#108000 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Jun 12, 2010 10:16 pm Subject: Proper links to files in the Files section ptaus1 Hi all, A technical note regarding how to give links to files in the Files section properly: The problem at the moment is that when you sign in to access the Files section, Yahoo automatically assigns a certain string of characters as your session ID to every file address you go to. So when you go to Useful posts file for example, the actual link looks something like this: http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/0GUUTGu8b1Ik8SSVgB1nmeYPnZ4ZractNIVhn6Iy7e1\ 5V7z155wMsp4n9O59ijsl1UyvuoBSy3s20SAAsJSh/Useful_Posts.htm Now, the problem is that this is basically a temporary link to Useful Posts file that will be valid only for you and only while your yahoo session is open. Once you finish the session (sign out or close the browser) the link will not work anymore. So, if you just copy tht address or shortcut ad paste it, the link will obviously not work after a while (I made this mistake a few times). So the correct way to give a link to a file in the Files section is like this: 1. Copy the address of the actual Files section page, which is: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ 2. At the end of that address, type the name of the file you want to link to - for example, for the Useful Posts file, the full link will be: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts.htm This is basically the permanent link to that file and it will work any time (as long as yahoo doesn't redesign the whole site, which doesn't happen often). Best wishes pt #108001 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More dhammas rolling on.... sarahprocter... Hi Mike, (& Ken H) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanatiloka/wheel394.html#ch2 "Therefore it is said in the Visuddhimagga (Chap. XIX): ? Everywhere, in all the realms of existence, the noble disciple sees only mental and corporeal phenomena kept going through the concatenation of causes and effects. No producer of the volitional act or kamma does he see apart from the kamma, no recipient of the kamma-result apart from the result. And he is well aware that wise men are using merely conventional language, when, with regard to a kammical act, they speak of a doer, or with regard to a kamma-result, they speak of the recipient of the result. "No doer of the deeds is found, No one who ever reaps their fruits; Empty phenomena roll on: This only is the correct view. And while the deeds and their results Roll on and on, conditioned all, There is no first beginning found, Just as it is with seed and tree... No god, no Brahma, can be called The maker of this wheel of life: Empty phenomena roll on, Dependent on conditions all." ... S: Namas and rupas rising and falling away, rolling on through samsara, "Dependent on conditions all." ? Metta ? Sarah ===== #108002 From: "connie" Date: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:38 am Subject: Sangiitisutta 324, 6.9-10 nichiconn Dear Friends, the next set of the Sixes (324, 6.9-14) begins. DN33 324, 6.9-10: agaaravaa, gaaravaa sutta DN 33 6.9) Cha agaaravaa. Idhaavuso, bhikkhu satthari agaaravo viharati appatisso; dhamme agaaravo viharati appatisso; sa'nghe agaaravo viharati appatisso; sikkhaaya agaaravo viharati appatisso; appamaade agaaravo viharati appatisso; pa.tisanthaare [pa.tisandhaare (ka.)] agaaravo viharati appatisso. Walshe DN 33.2.2(9) 'Six kinds of disrespect (agaaravaa): Here, a monk behaves disrespectfully and discourteously towards the Teacher, the Dhamma, the Sangha, the training, in respect of earnestness (appamaade), of hospitality (pa.tisanthaare). 10) Cha gaaravaa. Idhaavuso, bhikkhu satthari sagaaravo viharati sappatisso; dhamme sagaaravo viharati sappatisso; sa'nghe sagaaravo viharati sappatisso; sikkhaaya sagaaravo viharati sappatisso; appamaade sagaaravo viharati sappatisso; pa.tisanthaare sagaaravo viharati sappatisso. RDs [6.10] Six forms of reverence. Herein, friends, a brother conducts himself in the opposite manner in the foregoing six cases. A.t.thakathaa: Agaaravoti gaaravavirahito. Appatissoti appatissayo aniicavutti. Ettha pana yo bhikkhu satthari dharamaane tiisu kaalesu upa.t.thaana.m na yaati. Satthari anupaahane ca'nkamante saupaahano ca'nkamati, niice ca'nkamante ucce ca'nkamati, he.t.thaa vasante upari vasati, satthudassana.t.thaane ubho a.mse paarupati, chatta.m dhaareti, upaahana.m dhaareti, nahaayati, uccaara.m vaa passaava.m vaa karoti. Parinibbute pana cetiya.m vanditu.m na gacchati, cetiyassa pa~n~naayana.t.thaane satthudassana.t.thaane vutta.m sabba.m karoti, aya.m satthari agaaravo naama. Yo pana dhammassavane sa.mghu.t.the sakkacca.m na gacchati, sakkacca.m dhamma.m na su.naati, samullapanto nisiidati, sakkacca.m na ga.nhaati, na vaaceti, aya.m dhamme agaaravo naama. Yo pana therena bhikkhunaa anajjhi.t.tho dhamma.m deseti, nisiidati, pa~nha.m katheti, vu.d.dhe bhikkhuu gha.t.tento gacchati, ti.t.thati, nisiidati, dussapallatthika.m vaa hatthapallatthika.m vaa karoti, sa'nghamajjhe ubho a.mse paarupati, chattupaahana.m dhaareti, aya.m sa'nghe agaaravo naama. Ekabhikkhusmimpi hi agaarave kate sa'nghe agaaravo katova hoti. Tisso sikkhaa pana apuurayamaanova sikkhaaya agaaravo naama. Appamaadalakkha.na.m ananubruuhayamaano appamaade agaaravo naama. Duvidhampi pa.tisanthaara.m akaronto pa.tisanthaare agaaravo naama. Cha gaaravaa vuttappa.tipakkhavasena veditabbaa. .Tiikaa: Appa.tissayoti appa.tissavo, va-kaarassa ya-kaara.m katvaa niddeso. Garunaa kismi~nci vutte gaaravavasena pa.tissavana.m pa.tissavo, pa.tissavabhuuta.m, ta.msabhaaga~nca ya.m ki~nci gaarava.m, natthi etasmi.m pa.tissavoti appa.tissavo, gaaravarahito. Tenaaha <>ti. Yathaa cetiya.m uddissa kata.m satthu katasadisa.m, eva.m cetiyassa purato kata.m satthu purato katasadisa.m evaati aaha <>tiaadi. Sakkacca.m na gacchatiiti aadara.m gaarava.m uppaadetvaa na upasa'nkamati. Yathaa sikkhaaya ekadese kopite, agaarave ca kate sabbaa sikkhaa kuppati, sabbattha ca agaarava.m kata.m naama hoti samudaayato sa.mvarasamaadaana.m avayavato bhedoti. Eva.m ekabhikkhusmi.mpi.pe. agaaravo katova hoti. Anaadariyamattenapi sikkhaaya aparipuuriyevaati aaha <>ti. Appamaadalakkha.na.m sammaapa.tipatti. Duvidhanti dhammaamisavasena duvidha.m. ...to be continued, connie #108003 From: "connie" Date: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:46 am Subject: Sangiitisutta Sixes, 323-324. nichiconn Dear Friends, To begin again: "In this situation" says the << Co: All of them, trained in the three kinds of training, sat motionless, like the flame of a light not moved by wind. ... These monks had accomplished vipassanaa. When he [the Buddha] had seen here their siila, he thought: "these monks are pleasing to me and I am pleasing to them." >> #87420 Dhp 360-361 Buddhist Legends, Part 3, Book XXV, Bhikkhu Vagga. XXV. 1. Guard the Doors of the Senses Restraint of the eye is good. This religious instruction was given by the Teacher while he was in residence at Jetavana with reference to five monks. It appears that each of these five monks guarded one of the five doors of the senses. One day they met and began to argue with each other, saying, "It is I who guard the door which is difficult to guard!" Finally they said, "We can learn the Truth of this matter by questioning the Teacher." So they approached the Teacher and asked him the following question, "Reverend Sir, each one of us imagines that the particular door which he is guarding is the door of all other doors which is the most difficult to guard. Now we should like to have you tell us which one of us is guarding the door that is the most difficult to guard." The Teacher carefully avoided placing anyone of the monks in a position inferior to that of his fellows and said in reply, "Monks, all of these doors are difficult to guard. But this is not the first time you have failed to control yourselves in these five particulars. In a previous state of existence also you failed to exercise restraint over your senses, and because you refused to comply with the admonition of wise men, met destruction." "When was that, Reverend Sir?" asked the five monks. 1a. Story of the Past: Takkasilaa Jaataka Complying with their request, the Teacher related in detail the Takkasilaa Jaataka, telling them how, in the distant past, after the household of a king had been destroyed by ogresses, the Great Being, having received the ceremonial sprinkling of a king, seated on the royal throne under the white parasol, surveying his own majesty and glory, thinking to himself, "Men should exert the power of their will," breathed forth the following Solemn Utterance: Because with firm courage I abode steadfast in the admonition of good men, because I showed nor fear nor dread, Therefore came I not into the power of the ogresses. Through great peril came I to safety. Having recited this Stanza, the Teacher summarized the Jaataka as follows: "At that time you were the five men who, when the Great Being went forth to take the kingdom of Takkasilaa, stood round about him with weapons in your hands, guarding the road. But when, as you journeyed by the way, the ogresses tempted you with objects pleasing to the senses of sight and sound and smell and taste and touch, then you threw off all restraint, then you disregarded the admonitions of the Wise Men, then you yielded to the seductions of the ogresses; and they devoured you, and you were utterly destroyed. The Wise Man who restrained himself and yielded not to their temptations, who paid no attention to the ogress of celestial beauty that followed close upon his heels, and who reached Takkasilaa in safety and became king, was I myself." Having summed up the Jaataka, the Teacher said, "A monk should guard all the doors of the senses, for only by guarding the doors of the senses can he obtain release from all suffering." So saying, he pronounced the following Stanzas, 360. Restraint of the eye is good, restraint of the ear is good, Restraint of the nose is good, restraint of the tongue is good. 361. Restraint of the body is good, restraint of speech is good, Restraint of the mind is good, restraint in all things is good. The monk who practices restraint in all things, obtains release from all suffering. c: see Telapatta Jaataka http://sacred-texts.com/bud/j1/j1099.htm and for the footnote for Milinda-pa~nho 359 (limited perogative of kings), see http://sacred-texts.com/bud/sbe36/sbe3608.htm peace, connie #108004 From: "gazita2002" Date: Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:41 pm Subject: Re: uploaded audio discussions from Bangkok gazita2002 Hi Sarah, vince/nancy will be in Bkk from aug30 however I think that may be too late. Not sure how long you are there for. patience, courage and good cheer, azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > The recently completed edited discussions from Bangkok seem fine now. To listen, go to: > > http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ > > Scroll down to (or use the link to) the audio section and then scroll down to: > > Bangkok June & July 2007 > > Pls share any comments you find helpful/disagree with/wish to discuss. > > Nina, this afternoon I had another lovely tea and chat with Jessica. We didn't have so much time but chatted about the value of understanding the Dhamma in daily life, whether studying Pali in Myanmar, helping friends in Hong Kong or under the stress of moving house! We discussed motives for ordaining and how the practice is always at this moment regardless. What else? We chatted about friends of hers who become depressed or agitated, anxious to reach nibbana, to escape suffering, not realising it's all self-lobha at work. > > Sukin and Azita, Jessica may be able to join us in Bangkok from around 20th August. If anyone else might be there, pls let us know. > > Metta > > Sarah > ====== > #108005 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:09 pm Subject: Re: More dhammas rolling on.... kenhowardau Hi Sarah (and Mike), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Mike, (& Ken H) > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanatiloka/wheel394.html#ch2 > "Therefore it is said in the Visuddhimagga (Chap. XIX): > ? > Everywhere, in all the realms of existence, the noble disciple sees only mental and corporeal phenomena kept going through the concatenation of causes and effects. No producer of the volitional act or kamma does he see apart from the kamma, no recipient of the kamma-result apart from the result. And he is well aware that wise men are using merely conventional language, when, with regard to a kammical act, they speak of a doer, or with regard to a kamma-result, they speak of the recipient of the result. > > "No doer of the deeds is found, No one who ever reaps their fruits; Empty phenomena roll on: This only is the correct view. And while the deeds and their results Roll on and on, conditioned all, There is no first beginning found, Just as it is with seed and tree... No god, no Brahma, can be called The maker of this wheel of life: Empty phenomena roll on, Dependent on conditions all." > ... > S: Namas and rupas rising and falling away, rolling on through samsara, "Dependent on conditions all." > ? ------------------ That's a lovely quote, thanks Sarah. It's always nice to see that, thousands of years ago, the ancient commentaries were talking about the Dhamma in the same way some of us are talking about it today. The point about there being "no first beginning found" is worth a closer look, I think. It's not just one of those circular puzzles about "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?" it's a way of understanding the present reality. I'm not sure exactly how it applies, but it tells us that the present citta is not a first cause. (Just as all the cittas that went before it were not a first cause.) We can't say the same thing about a "last cause" or a "last result" however. While present citta is certainly not the last, there will be a last one day. Ken H #108006 From: "antony272b2" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:10 am Subject: Re: Help pls finding Sutta on World Creation Self Views (not in DN1?) antony272b2 I found it! http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.6.06.than.html --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "antony272b2" wrote: > > I don't think that DN1 the Brahmajala Sutta has this teaching. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "antony272b2" wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Just dropping by for help finding a sutta where the Buddha rejects four speculative views:. > > > > The world is created by oneself. > > The world is created by another. > > The world is both created by oneself and created by another. > > The world is neither created by oneself nor created by another. > > > > Thanks / Antony. > > > #108007 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Help pls finding Sutta on World Creation Self Views (not in DN1?) sarahprocter... Dear Antony, --- On Mon, 14/6/10, antony272b2 wrote: >I found it! http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.6.06.than.html --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "antony272b2" wrote: <...> > > The world is created by oneself. > > The world is created by another. > > The world is both created by oneself and created by another. > > The world is neither created by oneself nor created by another. ... S: Well done! Thx for sharing. I like the verse: "Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed: People are intent on the idea of "made by me" and attached to the idea of "made by another." Some do not realize this, nor do they see it as a thorn. But to one who sees, having extracted this thorn, [the thought] "I am doing," doesn't occur; "Another is doing," doesn't occur. This human race is possessed by conceit bound by conceit, tied down by conceit. Speaking hurtfully because of their views they don't go beyond transmigration — the wandering on.' .... S: I was about to check out other translations and started to get up to reach for a book, only to remember all our books are being shipped to Sydney as I speak. Perhaps others may check the Pali and/or other translations. Perhaps we'll catch up there again! As I mentioned to pt, Ken H and others, thinking about a Syd dhamma get-together.... Hope you're doing well Metta Sarah ======== #108008 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 1:46 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Little selves? sarahprocter... Dear Kevin, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin F wrote: > 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. ... S: A good response! You've already written many helpful replies to others here on the Dhamma. Metta Sarah p.s Just catching up a little.... ======== #108009 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 1:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fives (321, 24) and commentary. sarahprocter... Dear Nina & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > 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). ... S: This was interesting. Here we see that sabhaava (generally) refers to anatta in the suttas. I appreciate the diligence with which you and Connie are keeping up the series. .... > 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. ... S: Is this passage implying or stating as a fact that this person has reached arahatship as a sukkhavipassaka (without any mundane jhana attainments)? .... > 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. ... S: This is the important conclusion that the commentary points out. It just depends on conditions whether jhana cittas or any other cittas arise. The goal is the development of insight up, the development of detachment from all conditioned dhammas. Metta Sarah ====== #108010 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 2:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Learning Pali/ translating Sutta Pitika sarahprocter... Dear Nina (& Kevin), I think the following comments which you shared from K.Sujin's Thai talks are very important to appreciate: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >....Kh Sujin quotes > many suttas on a Thai series, called 'radio tapes' (tape Vithayu). > One does not have to translate all suttas, but most important is > helping people to see that each sutta points to understanding this > moment. For instance now she deals with mindfulness of death. Do we > find ourselves important when we die? When the Buddha spoke about > this subject the purpose was not becoming calm, but it was not being > heedless in the development of satipa.t.thaana. Just knowing > realities that appear at this moment through the six doors. It is the > same with the other Recollections like mindfulness of the body, or > Breath. The characteristic of breath is only ruupa-dhamma. It has to > be known as such. The aim was not access concentration or jhaana, the > aim was learning that realities are not a person, not self. We should > never lose sight of this. ... S: Yes, it doesn't matter what we read, what we consider, what our daily activities are - the purpose of the teachings is to point to the understanding of dhammas as anatta. I know Kevin appreciates this too. Metta Sarah ========= #108011 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 2:12 am Subject: Re: Sankhata dhammas sarahprocter... Dear Paul, You asked the following qu sometime back (#106977) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "retro77@..." wrote: > We know from the suttas on dependent origination that sankharas are conditioned by ignorance. So if "the sankhata dhammas or conditioned phenomena of the five aggregates" are all fabricated/constructed/sankhara-ised based upoon an underlying platform of ignorance, then where does that leave us in terms of being able to observe dhammas with panna (wisdom) - in light of the fact a mindstate cannot be simultaneously rooted in wisdom and ignorance? And is it still valid to consider paramattha dhammas other than nibbana as "ultimate" in any way if all sankharas are merely the products of ignorance (avijja)? > > Let alone paramattha, can dhammas even be considered in any way to even "exist"? ... S: I thought you raised good points and was glad to read your contributions. I'm just wondering if it was fully answered to your satisfaction. If not, I'd like to discuss it further with you if you're still 'hanging in' here... For a start, I'd like to ask what you understand by "the sankharas"? Could you give some examples of sankharas arising now as we write? Metta Sarah ====== #108012 From: "Sadhu Chew" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:29 am Subject: Re: The Path of Purification: Visuddhimagga IV-1 chewsadhu Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma-sambuddhassa ?????.???.????? Visuddhimaggo (Pat.hamo bha-go) Nida-na-dikatha- ? ? [I. INTRODUCTORY] 1. Si-lepatit.t.ha-ya naro sapañño, cittam. paññañca bha-vayam.; A-ta-pi- nipako bhikkhu, so imam. vijat.aye jat.anti. (sam.. ni. 1.23); [PTS 001] ?????: ??'???,?????, ????"?,??"???"? ?`(I,1): [1] 'When a wise man, established well in Virtue, Develops Consciousness and Understanding, Then as a bhikkhu ardent and sagacious, He succeeds in disentangling this tangle' (S.i,13). #108013 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 6:41 am Subject: Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions jonoabb Hi Alex (107974) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > What about studying and considering Dhamma? Is it also a wrong activity? > =============== J: Anything done with the idea that it would induce kusala to arise there and then would be wrong practice. An activity done not as a form of practice but out of an interest in the teachings would not necessarily be wrong practice. > =============== > BTW, while studying and considering may involve thinking. In proper meditation one studies and considers the Dhamma experientially and non-verbally without trying to control anything. > =============== J: I don't see how that can be. There's trying to control in the sense of setting up an environment in which one believes awareness/insight is more likely to arise. Otherwise, why go to all the trouble? Jon #108014 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 6:40 am Subject: [dsg] Re: daily activities in satipatthana jonoabb Hi Howard (107972) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > The fact that you speak of a set of dhammas puts us much closer. > =============== J: Hmm, I'm not sure it does. I was not using "set of dhammas" to mean a person ;-)) > =============== > Maybe you are putting more into "deliberate focusing" than I am. > =============== J: I'm having difficulty seeing how hearing and understanding words spoken in one's own language can, in normal circumstances, be said to require 'deliberate focusing of attention'. We converse with others all day without needing deliberate focusing, don't we? > =============== > Kamma is intention and intentional action. That is all I am speaking > of. (But that is a lot.) > =============== J: 'Kamma is intention' (where 'intention' means the mental factor of cetana) ? Yes. This is an example of using 'ultimate speech'. 'Kamma is intentional action' (where 'intentional action' means an activity such as giving gifts, stealing) ? Also yes. This is using more conventional speech. However, the meaning is exactly the same as 'kamma is intention' above. Both association with the right person and hearing the true dhamma involve the mental factor of cetana. But they do not require what in conventional language we call deliberate focussing of attention or deliberate action or specific purposeful activity, in that they may and do at times occur due to past kamma and an interest in the teachings acquired from previous study. > =============== > Mostly subliminal, sometimes coming to the surface. Intention is > intention, and that is all I am speaking of. From desire comes will and from > will comes willed activity. That is kamma - it's genesis and it's execution. > Mostly it operates subliminally but still with desire and sense of self as > it's basis. > =============== J: Here we are just talking about the third requirement of reflecting on what has been heard and understood. It is kusala of the level of bhavana. It may, and often does, happen subliminally. Again, no deliberate focussing (in the ordinary, conventional sense) is needed. Jon #108015 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 6:43 am Subject: Re: Buddha forbade teaching on sekha stages to "unwise" (worldlings?). jonoabb Hi Alex (107975) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Right, except that these people may have had some mundane right views and some good qualities that are common to religions or basic human beliefs. > =============== J: What do you mean here by 'mundane right views'? As I understand it, the kusala qualities that are common to other teachings are dana, sila and samatha only. > =============== > Has sufficient good kamma that one can encounter the teaching and be able to study and practice it. > > Has sufficient mundane understanding that can be common with non-Buddhist religions, to understand the value of Dhamma. > =============== J: The 'value of dhamma' is really the teaching on not-self. There's nothing in the development of dana, sila and samatha outside the teachings that prepares one to understand the teaching on not-self. > =============== > Then what does it mean in your opinion? > =============== J: These terms can be understood at different levels, I'm sure. As regards 'sandithiko' ('visible here and now'), I agree with pt's description, that is to say, that the teaching is capable of immediate verification, at some level or another, by any person who cares to examine and consider it. As regards 'akaaliko', this refers to the fact that the truths of the teaching are valid for all times (through all ages), past, present and future. > =============== > Because they fit the suttas and who wants to be in samsara longer than neccesary? > =============== J: But if you're wrong on this point it will mean even longer in samsara ;-)) Jon #108016 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 6:47 am Subject: Re: Buddha forbade teaching on sekha stages to "unwise" (worldlings?). jonoabb Hi pt (107988) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > pt: I was wondering about that description recently as well. In the beginning, I found that particular sentence very inspiring in a sense that anyone can immediately start experiencing/verifying the truth for himself as soon as one starts learning about the Dhamma: > =============== J: Yes, very inspiring, for the reasons you mention > =============== > "This Dhamma is visible here-&-now, not subject to time, inviting all to come & see, pertinent, to be known by the wise for themselves." > > But I've been going through Visuddhimagga recently, and there in chapter VII, that particular sentence is analysed and it seems "the wise" in fact stands for the Noble ones, which means this sentence only applies to them, not to anyone. In particular, see VII,69, 76 and 85. I was just wondering if I'm understanding Visuddhimagga correctly here or not? > =============== J: I think it's just the "being known for themselves" that requires highly developed insight, where "known" is being used in the sense of "penetrated". The rest of the epithets -- visible here-&-now, not subject to time, inviting all to come & see, pertinent ? are not limited to "the wise" but apply more generally. Jon #108017 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 6:45 am Subject: Re: daily activities in satipatthana jonoabb Hi Robert (107984) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > you group action and doer together as being "conventional concepts" : > > I had always thought that it was doer and receiver that were being referred to as mere concepts and that "action" and kamma-result were referring to ultimate realities. > =============== J: Yes, I agree that what is being referred to in the passage is the doer of deeds and receiver of results. The expression 'taking place of any action' is also to be read as a conventional expression, as I see it (perhaps I should've made it clear that that was not the focus of the passage). Jon #108018 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 6:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello sarahprocter... Hi Robin, You wrote (#106968) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" wrote: > >S: 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. > > > >R: 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? I think it might be moment-to-moment mentality, but samadhi? .... S: (I'll keep responses brief until I know you're still reading and wish to discuss further) As I understand, in the texts, khanika samadhi (momentary concentration) is the same as khanika ekaggata (or citte-kaggata), i.e. khana-matta-thitiko samadhi, (the concentration lasting moment to moment). So, yes, khanika samadhi or ekaggata cetasika arises with every citta, even in the case of "ordinary, run of the mill, uninstructed persons." As for sati (mindfulness), this cetasika arises with (and only with) sobhana (beautiful) cittas. Can you give me a reference to khanika samadhi in a text which we can discuss further? As I've mentioned before with regard to samadhi, the context is very important and its meaning will vary accordingly. ... > Or are you saying that Appana Samadhi and Khanika Samadhi are the same? ... S: Definitely not. Appana samadhi refers to the degree and kind of samadhi at moments of jhana cittas or lokuttara cittas. ... >I think the difference is that, in Appana Samadhi, sensory contact is closed off, there is no contact. The mind is fixed on one object. The mind may consist of a series of momentary cittas; but the pattern is relatively stable. In khanika samadhi, the mind fluidly shifts from object to object, without fixing on any one. I think The sense doors are open, there is contact; but not attachment? .... S: There is khanika ekaggata at each moment, even at moments of attachment. I don't know what else khanika samadhi is referring to. ... > > One day, I was sitting by the river down the street, watching some acquaintances fish. There were three older guys fishing. All were bottom fishing with no bobber. That calls for line watching. > > One guy was all distracted and `jumpy.' He kept misplacing things and missing bites. He was constantly cussing too. And frowning. Also, he reacted to everything that happened around us. If a car drove by, or someone showed up, he turned sharply to look. A squirrel climbed up a tree, he jumped to see what made the noise. He could 'not see the forest for the tress,' and could not really see the trees either. > > Another was so engrossed in his line watching; that he seemed unaware of anything else. People would say something to him; he did not even hear it. People came by and left, he did not even notice. I noticed a fixed, blissful smile on his face. He caught some fish, but missed a few because he was almost lost in a reverie type trance state. It was like he reduced the forest to one tree, and saw nothing else. > > The third guy was calm but alert. He was taking everything in; he saw the big picture, the whole forest. He had a cheerful face, bright eyes, and engaging demeanor. He was chatting with me; pointing out different kinds of trees, foliage, birds, and insects; discussing currents; noticing and acknowledging who came and who left; and was rigging hooks at the same time. His motions were fluid. All the while, he watched his line and never missed a bite. He was what I call mindful. He was seeing both the forest and each tree. ... S: And outer appearances can be very misleading. From what you describe, I wouldn't begin to speculate about who had more sati! Conventional mindfulness, maybe. I should think the fish liked the first guy best!! Metta Sarah ====== #108019 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 7:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello sarahprocter... Hi Robin, (# 106961) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" wrote: > I read the links, and I think we just disagree. I am not sure who wrote: > > "According to the Pali canon, all conditioned phenomena arise and fall away immediately. Nothing lasts or is `passed > on'." > > I agree that is true of all conditioned phenomena. However, there is a liberation from the conditioned. There is also citta bhavana, development or cultivation of citta, via methods that are consciously chosen. There are choices to block and let go of unwholesome volitions; and to cultivate and maintain good ones, thus merit accumulation. This implies some kind of subjectiveness. I kind of like the 5 niyama concept; with niyama apparently meaning a process of causality. Of these, citta niyama appears to have a personal quality. ... S: Citta niyama refers to the order of cittas, according to particular conditions. There are conditions now for this moment of seeing or thinking or hearing. No one can change it or introduce a method or "consciously choose" a different citta to arise. They are all anatta. ... > > "The words vi~n~naa.na (consciousness), citta (mind, consciousness), and mano (mind) are one in meaning." > > Ven W Rahula suggested they are near synonyms; if I understood correctly, but with shades of meaning. I am inclined to tilt that direction, right now. Please be forbearing if I do not use the technical transliteration method, I just find it confusing at this point. ... S: No problem, thank you for sharing your research. The quote is from the texts. I think Ven Rahula uses his own interpretation. (See "alaya" in U.P.) ... > One whole in my logic is the concept of unconditioned citta, it is like saying uncompounded sankhara. ~~ >scratches head< ... S: Impossible... ... > > I realize that there are other takes, and I have certainly not dis-missed those. I am willing to live with the ambiguity of not yet knowing the answers. One interesting take I heard is thst luminous citta is the rebirth consciousness, and is to be avoided, rather than cultivated. ... S: Luminous citta (according to the texts) refers to the cittas which are not defiled. So the bhavanga cittas (including rebirth consciousness) are referred to as luminous cittas. What are cultivated are the wholesome cittas which arise in the javana processes. Just as there can be well-behaved or naughty children, so there can be wholesome or unwholesome cittas following the bhavanga cittas. ... > > If volitions are impersonal and arise according to causes and conditions outside of 'my' control, does it matter? And if so, what does citta bhavana even mean? ... S: What matters is to understand dhammas as anatta, outside anyone's control. This is the only way that understanding and detachment can develop. This is the highest bhavana or development. Citta bhavana would refer to the development of wholesome cittas and cetasikas - the development of the mind and mental states. ... > > I apologize for any typos. Two grandkids are over here today and my concentration was tested. By using the words I and my, I do not mean to imply a perpetual self. : ... S: No problem. I've been like your first fisherman since you wrote (Apr 20th), racing round, jumping at everything, trying to sort out what has unexpectedly turned out to be a major move. This id daily life - grandkids, house issues and so on. No matter how tested we may be, concentration has been and is arising at every single moment. Citta niyama....a fixed order of cittas by conditions. The only question is whether now, at this very moment, is there any understanding of what is experienced? The rest is all a fantasy. Thx for your patience! Metta Sarah ======= #108020 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions upasaka_howard Hi, Jon (and Alex) - In a message dated 6/14/2010 9:43:00 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Alex (107974) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > What about studying and considering Dhamma? Is it also a wrong activity? > =============== J: Anything done with the idea that it would induce kusala to arise there and then would be wrong practice. ------------------------------------------------ Jon, I believe the Buddha taught the opposite, for example as follows: "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' If this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because this abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' "Develop what is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' If this development of what is skillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because this development of what is skillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.'" — _AN 2.19_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an02/an02.019.than.html) and "One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into _right view_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-ditthi/index.html) : This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong resolve & to enter into _right resolve_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-sankappo/index.htm\ l) : This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong speech & to enter into _right speech_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-vaca/index.html) : This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong action & to enter into _right action_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-kammanto/index.htm\ l) : This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong livelihood & to enter into _right livelihood_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-ajivo/index.htm l) : This is one's right effort." — _MN 117_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html) ------------------------------------------------- An activity done not as a form of practice but out of an interest in the teachings would not necessarily be wrong practice. > =============== > BTW, while studying and considering may involve thinking. In proper meditation one studies and considers the Dhamma experientially and non-verbally without trying to control anything. > =============== J: I don't see how that can be. There's trying to control in the sense of setting up an environment in which one believes awareness/insight is more likely to arise. Otherwise, why go to all the trouble? Jon ========================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #108021 From: "connie" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 8:10 am Subject: Sangiitisutta 324 cont'd, 6.11-13 nichiconn Dear Friends, DN33 324 continued, 6.11-13: 11) Cha somanassuupavicaaraa. Cakkhunaa ruupa.m disvaa somanassa.t.thaaniya.m ruupa.m upavicarati; sotena sadda.m sutvaa. ghaanena gandha.m ghaayitvaa. jivhaaya rasa.m saayitvaa. kaayena pho.t.thabba.m phusitvaa. Manasaa dhamma.m vi~n~naaya somanassa.t.thaaniya.m dhamma.m upavicarati. Walshe DN 33.2.2(11) 'Six pleasurable investigations (somanassuupavicaaraa)*: When, on seeing a sight-object with the eye, on hearing ..., smelling ..., tasting ..., touching ..., knowing a mind-object with the mind, one investigates a corresponding object productive of pleasure. [iii 245] *'Investigations linked with pleasure' (DA). Olds Six pleasing reaction-stimulants: When seeing a material form with the eye, that material form, occasioning pleasure, stimulates reaction. ...etc. RD Six pleasurable investigations, to wit, when on occasion of any sensation through the five senses, or any cognition by the mind, a corresponding object giving rise to pleasure is examined. 6.12) Cha domanassuupavicaaraa. Cakkhunaa ruupa.m disvaa domanassa.t.thaaniya.m ruupa.m upavicarati...pe... manasaa dhamma.m vi~n~naaya domanassa.t.thaaniya.m dhamma.m upavicarati. Walshe Six unpleasurable investigations: (as (11) but: productive of displeasure). 6.13) Cha upekkhuupavicaaraa. Cakkhunaa ruupa.m disvaa upekkhaa.t.thaaniya.m [upekkhaa.thaaniya.m (ka.)] ruupa.m upavicarati...pe... manasaa dhamma.m vi~n~naaya upekkhaa.t.thaaniya.m dhamma.m upavicarati. Walshe Six indifferent investigations: (as (11) but: productive of indifference (upekhaa)) Olds Six objectively detached reaction-stimulants: ... RD Six investigations of indifference, to wit, when such investigations as the foregoing leave anyone indifferent. A.t.thakathaa: Somanassuupavicaaraati somanassasampayuttaa vicaaraa. Somanassa.t.thaaniyanti somanassakaara.nabhuuta.m. Upavicaratiiti vitakkena vitakketvaa vicaarena paricchindati. Esa nayo sabbattha. Domanassuupavicaaraapi evameva veditabbaa. Tathaa upekkhuupavicaaraa. .Tiikaa: Somanassuupavicaaraati somanassasahagataa vicaaraa adhippetaa, upasaddo ca nipaatamattanti aaha <>ti. Tathaa hissa abhidhamme (dha. sa. 8) <>ti niddeso pavatto. Somanassakaara.nabhuutanti sabhaavato, sa'nkappatopi somanassassa uppattiyaa paccayabhuuta.m. Kaama.m parittabhuumakaa vitakkavicaaraa a~n~nama~n~namaviyogino , kiriyaabhedato pana pa.thamaabhinipaatataaya vitakkassa byaapaaro saatisayo. Tato para.m vicaarassaati ta.m sandhaaya <>ti pubbakaalakiriyaavasena vatvaa <>ti vutta.m. Laddhapubbaasevanassa vicaarassa byaapaaro pa~n~naa viya hoti. Tathaa hi <>ti pe.take vutta.m. <>ti ettha yaaya di.t.thiyaa puggalo di.t.thisaama~n~na.m gato vutto, saa pa.thamamaggasammaadi.t.thi kosambakasutte adhippetoti aaha <>ti. Idhaati imasmi.m sutte. Catuusupi maggesu sammaadi.t.thi di.t.thiggaha.nena gahitaati aaha <>ti. ...to be continued, connie #108022 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 8:31 am Subject: Re: Buddha forbade teaching on sekha stages to "unwise" (worldlings?). truth_aerator Hi Jon, all, >A:Right, except that these people may have had some mundane right >views and some good qualities that are common to religions or basic >human beliefs. > > =============== > J: What do you mean here by 'mundane right views'? "There is good and bad kamma. There is Father and Mother. There is another world and spontaneously reborn beings..." With metta, Alex #108023 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:07 pm Subject: Re: Buddha forbade teaching on sekha stages to "unwise" (worldlings?). ptaus1 Hi Jon, Thanks for your reply. Best wishes > > But I've been going through Visuddhimagga recently, and there in chapter VII, that particular sentence is analysed and it seems "the wise" in fact stands for the Noble ones, which means this sentence only applies to them, not to anyone. In particular, see VII,69, 76 and 85. I was just wondering if I'm understanding Visuddhimagga correctly here or not? > > J: I think it's just the "being known for themselves" that requires highly developed insight, where "known" is being used in the sense of "penetrated". The rest of the epithets -- visible here-&-now, not subject to time, inviting all to come & see, pertinent ? are not limited to "the wise" but apply more generally. ----- #108024 From: "colette" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 10:26 pm Subject: Re: FUNDAMENTALS ksheri3 Hi Sarah, This may be a bit "out there" but the concept that the Buddha issued concerning ANYTHING as being WRONG OR RIGHT is itself an act of labeling (see Name & Form); in order to speak that something is wrong or right takes the act of THINKING thoughts where we run into BIJA and it's reason for "being" as CAUSE & CONDITIONS. Sorry, but I'm way out there in/on a Tantra and am working this thing. Last Fri. I ran into a guy, in my neighborhood, in my usual spot where I compose/write and study to practice. He was such an inspiration since he had previously studied QUANTUM PHYSICS and not only understood what I was saying in terms of Western esoteric practices such as Kabbalah but he also grasped a lot of the Buddhism I was speaking of. I've seen it many times in sites I've googled in terms of Buddhist practices, where educated Asians actually apply things like Quantum Physics to actual Buddhist practices/philosophy. I know it applies and that as of this moment I do not have the educated understanding of the principles to actually apply them as I would in Western practices. I know something is there, that my consciousness has changed in some way, I can even feel it's presence, but for the time being it's a waiting game to see if I can achieve something, if there is anything to achieve in the first place. AND SO, although it's a month later, I take up the challenge of your cryptic reply where I put forth the actuality of the daring-do, the barnstorming act, that the Buddha puts forth in the terms of LABELING, NAMING, IDENTIFYING, ETC., something, anything as "being". Maybe my hypothesis and observation is not suited for this group but something like a Dharma Fellowship or a Yogachara group, a MIND-ONLY group since I certainly am speaking of the potentiality of the MANIFESTATION of a THOUGHT, making a noumena a phenomena, making the Dharmakaya the Rupakaya, etc. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Colette, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > Is it WRONG SPEACH, for instance, to LABEL SOMETHING AS BEING RIGHT OR WRONG? > ... > S: It would depend on the mental states at such a time as to whether it was RIGHT or WRONG speech. > > When the Buddha labelled some thoughts, deeds and speech as RIGHT and some as WRONG, it was always RIGHT SPEECH! > > Metta > > Sarah > ========= > #108025 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:33 pm Subject: Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions ptaus1 Hi Howard (and Jon), Not sure if this will help the discussion, I came across a passage on effort in Vsm (section on concentration(!) - mindfulness of breathing) VIII, 202-3: "...the bhikkhu sits, having established mindfulness at the nose tip or on the upper lip, without giving attention to the in-breaths and out-breaths as they approach and recede, though they are not unknown to him as they do so, and he manifests effort, carries out a task, and achieves an effect. 203. ' "Effort": what is the effort? The body and the mind of one who is energetic become wieldy?"this is the effort. What is the task? Imperfections come to be abandoned in one who is energetic, and his applied thoughts are stilled?"this is the task. What is the effect? Fetters come to be abandoned in one who is energetic, and his inherent tendencies come to be done away with?"this is the effect." pt: So it seems interesting that even for samatha, effort is equated to mind and body becoming wieldy, rather than - making the mind and body wieldy by (what I guess Jon would call - 'intentional') effort. Though it's another matter how does one become energetic in the first place... Best wishes pt > > A: What about studying and considering Dhamma? Is it also a wrong activity? > > =============== > > J: Anything done with the idea that it would induce kusala to arise there > and then would be wrong practice. > ------------------------------------------------ > H: Jon, I believe the Buddha taught the opposite, for example as follows: > ... > "One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into _right view_ > (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-ditthi/ind\ ex.html) : This > is one's right effort... > "One tries to abandon wrong resolve & to enter into _right resolve_ > (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-sankappo/i\ ndex.html) > : This is one's right effort... > "One tries to abandon wrong speech & to enter into _right speech_ > (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-vaca/index\ .html) : > This is one's right effort... > ?" _MN 117_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html) ------ #108026 From: "antony272b2" Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 1:03 am Subject: Re: Help pls finding Sutta on World Creation Self Views (not in DN1?) antony272b2 Hi Sarah, This sutta makes me laugh as I am temporarily liberated from self-views. The Buddha rejects four speculative views: 1. "The self and the cosmos are self-produced"... 2. "The self and the cosmos are produced by another"... 3. "The self and the cosmos are both self-produced and produced by another"... 4. "The self and the cosmos are neither self-produced nor produced by another, but are spontaneously arisen." People are intent on the idea of "made by me" and attached to the idea of "made by another." Some do not realize this, nor do they see it as a thorn. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.6.06.than.html (John D. Ireland: "I am the agent") Antony: This covers the first three, but I don't quite understand what the problem with number 4 is. Another set of speculative views that the Buddha rejects: "The self and the cosmos are eternal... "The self and the cosmos are not eternal"... "The self and the cosmos are both eternal and not eternal"... "The self and the cosmos are neither eternal nor not eternal"... Antony: It is a joy to be liberated from these self-views about permanence/impermanence. I think that the Dhamma is much more immediate than concepts can pin down. With metta / Antony. S: Perhaps we'll catch up there again! As I mentioned to pt, Ken H and others, thinking about a Syd dhamma get-together.... A: Yes I will be in Sydney and I'm pleased to report that my mobility is improving (my walking is back to normal!) I have some ideas to discuss about how dana (giving an object) affirms the long-term existence of others, complementing viewing everything as psychophysical phenomena. Maybe I'll start a thread on dsg. #108027 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 1:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiitisutta 324 cont'd, 6.11-13 nilovg Dear Connie, Thank you, but I am limping behind. I still have to do: Suttanta:324 = 9-14: agaaravaa, gaaravaa; 9) Cha agaaravaa. This will take me some time, Nina. Op 14-jun-2010, om 17:10 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > DN33 324 continued, 6.11-13: > > 11) Cha somanassuupavicaaraa. #108028 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 2:16 am Subject: Re: daily activities in satipatthana rjkjp1 (107698) > > > J: Thanks, nice quote. I particularly noted: > > > "And with full insight he clearly understands that the wise ones are using > > > merely conventional terms when, with regard to the taking place of any > > > action, they speak of a doer, or when they speak of a receiver of the > > > karma-results at their arising."" > > >======= > > >J: Both the 'action' and its 'doer' are conventional concepts. > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert > > (107984) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > > you group action and doer together as being "conventional concepts" : > > > > I had always thought that it was doer and receiver that were being referred to as mere concepts and that "action" and kamma-result were referring to ultimate realities. > > =============== > > J: Yes, I agree that what is being referred to in the passage is the doer of deeds and receiver of results. The expression 'taking place of any action' is also to be read as a conventional expression, as I see it (perhaps I should've made it clear that that was not the focus of the passage). > > Jon Dear Jon according to my very limited understanding of pali the phrase is saying that doer and reciver are vohara (conventional) and do not exist in ultimate terms. But it implies that action and result do exist in ultimate terms. XIX `19 Samanupassati. Tassevaṃ samanupassato yā sā pubbantādayo ārabbha ``ahosiṃ nu kho aha''ntiādinā nayena vuttā soḷasavidhā vicikicchā, sā sabbā pahīyati. Sabbabhavayonigatiṭṭhitinivāsesu hetuphalasambandhavasena pavattamānaṃ nāmarūpamattameva khāyati. So neva kāraṇato uddhaṃ kārakaṃ passati, na vipākappavattito uddhaṃ vipākapaṭisaṃvedakaṃ. Kāraṇe pana sati ``kārako''ti, vipākappavattiyā sati ``paṭisaṃvedako''ti sama??āmattena paṇḍitā voharanticcevassa sammappa??āya sudiṭṭhaṃ hoti. [There is no Doer apart from Kamma and its Result] In all kinds of becoming, generation, destiny, station and abode there appears only mentality-materiality, which occurs by means of linking of cause with fruit. He sees no doer over and above the doing, no experiencer of the result over and above the occurrence of the result. But he sees clearly with right understanding that the wise say 'doer' when there is doing and 'experiencer' when there is experiencing simply as a 20. mode of common usage. Robert #108029 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 3:04 am Subject: uploaded discussions nilovg Dear Sarah, as to Uploaded!! Find under this heading: "Bangkok June and July 2007" After India 05. ---------- N: Anumodana, I appreciate this. I did not understand your addres, you wrote: add in Sydney. Do I have to write Sydney first and then Manly? Nina. #108030 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 3:11 am Subject: Sangiitisutta, the Fives. nilovg Dear Sarah, just catching up slowly after my break. S: 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. ... S: Is this passage implying or stating as a fact that this person has reached arahatship as a sukkhavipassaka (without any mundane jhana attainments)? .---------- N: Yes. See also the following. Nina. #108031 From: "colette" Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 2:25 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions ksheri3 Hi Howard, Jon, Alex, et al, > J: I don't see how that can be. There's trying to control in the sense > of setting up an environment in which one believes awareness/insight is more > likely to arise. Otherwise, why go to all the trouble? > colette: Jon, I actually believe that most if not all sentient beings actually try to control their meditation and their meditation practices. I believe that Howard was refering, when he said that meditations should not be controlled, was specifically to that DEPENDENCY which arises after becoming accustomed to the process of meditation. Through the decades I've practiced meditation I've found that the objectivity of FOCUSING on a single being or single concept eventually tends to disrupt and obscure the bliss of the meditational experience. It gets in the way because of this REQUIREMENT of maintaining a single position. When I let go of the singularity of something, I've found, that the meditational experience is far more rewarding and comforting. In fact I've found that trying to remain focused on a single thought or single "thing" is of far less value than just letting the meditation follow it's own path without trying to force the round peg in the square hole, etc. ---------------------------------- > Otherwise, why go to all the trouble? > colette: Jon, by trying to force the issue to fit into PRE-CONCEPTIONS and PRE-EXISTING TEMPLATES (Boiler Plates), to me, it seems as though you're just creating far more trouble for yourself i.e. "creationism". toodles, colette #108032 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 3:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiitisutta, the Fives. sarahprocter... Dear Nina, --- On Tue, 15/6/10, Nina van Gorkom wrote: S: 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. ... >S: Is this passage implying or stating as a fact that this person has reached arahatship as a sukkhavipassaka (without any mundane jhana attainments)? .---------- >N: Yes. See also the following. .. S: yes, it seems very categorical and a good reference for people who wonder about this. Many thanks for continuing with the series and best wishes for the publication of Conditions. Anumodana to you, Lodewijk and Alan! Metta Sarah p.s Our new add will be exactly as I put it. No need to put Sydney in the address, just Manly, NSW and the code. Many thanks in advance. ======= #108033 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 3:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions upasaka_howard Hi, pt (and Jon) - In a message dated 6/15/2010 2:34:06 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ptaus1@... writes: Hi Howard (and Jon), Not sure if this will help the discussion, I came across a passage on effort in Vsm (section on concentration(!) - mindfulness of breathing) VIII, 202-3: "...the bhikkhu sits, having established mindfulness at the nose tip or on the upper lip, without giving attention to the in-breaths and out-breaths as they approach and recede, though they are not unknown to him as they do so, and he manifests effort, carries out a task, and achieves an effect. 203. ' "Effort": what is the effort? The body and the mind of one who is energetic become wieldyâ€"this is the effort. What is the task? Imperfections come to be abandoned in one who is energetic, and his applied thoughts are stilledâ€"this is the task. What is the effect? Fetters come to be abandoned in one who is energetic, and his inherent tendencies come to be done away withâ€"this is the effect." pt: So it seems interesting that even for samatha, effort is equated to mind and body becoming wieldy, rather than - making the mind and body wieldy by (what I guess Jon would call - 'intentional') effort. ------------------------------------------- Yes, that is what Buddhaghosa appears to be asserting. Thank you for posting this. It is certainly relevant. ------------------------------------------ Though it's another matter how does one become energetic in the first place... ------------------------------------------- Yes. Also, there seems to be a difference between what Buddhaghosa had to say about effort and what the Buddha said - for example in what I quoted in my post to Jon. ----------------------------------------- Best wishes pt =========================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #108034 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 3:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions upasaka_howard Hi, Colette (and Jon & Alex) - In a message dated 6/15/2010 6:14:47 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ksheri3@... writes: colette: Jon, I actually believe that most if not all sentient beings actually try to control their meditation and their meditation practices. I believe that Howard was refering, when he said that meditations should not be controlled, was specifically to that DEPENDENCY which arises after becoming accustomed to the process of meditation. Through the decades I've practiced meditation I've found that the objectivity of FOCUSING on a single being or single concept eventually tends to disrupt and obscure the bliss of the meditational experience. It gets in the way because of this REQUIREMENT of maintaining a single position. When I let go of the singularity of something, I've found, that the meditational experience is far more rewarding and comforting. In fact I've found that trying to remain focused on a single thought or single "thing" is of far less value than just letting the meditation follow it's own path without trying to force the round peg in the square hole, etc. ======================= This is my experience as well, Colette. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #108035 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 7:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kh Bong's book. nilovg Dear Sarah, I read in Khun Bong's book and I find that my Thai is very deficient. I am used to Kh Sujin's Dhamma language and I have great trouble with everyday language. Many words escape me. Jon would be much better to translate and quote. But I do my best to render just what I understood. The book is very impressive. Thai is really a very difficult language. Nina. Op 15-jun-2010, om 12:18 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Our new add will be exactly as I put it #108036 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 8:22 am Subject: Re: Sangiitisutta, the Fives. truth_aerator Dear Nina, Sarah, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > just catching up slowly after my break. > S: 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. > ... > S: Is this passage implying or stating as a fact that this person has > reached > arahatship as a sukkhavipassaka (without any mundane jhana attainments)? > .---------- > N: Yes. See also the following. > Nina. > How do we know that that kind of Arahant never (even in previous lives) achieved Jhana? As I understand it, freedom from Sakkayaditthi is stream entry, not Arhatship. With metta, Alex #108037 From: "Jessica" Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 8:54 am Subject: Question on Anapanasati Sutta jessicamui Dear Friends, when I was reading Anapanasati Sutta M iii 84, I was "surprised" to found that the Buddha was instructing 'a bhikkhu trains thus: ' I shall breathe in experiencing rapture';.. The statements seem to be pre-conditioning the mind in experiencing certain specific mental factors. In actual practice, does one make this "I shall.." volition per observation of the breathing, or prior to the practice period ? Thanks in advance for your comments. Metta, Jessica. #108038 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 11:58 am Subject: smiling-consciousness of an arahat nilovg Dear Alex, Howard: > P. S. Can an arahant laugh? And why should we care one way or the other? I > suspect that an arahant can laugh with "bubbling joy," but if not, then > not. Good answer, Howard. Though I wonder why there is special smiling citta for an Arahant if it is just a bodily expression (kaya-vinnatti?) of something like metta, or karuna. --------- N: No, an arahat does not laugh. He may smile with sobhana kiriyacitta, accompanied by sobhana hetus, or with an ahetuka kiriyacitta. In the last case the object is not sublimnel but something like a carcas or a ghost. He is glad to be liberated from the cycle. See Vis. XIV, 108, footnote 41. Nina. #108039 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 12:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Can one be a sekha and not know it? nilovg Dear Alex, Op 9-jun-2010, om 17:51 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > I wonder if it is possible at all to know everything about one's > accumulations. Are there any sutta or VsM quotes about this? -------- N: One can learn more about one's accumulated inclinations by sati sampaja~n~na, by being aware of lobha arising now. One knows that this is conditioned by past lobha. Not everything can be known. It is good not to mislead oneself into thinking that one is full of kusala. Also, if there is no awareness of lobha, dosa and moha they can never be eradicated. They must be clearly understood as conditioned dhammas, not belonging to anyone. In that way the idea of self who is the owner of cittas becomes less. First wrong view has to go, thus also wrong view about one's akusala, and then later on other defilements will be eliminated. It is not so that one makes more progress by being aware of kusala, I would say: on the contrary. Akusala must be known as it is. This is indispensable. And it is not so that 'everything goes'. As Sarah also explained, when there is awareness and understanding at that moment the citta is kusala. That kusala citta can have as object akusala citta or cetasika that just fell away. Sutta: M. II, 15, Anumaanasutta. The monk has to realize his akusala, his dosa, his unkind speech, his conceit. The bhikkhu has to consider this sutta three or two times a day. Nina. #108040 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 12:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sangiitisutta, the Fives. nilovg Dear Alex, Op 15-jun-2010, om 17:22 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > How do we know that that kind of Arahant never (even in previous > lives) achieved Jhana? ------ N: He may or he may not, we do not know. But anyway, here is spoken of the present life. ------- > > A: As I understand it, freedom from Sakkayaditthi is stream entry, > not Arhatship. ------ N: The text does not say Sakkayaditthi, but: sakkaaya. Personality, this refers to rebirth, to the cycle. ------- Nina. #108041 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 12:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Anapanasati Sutta nilovg Dear Jessica, Op 15-jun-2010, om 17:54 heeft Jessica het volgende geschreven: > when I was reading Anapanasati Sutta M iii 84, I was "surprised" to > found that the Buddha was instructing 'a bhikkhu trains thus: ' I > shall > breathe in experiencing rapture';.. The statements seem to be > pre-conditioning the mind in experiencing certain specific mental > factors. > > In actual practice, does one make this "I shall.." volition per > observation of the breathing, or prior to the practice period ? -------- N: This I sahh is not a kind of preconditioning, more like an advice. He has to be aware of the jhaanafactors so that he will not take them for self. Even rapture, piiti, it is so easy to be infatuated with it. It is only a cetasika, an element devoid of self. That person develops calm as well as insight. Nina. #108042 From: "colette" Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 2:57 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions ksheri3 Hi Howard, Okay, we agree on a consciousness. > This is my experience as well, Colette. This brings us to the potentiality of something having to do with 'the body' as the means. We are both agreeing that the mind conizes and that in certain conditions/under certain conditions, we find the meditationaly experience as beneficial/conducize to the meditational process. WHAT ARE THOSE CONDITIONS? CAN THEY BE DUPLICATED TO PACIFY THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD? Why is it, that you and I agree, that by focusing on this rediculous SINGLE POINT PERSPECTIVE (creationism) that OBSCURATIONS occur and are manifested in the noumenal experience of MEDITATION? This RESULTANT PHENOMENA that you and I both agree upon, seems to CONTRADICT the entire educational experience/learning experience which all societies subscribe to. Is the SUBCRIPTION to a failed PROCESS cognized by society or is the society ultimately doing nothing more than running in circles by trying to fit the a round peg in a square hole? Home schooling and Montessori schooling are both acknowledged as being valid courses/paths to an educational experience, yet both courses/paths are ENTIRELY DEPENDENT UPON A SINGLE POINT PERSPECTIVE. <...> Thanx for remembering me after so long being somewhere, "out there", doing something! Somethin' tells me that I'm not the only person that sees this 'thing' and am focusing on this 'thing' which does exist. BUT, DAMN, WHERE THE HELL IS IT? IT IS SO TRANSIENT AND SO ILLUSIVE. COULD IT BE NOTHING MORE THAN A MIRAGE OR HALLUCINATION? toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Colette (and Jon & Alex) - > > In a message dated 6/15/2010 6:14:47 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > ksheri3@... writes: > > colette: Jon, I actually believe that most if not all sentient beings > actually try to control their meditation and their meditation practices. I > believe that Howard was refering, when he said that meditations should not be > controlled, was specifically to that DEPENDENCY which arises after becoming > accustomed to the process of meditation. > > Through the decades I've practiced meditation I've found that the > objectivity of FOCUSING on a single being or single concept eventually tends to > disrupt and obscure the bliss of the meditational experience. It gets in the > way because of this REQUIREMENT of maintaining a single position. When I let > go of the singularity of something, I've found, that the meditational > experience is far more rewarding and comforting. In fact I've found that trying > to remain focused on a single thought or single "thing" is of far less > value than just letting the meditation follow it's own path without trying to > force the round peg in the square hole, etc. > ======================= > This is my experience as well, Colette. > > With metta, > Howard <..> #108044 From: "ptaus1" Date: Tue Jun 15, 2010 10:51 pm Subject: Re: Question on Anapanasati Sutta ptaus1 Dear Jessica, > J: when I was reading Anapanasati Sutta M iii 84, I was "surprised" to > found that the Buddha was instructing 'a bhikkhu trains thus: ' I shall > breathe in experiencing rapture';.. The statements seem to be > pre-conditioning the mind in experiencing certain specific mental > factors. > > In actual practice, does one make this "I shall.." volition per > observation of the breathing, or prior to the practice period ? pt: Visuddhimagga VIII, 145-244 discusses mindfulness of breathing and Anapanasati sutta. In particular, VIII,174 addresses the meaning of "I shall...": "174. Herein, in the first part of the system (nos. i and ii) [pt: these are the first two bases of the first tetrad, which are before "I shall..."] - see note 49 - he should only breathe in and breathe out and not do anything else at all, and it is only afterwards that he should apply himself to the arousing of knowledge, and so on. Consequently the present tense is used here in the text, 'He knows: "I breathe in" ... he knows: "I breathe out". But the future tense in the passage beginning ' "I shall breathe in experiencing the whole body" ' should be understood as used in order to show that the aspect of arousing knowledge, etc., has to be undertaken from then on." Note 49: "In the first part of the system": in the first part of the system of development; in the first two bases, is what is intended. Of course, arousing of knowledge must be admitted to take place here too because of the presence of awareness of the length and shortness of the breaths as they actually are (as they actually become); and it is not hard to do that, for it is merely the taking account of them as they occur. That is why it is put in the present tense here. But what follows is as hard as for a man to walk on a razor's edge; which is why the future tense is used for the subsequent stages in order to indicate the need for exceptional prior effort' (Pm. 263)." pt: So, as far as I understand, "I shall..." is used to indicate the presence of understanding. Best wishes pt #108045 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 1:41 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Anger. How to stop / with .Metta-Karuna / sarahprocter... Hi Robin, Very belatedly, I wished to reply to the following questions/comments on karuna (compassion): --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" wrote: > > >R:I think Karuna is bittersweet sorrow; not bitter. That is my understanding, fwiw. > > .... > > S: Just sweet, very sweet. That is my understanding, fwiw:-) > > ... > > robin: I do not think so. What is sweet about others in pain or stress? .... S: As we understand from the Buddha, the "sweetness" or "bitterness" is in the citta. We're used to thinking in terms of circumstances as dictating such sweetness or bitterness, but in fact, at moments of kindness, compassion, understanding or other wholesome cittas, there's no anguish, no pain, no stress. As far as others are concerned, like for us, the bodily pain is a result of kamma, the mental pain and stress come about as a result of accumulated dosa. What is helpful for people at such times is not our grief, but our compassion, kindness and wisdom. .... >How can we feel sweet in response to the real pain of another? ... S: When there is kindness, caring and concern for the other rather than our own unpleasant feelings, our responses are "sweet", not "bitter". Of course, cittas change rapidly and usually there many are alternating wholesome and unwholesome responses. Gradually we can learn what is kusala and what is akusala, what is supportive and what isn't. .... >How can we be happy in response to suffering, unless we are sadistic? .... S: Metta and karuna can never arise with unhappiness or unpleasant feelings. Of course, pleasant feelings and happiness can arise with these wholesome states or with lobha, attachment. Usually, feeling happy is with lobha. This isn't metta or karuna. ... >What IS sweet is the warm concern or compassion that arises in response. The Buddha's Compassion can be seen in his words to the householder Sigala. Those were not sweet, nicey nicey words. He gave some pretty tough advice -- I am sure in a warm way that reached Sigala's heart. .... S: Exactly. With warm concern and compassion, there is no unpleasant feeling and the words may sound tough, as you suggest, like when a teacher or parent tries to guide a child. ... <...> > Here is what I mean by bittersweet. My wife I had a dog for 14 years. After the dog died, I wrote: > > "So far the adjustment is tough on the gut level of non-conceptual perception and habits. On the conceptual level, I know she is gone. We have accepted that. Then, I will be eating, and I find myself thinking I need to save the dog a bite. We come home from the store and enter the house, we are automatically looking around for her. Then there is that tight-ness in the gut, the tears that rim the eyes. One thing about a dog, even if one is only gone briefly, they are thrilled when you return. "And who can say why your heart cries ... Only Time." ... S: It's very touching and we can all relate to this. We all experience losses and share these experiences. However, I would say that for most of us at such times, this is (in paramattha language), an account of lobha and dosa. We grieve for ourselves and our losses. This points us to the first 2 Noble Truths - lobha as the cause of dukkha, the arising and passing away of what we find dear. Thx for sharing, Robin. Metta Sarah ======== #108046 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 1:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question on Anapanasati Sutta nilovg Dear pt, thank you for the quote. BTW I quickly went through past mails after my trip and I thought I had seen one of yours to me, but lost it again. Please, could you repeat this post? Nina. Op 16-jun-2010, om 7:51 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > So, as far as I understand, "I shall..." is used to indicate the > presence of understanding. #108047 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:00 am Subject: Re: Overcoming wrong view....for now sarahprocter... Hi Phil, Excuse the ambush - back to #106806 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > Ph: I should clarify of course that I *do* realize that sakkaya ditthi is at the root of suffering and bad behaviour, I guess I just differ with you about the degree we who are living as lay followers in hectic situations can reasonably expect or hope to eradicate it in this lifetime. ... S: Why expect or hope to "eradicate it in this lifetime"? Honestly, it's not something I think about. ... >I really don't believe that refining our thought processes so that the conceptual content is more about paramattha than about concepts (i.e, concepts about realities, rather than concepts about concepts.) does much, though it certainly feels kind of deep and liberating to always be absorbed mentally on paramattha topics. .... S: Again, I don't relate to this. It sounds far too atta-ish to me to have ideas about trying to refine our thought processes, having them be more about paramattha than concepts. Just conditioned dhammas.... when there are conditions to reflect on paramattha dhammas, that's how it is. When there are conditions to think about concepts, again that's how it is. ... >Still, it is better than nothing and as I said before brings us a little closer to the truth. (As long as we don't mistake this thinking about paramattha dhammas to have some kind of great value that, for example, makes it easier to accept doing bad deeds because one sees the anattaness of them, and is therefore developing kusala in a way that matters...) .... S: By underastanding paramattha dhamams, there is a greater understanding (by definition)of the harm of bad deeds, even the harm of suble akusala dhammas - the opposite of what you say, I think. It is when one thinks in terms of various situations and people that somehow the bad deeds become justified or bad seems not so bad. I really don't understand your reasoning (or rather, think you've misunderstood the teaching of dhammas in this regard). ... > > As for abstaining, I always find it interesting to reflect on how it is that I abstain successfully from doing bad deeds, and to be honest and without intending to boast, there has been a lot of success in abstaining. ... S: Isn't this because of an understanding of the harm and bad nature of such? Gradually one learns to see the harm of more and more akusala, from the gross to the more subtle, surely? Metta Sarah ======= #108048 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:09 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Applying mind to seeing and hearing sarahprocter... Dear Nina & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > On aThai recording Kh Sujin read the Cunda sutta (K. V, 161) . > Ananda was so sad that Saariputta had passed away. The Buddha > explained that dying is so normal, so common. All that is dear has > the nature of diversity, separation. Then he exhorted to > satipa.t.thaana, contemplating the body in the body, etc. That is the > way to take refuge 'in oneself', to take refuge in the Dhamma. > ----- ... S: I like these reminders. Yes, dying is normal, we part from all that is dear to us, sooner or later. The only refuge is satipatthana: http://www.mahindarama.com/e-tipitaka/samyutta-nikaya/sn47-13.htm Samyutta Nikaya XLVII.13 Cunda Sutta About Cunda (Sariputta's Passing Away) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi in Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Now at that time Ven. Sariputta was staying among the Magadhans in Nalaka village -- diseased, in pain, severely ill. Cunda the novice was his attendant. Then, because of that illness, Ven. Sariputta attained total Unbinding. So Cunda the novice, taking Ven. Sariputta's bowl & robes, went to Ven. Ananda in Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery, near Savatthi, and on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to Ven. Ananda: "Venerable sir, Ven. Sariputta has attained total Unbinding. Here are his bowl & robes." "Cunda, my friend, this news is reason for seeing the Blessed One. Come, let's go to the Blessed One and report this matter to him." "Yes, venerable sir," Cunda the novice replied. So Ven. Ananda & Cunda the novice went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As they were sitting there, Ven. Ananda said to him, "Lord, just now Cunda the novice said to me, 'Venerable sir, Ven. Sariputta has attained total Unbinding. Here are his bowl & robes.' It was as if my body were drugged, I lost my bearings, things weren't clear to me, on hearing that Ven. Sariputta had attained total Unbinding." "But, Ananda, when he attained total Unbinding, did Sariputta take the aggregate of virtue along with him? Did he take the aggregate of concentration...discernment...release...the aggregate of knowledge & vision of release along with him?" "No, lord, when he attained total Unbinding, Ven. Sariputta didn't take the aggregate of virtue...concentration...discernment...release...the aggregate of knowledge & vision of release along with him. It's just that he was my instructor & counselor, one who exhorted, urged, roused, & encouraged me. He was tireless in teaching the Dhamma, a help to his companions in the holy life. We miss the nourishment of his Dhamma, the wealth of his Dhamma, his help in the Dhamma." "But, Ananda, haven't I already taught you the state of growing different with regard to all things dear & appealing, the state of becoming separate, the state of becoming otherwise? What else is there to expect? It's impossible that one could forbid anything born, existent, fabricated, & subject to disintegration from disintegrating. "Just as if the largest limb were to fall off of a great tree composed of heartwood, standing firm; in the same way, Sariputta has attained total Unbinding from this great community of monks composed of heartwood, standing firm. What else is there to expect? It's impossible that one could forbid anything born, existent, fabricated, & subject to disintegration from disintegrating. "Therefore, Ananda, each of you should remain with your self as an island, your self as your refuge, without anything else as a refuge. Remain with the Dhamma as an island, the Dhamma as your refuge, without anything else as a refuge. And how does a monk remain with his self as an island, his self as his refuge, without anything else as a refuge? How does he remain with the Dhamma as an island, the Dhamma as his refuge, without anything else as a refuge? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings...mind...mental qualities in & of themselves -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is how a monk remains with his self as an island, his self as his refuge, without anything else as a refuge, with the Dhamma as an island, the Dhamma as his refuge, without anything else as a refuge. For those who -- now or after I am gone -- remain with their self as an island, their self as their refuge, without anything else as a refuge, with the Dhamma as an island, the Dhamma as their refuge, without anything else as a refuge, they will be the highest of the monks who desire training." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S: Wonderful! Metta Sarah ======== #108049 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:13 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 sarahprocter... Dear Ken H & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > The texts describe people, places, methods, cats, dogs and Sal trees, but that doesn't mean we have to admit there are such things. We have to know them in the "particular" sense, not in the "general" sense. ... S: What a gem! En route tomorrow afternoon! Metta Sarah p.s I checked us into a hotel for the last 2 nts - with no furniture or appliances left at home, I reached my paramattha limit:-) ========= #108050 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:16 am Subject: [dsg] Re: meditation centers/dsg sarahprocter... Hi all, Here were a few more Ken H 'one-liners', I had put aside: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: >KH: A worldling is just a citta. Just like the one that has arisen now. ... >KH: "Conventional" is just a term, or designation. The only right way of understanding it is as a shorthand way of saying "the five khandhas" or "the presently arisen namas and rupas." ... >>KO: Don't fall into the trap of thinking the conventional really exists - as some kind of alternative reality. There is only one reality. ... >KH: Until one is able to listening to words and the?direct understanding of?the sense door and mind door processing at the paramatha level and accumulate to the?understanding of these words, all our actions now?are just conventional. > --------------------------- > > Never! :-) There are always only dhammas. Whether we know it or not, that's all there ever are. ... S: Keep them rolling.... Metta Sarah ======= #108051 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] concepts and craving. sarahprocter... Dear Friends, One last one I'd put aside: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: >>KO: So DSG should change from No Action to No One/Self that Acts, Or it is cetana that acts. > ------------------------------- > > KH: No, DSG should continue to argue that there are only dhammas. Cetana is a dhamma, and it acts in a way that dhammas act - in a single fleeting moment. Therefore, cetana doesn't (for example) go to the corner store to buy a bottle of milk. That sort of action is pannatti (concept, thought, story). > > When we understand cetana as being purely a conditioned dhamma we are not bothered about how it acts, but when we think of a poor man walking to the shop, acting like some sort of robot, then we have wrong view. .... S: Nothing more to add! Metta Sarah ======= #108052 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:32 am Subject: Re: Will, codetermination sarahprocter... Dear pt (Alex & all), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > Thanks for coming back to this. Here are some of my thoughts on the topic. > > In conventional terms, I'd say choice is being made all the time, regardless of whether it can be described as a "decision" to read, to sit, to scratch, to abstain, etc. The question is whether this decision is ultimately riding on the back of kusala or akusala cittas so to speak. I guess only panna can know that. So that's the problem imo - when panna is not strong enough, or just absent for that matter, there's no telling whether what's conventionally described as "a choice to read suttas" is actually riding on the back of kusala or akusala cittas. I.e. whether cetana is actually kusala or akusala, is it accompanied by subtle lobha or by kusala determination, by right or wrong effort, etc. ... S: Well said. In truth, many different cittas, kusala and akusala. .... > > So, I guess we are all after figuring out what's practically the difference between a moment with sati, and a moment without it. .... S: At the moment of "figuring out", is there any sati? Isn't it just thinking instead of being aware of what is being experienced? Is there any wishing to have sati at such times? .... >Often what I practically gauge as a characteristic of sati for example - it later turns out to be some sort of lobha. For a time, conventional descriptions of sati and panna as "natural and spontaneous" as opposed to "deliberate and intentional" lobha, were helpful. But now it's also evident that a lot of this spontaneous stuff is also usually some sort of lobha. ... S: Yes, but so what? Lobha is very common and has to be known too. I think that when we try to analyse or work out what is what, then this is lobha for sure. I don't find it helpful at all. .... > So, it's tricky figuring out practically what's a moment with sati and what's not, ... S: I think the problem here is not the "tricky" one you suggest, but the trying to "figure out", because this seems to suggest a kind of attachment to having sati, if I'm not mistaken. When there's awareness, there's no figuring out, it's just aware of a characteristic. .... >... what's right effort and what's wrong, etc. Sometimes I'm 100% sure it was sati and panna definitely with right effort, but later, I read something and consider the past experience and conclude it was much closer to subtle greed for some concept of right effort... It's hard without a definite experiential reference point. .... S: But that's all thinking about, figuring out something that has already past. It's not awareness or understanding now and that's all that matters. Awareness of thinking of seeing or any other dhamma now is far more precious than analyising a concept about anything at all. ... >Of course reading helps, as well as hearing what others have to say about it, but only panna can ultimately tell, and it seems to develop pretty much like groping in the dark. ... S: Yes, only panna can tell and it depends on many conditions as to whether it arises at this moment or not. I think it's moha that gropes in the dark and panna which shines the light:-)) Thx for your reflections. I'll look forward to any more. Metta Sarah ======= #108053 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:36 am Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga Talks by Venerable Say?daw U S?l?nanda sarahprocter... Dear pt (Chris, Rob M & all), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > I was also wondering if the Venerable Silananda of the mentioned Visuddhimagga talks is the same as Silananda who posts here occasionally? ... S: Chris or anyone, pls correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Ven Silananda who gave the Vism talks is the Ven Silananda who passed away quite recently. I have a booklet of his Abhi notes which Rob M gave me and he prepared all the charts used in CMA as I recall BB telling me. So, the Ven Silananda who posts here is a different Ven. Metta Sarah ======== #108054 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts do not exist? How can they affect anything? sarahprocter... Hi Howard, This was a great one too: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ---------------------------------------------- > There's really no such thing as concepts, in my understanding. There's > just thinking. It it the thinking that has effect. Of course, various > complexes that are thought about and seem to be the referents of "concepts," > complexes such as people, houses, trees, and cars, do seem to have effect, > but in fact it is the more elementary phenomena of which the complexes are > composed, the so called paramattha dhammas, that have effect, acting > individually and in concert. > -------------------------------------------- S: You're even beginning to sound a little like Ken H:-)) (Not meaning to worry you, of course:-) Metta Sarah =========== #108055 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:50 am Subject: sati or no sati nilovg Dear pt, I found your post. ----------- pt: I think you're right - often the desire to know whether there is mindfulness or not, is itself some sort of lobha. Though I hope that at least occasionally, it can be kusala interest to know about Dhamma for the sake of Dhamma. I mean, it's a topic that seems very interesting. Another problem is that direct experience of mindfulness for example (which happens rarely, if at all) is confused with a conceptual analysis of the "present state of mind". I fall into that very often - trying to analyse my present mind-state, which of course by default means that there's no direct experience happening in the first place - only more thinking. ------- N: Yes, all these things are very natural, happening to all of us. Thinking is thinking and it cannot be prevented. There are condiitons for thinking in such or such a way. --------- pt:Still, I can't help but wonder - equanimity, calm, mindfulness, concentration, etc - I find their descriptions in texts very similar, so it's hard to make sense of their differences in real-life. -------- N: They are different cetasikas. As to real life: only after the first stage of insight (discerning the difference between nama and rupa) there will be a clearer understanding of different namas. ---------- pt: That reminds me, recently Han mentioned a definition of sati, which I think comes from Visuddhimagga: "Sati has the characteristic of not wobbling, i.e., not floating away from the object (apilaapana lakkha.naa). Its function is absence of confusion or non-forgetfulness (asammosarasaa). It is manifested as guardianship (aarakkhapaccupa.t.thaanaa). Its proximate cause is strong perception (thirasa~n~naa pada.t.thaanaa)." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/messages/107544 I was wondering - what does "strong perception" mean? I doubt it's some sort of special focusing or concentration, but I'm not sure what is it? -------- N: Let us say: strong remembrance. There is remembrance of what naama is, what ruupa is, what sati is, and of the fact that there is mindfulness of only one reality at a time as it appears through one doorway at a time. By listening again and again, considering again and again, remembrance will become firmer. Nina. #108056 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:55 am Subject: Re: The role of samatha for insight sarahprocter... Hi Ken H & Kevin, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > 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 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. ... S: As I understand, people all have different accumulations and this was also true amongst those who became enlightened in the Buddha's time. So there were those who 1) had attained various jhanas prior to to any vipassana experiences. There were those who 2) only attained any (mundane) jhanas after attaining vipassanas. There were those who 3), as you suggest, attained jhanas and vipassanas in such a way that jhana cittas arose immediately before insight/enlightenment and were a basis for such by way of being the object experienced by the vipassana/lokuttara cittas. then there were those who 4)who were sukkha-vipassaka and never attained mundane jhanas before or after the attainment of vipassanas. As an example of the latter is the commentary text which Nina summarised in the Sangiiti cornere which I recently asked about. (It would be useful to have a full translation of the particular paragraph). Just like now - we never know what cittas will arise by conditions. Metta Sarah ====== #108057 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 3:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Complex Cetasikas sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, (For others too, I send you a note off-list and got a message that you were out of the country, so look forward to your return!) Just to say I thought your passages quoted in a message to Mike on Right Livelihood (# 107251) were excellent. Too much to re-quote, so just one: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > 562.? And also because there is abstaining from transgressing in the body door by one consciousness and from transgression in the speech door by another, therefore this arises in mutliple moments in the prior stage.? But at the moment of the path, profitable abstention called Right Livelihood arises singly, fulfilling the path factor by accomplishing non-arising because of cutting away the foundation of the volition connected with the bad conduct of wrong livelihood which has arises through the seven courses of action in the two doors.>> ... Metta Sarah ========= #108058 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 12:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts do not exist? How can they affect anything? upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 6/16/2010 5:42:17 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard, This was a great one too: ------------------------------------------- Thanks, Sarah. :-) ------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ---------------------------------------------- > There's really no such thing as concepts, in my understanding. There's > just thinking. It it the thinking that has effect. Of course, various > complexes that are thought about and seem to be the referents of "concepts," > complexes such as people, houses, trees, and cars, do seem to have effect, > but in fact it is the more elementary phenomena of which the complexes are > composed, the so called paramattha dhammas, that have effect, acting > individually and in concert. > -------------------------------------------- S: You're even beginning to sound a little like Ken H:-)) (Not meaning to worry you, of course:-) -------------------------------------------------------- I'm not worried. :-) I'm sure Ken is also not worried. I don't think we sound alike, and I'm quite sure that Ken also does not! ;-)) --------------------------------------------------------- Metta Sarah =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #108059 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 7:53 am Subject: Re: The role of samatha for insight truth_aerator Hi Sarah, all In brief the argument is this. 1) N8P is required to be fulfilled even for a sotapanna. 2) N8P includes samma-samadhi 3) Samma-Samadhi is defined as 4 Jhanas. Therefore the Jhanas are required even for Stream entry. With metta, Alex #108060 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The role of samatha for insight nilovg Dear Alex, Op 16-jun-2010, om 16:53 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > 1) N8P is required to be fulfilled even for a sotapanna. > 2) N8P includes samma-samadhi > 3) Samma-Samadhi is defined as 4 Jhanas. > > Therefore the Jhanas are required even for Stream entry. ------ N: I understand that when you read in some suttas that right concentration is defined as the 4 jhaanas you think that this is required. Those who had accumulated skill for jhaana would develop calm, even to the degree of jhaana as well as insight. We should not forget that insight, vipassanaa pa~n~naa, is indispensable. But it has not been stated that everybody must develop calm to the degree of jhaana. At the moment of enlightenment samaadhi has the strength of the first jhaana, as you know. The reason is that nibbaana is the object that is experienced. Moreover, the eradication of defilements is very calm. Nina. #108061 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Jun 16, 2010 9:04 pm Subject: Re: sati or no sati ptaus1 Dear Nina and Sarah, Thanks for your replies. Best wishes pt > I was wondering - what does "strong perception" mean? I doubt it's > some sort of > special focusing or concentration, but I'm not sure what is it? > -------- > N: Let us say: strong remembrance. There is remembrance of what naama > is, what ruupa is, what sati is, and of the fact that there is > mindfulness of only one reality at a time as it appears through one > doorway at a time. By listening again and again, considering again > and again, remembrance will become firmer. #108062 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:54 am Subject: Abhidhamma Series, no. 19. Rebirth in different planes of existence. (part 2). nilovg Dear friends, Rebirth in different planes of existence. (part 2). Rebirth-consciousness does not only arise in sensuous planes of existence, kaama-bhuumi, it can also arise in higher heavenly planes which are not sensuous planes of existence. If one is born in one of the kaama-bhuumis and one sees the disadvantage of sense impressions, one may cultivate jhaana, absorption. Then one can, besides kaamaavacara cittas, also have ruupa-jhaanacittas and aruupa- jhaanacittas. If one cultivates the eightfold Path one can have lokuttara cittas, supramundane cittas which directly experience nibbaana. There are four planes of citta: kaamaavacara cittas, ruupaavacaara cittas which are ruupajhaanacittas, aruupaavacaara cittas which are aruupajhaanacittas and lokuttara cittas. Which of these planes of citta a particular citta belongs to, depends on the object it experiences. Kaamaavacara citta experiences a sense object. Ruupaavacaara cittas and aruupaavacaara cittas experience with absorption the meditation subjects of ruupa-jhaana and aruupajhaana. Lokuttara citta experiences nibbaana. A plane of citta is different from a plane of existence which, as we have seen, is the place where rebirth-consciousness arises. When someone attains jhaana, the kusala kamma he performs is not kaamaavacara kusala kamma; at the moment of jhaana there are no sense impressions. The kusala kamma which is jhaana does not produce result in the same lifespan one attains it, but it can produce result in the form of pa.tisandhi-citta, the pa.tisandhi-citta of the next life. In that case there are jhaanacittas arising shortly before death and the pa.tisandhi-citta of the next life experiences the same object as those jhaanacittas. The result of ruupaavacara kusala citta (kusala citta which is ruupa- jhaanacitta) is birth in a heavenly plane which is not kaama-bhuumi but a ruupa-brahma-plane (fine-material world). The result of an aruupaavacara kusala citta (kusala citta which is aruupa-jhaanacitta) is birth in a heavenly plane which is an aruupa-brahma plane (immaterial world). There are different ruupa-brahma-planes and aruupa-brahma planes. Those who attain ruupa-jhaana can be reborn in ruupa-brahma-planes where there are less sense-impressions. There are sixteen ruupa- brahma planes in all. One of these is the plane of unconscious beings, asa~n~nasatta. Those who cultivate ruupajhaana and see the disadvantage of naama may be reborn in a plane where there is only ruupa, not naama. Thus, here there is not a rebirth-consciousness, only ruupa-pa.tisandhi. Those who see the disadvantages of the meditation subjects of ruupa-jhaana which are still bound up with materiality, cultivate aruupa-jhaana. If they attain aruupa-jhaana they can be reborn in aruupa-brahma planes where there is no ruupa, only naama. There are four classes of aruupa-brahma planes. There are thirty-one classes of planes of existence in all, namely: 4 woeful planes | 1 human plane | 11 sensuous planes 6 deva planes | 16 r?pa-brahma planes 4 ar?pa-brahma planes Kusala kamma can cause a happy rebirth, but the end of birth is to be preferred to any kind of rebirth. If one cultivates the eightfold Path and attains arahatship there will be no more rebirth. The dying- consciousness (cuti-citta) of the arahat is not succeeded by a pa.tisandhi-citta. The Buddha reminded people of the dangers of birth and encouraged them to be mindful, in order to attain the ``deathless'' which is nibbaana. We read in the Mahaa-parinibbaana-sutta (Dialogues of the Buddha II, no. 16, chapter II, 1-4): ... The Exalted One proceeded with a great company of the monks to Kotig?ma; and there he stayed in the village itself. And at that place the Exalted One addressed the monks, and said: ``It is through not understanding and grasping four Ariyan Truths, O monks, that we have had to run so long, to wander so long in this weary path of rebirth, both you and I!'' ``And what are these four?'' ``The Ariyan truth about dukkha; the Ariyan truth about the cause of dukkha; the Ariyan truth about the cessation of dukkha; and the Ariyan truth about the path that leads to that cessation. But when these Ariyan truths are grasped and known the craving for future life is rooted out, that which leads to renewed becoming is destroyed, and then there is no more birth!'' **************** Nina. #108063 From: "antony272b2" Date: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:18 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? antony272b2 Hello Bhikkhu Samahita, all, Are you familiar with AN 4.174 Kotthita Sutta? Here is a condensed version: As Ven. Maha Kotthita was sitting there, he said to Ven. Sariputta, "With the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media [vision, hearing, smell, taste, touch, & intellection] is it the case that there is: anything else?"... not anything else?... both is & is not anything else?"... neither is nor is not anything else?"... [Sariputta:] "Don't say that, my friend." [Maha Kotthita:] "Being asked if, with the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media, there is anything else, you say "Don't say that, my friend." Now, how is the meaning of your words to be understood?" [Sariputta:] "The statement, 'With the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media [vision, hearing, smell, taste, touch, & intellection] is it the case that there is anything else?' is it the case that there is not anything else?... is it the case that there both is & is not anything else?"... is it the case that there neither is nor is not anything else?"... objectifies non-objectification.[1] However far the six contact-media go, that is how far objectification goes. However far objectification goes, that is how far the six contact media go. With the remainderless fading & stopping of the six contact-media, there comes to be the stopping, the allaying of objectification." Note 1. See MN 18. As Sn 4.14 points out, the root of the classifications and perceptions of objectification is the thought, "I am the thinker." This thought forms the motivation for the questions that Ven. Maha Kotthita is presenting here: the sense of "I am the thinker" can either fear or desire annihilation in the course of Unbinding. Both concerns get in the way of the abandoning of clinging, which is essential for the attainment of Unbinding, which is why the questions should not be asked. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.174.than.html Antony: Does this sutta reject speculative views about The All? Or is it only for advanced practitioners? Thanks / Antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Bhikkhu Samahita" wrote: > > Friends: > > The Empirical ALL is what can be Sensed or Thought! > > At Savatthi the Blessed Buddha pointed out a most Radical Empiricism: > Bhikkhus, I will teach you the ALL. Listen to that... And what, Bhikkhus, is > this ALL? > > The Eye and the Forms; > The Ear and the Sounds; > The Nose and the Smells; > The Tongue and the Tastes; > The Body and the Touches; > The Mind and the Mental States. > > This is defines and establish this ALL... If anyone, Bhikkhus, should ever > postulate this: > 'Having denied this all, I will define & point another all ...!!!', that > would be empty babble! > If he were questioned, he would not be able to reply & he would become quite > perplexed. Why? Because, Bhikkhus, that would be far out of his mental range! (since) #108064 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Jun 17, 2010 8:00 am Subject: 5 door process & 4 Elements truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, For lets say an ear door process one of the requirements is space. I wonder, what exactly does space here means? Why isn't air, as medium of transmission and earth element mentioned? For sound to occur, there needs to be vibrating particles. In vaccum there can't be any sound. For a nose-door process, are there other 3 dhatus rather than air element involved? For tongue-door process, is water element sufficient? Are other 3 elements involved in some way? For a body-door process, why is only earth element said? If one experiences cold or heat, doesn't the fire element is involved? If one experiences sticky surface, doesn't water element gets involved? And if one feels pressure or motion, doesn't air element gets involved? So in essence the questions are: Can all 4 dhatus be involved in each of 5 sense door process? It appears to be so. With metta, Alex #108065 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:47 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? kenhowardau Hi Antony, Once again we see the deplorable state of Buddhism in the world today. Searching the internet for something on AN4 174 I couldn't find anything that was not based on the teachings of Bhikkhu Thanissaro. (!) Thanissaro teaches that anatta does not mean no self. He says it simply means we should not *think* about the self (because that sort of thinking will disrupt our meditation). In the quote you have provided BT writes: ". . ."I am the thinker." This thought forms the motivation for the questions that Ven. Maha Kotthita is presenting here: the sense of "I am the thinker" can either fear or desire annihilation in the course of Unbinding. Both concerns get in the way of the abandoning of clinging, which is essential for the attainment of Unbinding, which is why the questions should not be asked." That is not the Dhamma. It is blatant anti-Dhamma. In other writings, BT has openly rejected the way of the Theras. Quite obviously, he is trying to replace it with a way of his own. We should speak out every time we see it happening. Ken H #108066 From: "antony272b2" Date: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:08 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? antony272b2 Hi Ken, all, Here are a couple of extracts from a better known sutta SN 12.15 To Kaccayana Gotta (on Right View) Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation: "All exists": Kaccana this is one extreme. "All does not exist": Kaccana this one extreme. Thanissaro Bhikkhu's translation: "'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes 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. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering." And: "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.015.than.html For Free Distribution, as a gift of Dhamma, from Access to Insight and Thanissaro Bhikkhu With metta / Antony. +++++ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Antony, > > Once again we see the deplorable state of Buddhism in the world today. Searching the internet for something on AN4 174 I couldn't find anything that was not based on the teachings of Bhikkhu Thanissaro. (!) > > Thanissaro teaches that anatta does not mean no self. He says it simply means we should not *think* about the self (because that sort of thinking will disrupt our meditation). > > In the quote you have provided BT writes: ". . ."I am the thinker." This thought forms the motivation for the questions that Ven. Maha Kotthita is presenting here: the sense of "I am the thinker" can either fear or desire annihilation in the course of Unbinding. Both concerns get in the way of the abandoning of clinging, which is essential for the attainment of Unbinding, which is why the questions should not be asked." > > > That is not the Dhamma. It is blatant anti-Dhamma. > > In other writings, BT has openly rejected the way of the Theras. Quite obviously, he is trying to replace it with a way of his own. > > We should speak out every time we see it happening. > > Ken H +++++ Antony: Hello Bhikkhu Samahita, all, Are you familiar with AN 4.174 Kotthita Sutta? Here is a condensed version: As Ven. Maha Kotthita was sitting there, he said to Ven. Sariputta, "With the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media [vision, hearing, smell, taste, touch, & intellection] is it the case that there is: anything else?"?. not anything else?? both is & is not anything else?"? neither is nor is not anything else?"? [Sariputta:] "Don't say that, my friend." [Maha Kotthita:] "Being asked if, with the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media, there is anything else, you say "Don't say that, my friend." Now, how is the meaning of your words to be understood?" [Sariputta:] "The statement, 'With the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media [vision, hearing, smell, taste, touch, & intellection] is it the case that there is anything else?' is it the case that there is not anything else?? is it the case that there both is & is not anything else?"? is it the case that there neither is nor is not anything else?"? objectifies non-objectification.[1] However far the six contact-media go, that is how far objectification goes. However far objectification goes, that is how far the six contact media go. With the remainderless fading & stopping of the six contact-media, there comes to be the stopping, the allaying of objectification." Note 1. See MN 18. As Sn 4.14 points out, the root of the classifications and perceptions of objectification is the thought, "I am the thinker." This thought forms the motivation for the questions that Ven. Maha Kotthita is presenting here: the sense of "I am the thinker" can either fear or desire annihilation in the course of Unbinding. Both concerns get in the way of the abandoning of clinging, which is essential for the attainment of Unbinding, which is why the questions should not be asked. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.174.than.html For Free Distribution, as a gift of Dhamma, from Access to Insight and Thanissaro Bhikkhu Antony: Does this sutta reject speculative views about The All? Or is it only for advanced practitioners? Thanks / Antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Bhikkhu Samahita" wrote: > > Friends: > > The Empirical ALL is what can be Sensed or Thought! > > At Savatthi the Blessed Buddha pointed out a most Radical Empiricism: > Bhikkhus, I will teach you the ALL. Listen to that... And what, Bhikkhus, is > this ALL? > > The Eye and the Forms; > The Ear and the Sounds; > The Nose and the Smells; > The Tongue and the Tastes; > The Body and the Touches; > The Mind and the Mental States. > > This is defines and establish this ALL... If anyone, Bhikkhus, should ever > postulate this: > 'Having denied this all, I will define & point another all ...!!!', that > would be empty babble! > If he were questioned, he would not be able to reply & he would become quite > perplexed. Why? Because, Bhikkhus, that would be far out of his mental range! (since) #108067 From: "antony272b2" Date: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:54 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? antony272b2 Hi Ken, all, Sorry I shouldn't have just posted the extracts below from SN12.15 without any comments or questions. I don't claim to understand the sutta. I thought it was an interesting sutta and was sincerely wanting to know if interpretations of the Sabba Sutta: The All could lead to speculative views about what exists and what doesn't exist. With metta / Antony. ++++ Here are a couple of extracts from a better known sutta SN 12.15 To Kaccayana Gotta (on Right View) Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation: "All exists": This is one extreme. "All does not exist": This one extreme. Thanissaro Bhikkhu's translation: "'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes 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. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering." And: "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.015.than.html For Free Distribution, as a gift of Dhamma, from Access to Insight and Thanissaro Bhikkhu With metta / Antony. +++++ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Antony, > > Once again we see the deplorable state of Buddhism in the world today. Searching the internet for something on AN4 174 I couldn't find anything that was not based on the teachings of Bhikkhu Thanissaro. (!) > > Thanissaro teaches that anatta does not mean no self. He says it simply means we should not *think* about the self (because that sort of thinking will disrupt our meditation). > > In the quote you have provided BT writes: ". . ."I am the thinker." This thought forms the motivation for the questions that Ven. Maha Kotthita is presenting here: the sense of "I am the thinker" can either fear or desire annihilation in the course of Unbinding. Both concerns get in the way of the abandoning of clinging, which is essential for the attainment of Unbinding, which is why the questions should not be asked." > > > That is not the Dhamma. It is blatant anti-Dhamma. > > In other writings, BT has openly rejected the way of the Theras. Quite obviously, he is trying to replace it with a way of his own. > > We should speak out every time we see it happening. > > Ken H +++++ Antony: Hello Bhikkhu Samahita, all, Are you familiar with AN 4.174 Kotthita Sutta? Here is a condensed version: As Ven. Maha Kotthita was sitting there, he said to Ven. Sariputta, "With the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media [vision, hearing, smell, taste, touch, & intellection] is it the case that there is: anything else?"?. not anything else?? both is & is not anything else?"? neither is nor is not anything else?"? [Sariputta:] "Don't say that, my friend." [Maha Kotthita:] "Being asked if, with the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media, there is anything else, you say "Don't say that, my friend." Now, how is the meaning of your words to be understood?" [Sariputta:] "The statement, 'With the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media [vision, hearing, smell, taste, touch, & intellection] is it the case that there is anything else?' is it the case that there is not anything else?? is it the case that there both is & is not anything else?"? is it the case that there neither is nor is not anything else?"? objectifies non-objectification.[1] However far the six contact-media go, that is how far objectification goes. However far objectification goes, that is how far the six contact media go. With the remainderless fading & stopping of the six contact-media, there comes to be the stopping, the allaying of objectification." Note 1. See MN 18. As Sn 4.14 points out, the root of the classifications and perceptions of objectification is the thought, "I am the thinker." This thought forms the motivation for the questions that Ven. Maha Kotthita is presenting here: the sense of "I am the thinker" can either fear or desire annihilation in the course of Unbinding. Both concerns get in the way of the abandoning of clinging, which is essential for the attainment of Unbinding, which is why the questions should not be asked. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.174.than.html For Free Distribution, as a gift of Dhamma, from Access to Insight and Thanissaro Bhikkhu Antony: Does this sutta reject speculative views about The All? Or is it only for advanced practitioners? Thanks / Antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Bhikkhu Samahita" wrote: > > Friends: > > The Empirical ALL is what can be Sensed or Thought! > > At Savatthi the Blessed Buddha pointed out a most Radical Empiricism: > Bhikkhus, I will teach you the ALL. Listen to that... And what, Bhikkhus, is > this ALL? > > The Eye and the Forms; > The Ear and the Sounds; > The Nose and the Smells; > The Tongue and the Tastes; > The Body and the Touches; > The Mind and the Mental States. > > This is defines and establish this ALL... If anyone, Bhikkhus, should ever > postulate this: > 'Having denied this all, I will define & point another all ...!!!', that > would be empty babble! > If he were questioned, he would not be able to reply & he would become quite > perplexed. Why? Because, Bhikkhus, that would be far out of his mental range! (since) #108068 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:05 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "antony272b2" wrote: > > Hi Ken, all, > > Sorry I shouldn't have just posted the extracts below from SN12.15 without any comments or questions. I don't claim to understand the sutta. I thought it was an interesting sutta and was sincerely wanting to know if interpretations of the Sabba Sutta: The All could lead to speculative views about what exists and what doesn't exist. > ---------------------- Hi Antony, I think the term "speculative views," when found in the texts, refers to views about the self. Needless to say, the view "all dhammas are not self (anatta)" is not included as one of them. It is a right view - about dhammas. Speculative views are about things other than dhammas. Contrary to what some people will tell you, the Buddha has expressly affirmed the "existence" of dhammas. For example, in 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." (end quote) Also, in one of the quotes you have provided, we read: "'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. It is clear to me the Buddha was saying those conditioned dhammas existed (unlike the mere concepts known to people caught up in the two extremes). Is that how you see it? Ken H #108069 From: "antony272b2" Date: Fri Jun 18, 2010 12:59 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? antony272b2 Hi Ken, Thankyou for bringing SN22:94 to my attention. I looked up the notes to Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation, which mention SN12.15 and conclude by saying "The affirmation of the existence of the five aggregates as impermanent processes, serves as a rejoinder to illusionist theories, which hold that the world lacks real being." No mention of AN4.174 I look forward to Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation and notes. Does anyone know how he is progressing with the complete translation of AN? In 2007 he said he hoped to complete it in a couple of years. Thanks / Antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Antony, > > I think the term "speculative views," when found in the texts, refers to views about the self. Needless to say, the view "all dhammas are not self (anatta)" is not included as one of them. It is a right view - about dhammas. > > Speculative views are about things other than dhammas. > > Contrary to what some people will tell you, the Buddha has expressly affirmed the "existence" of dhammas. For example, in 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." (end quote) > > > Also, in one of the quotes you have provided, we read: > > "'Everything exists': That is one extreme. > 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. > Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: > From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. > From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. > From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. > From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. > From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. > From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. > > It is clear to me the Buddha was saying those conditioned dhammas existed (unlike the mere concepts known to people caught up in the two extremes). > > Is that how you see it? > > Ken H #108070 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 18, 2010 1:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] 5 door process & 4 Elements nilovg Dear Alex, Op 17-jun-2010, om 17:00 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > For lets say an ear door process one of the requirements is > space. I wonder, what exactly does space here means? Why isn't air, > as medium of transmission and earth element mentioned? > > For sound to occur, there needs to be vibrating particles. In > vaccum there can't be any sound. > > For a nose-door process, are there other 3 dhatus rather than air > element involved? ------- N: Rivisit Vis. studies, Ch XIV, 53 and Tiika. The cave: All these similes are used to teach the conditions necessary for the functioning of the senses so that the sense- cognitions can occur. It is explained that cattle turn up their muzzles and breathe the wind, and no smell is experienced when breath is not inhaled. An example easy to understand. Of course the four great Elements have a function, they support all the other ruupas. But here are especially mentioned space and, in the case of the experience of odour, the element of air or wind. ---------- > > A: For tongue-door process, is water element sufficient? Are other > 3 elements involved in some way? --------- N: As said, the four great Elements have a function. Quote Vis. study: The tongue Even when the bhikkhu who enters the village in the morning In the village he will receive almsfood. A simple example that the water element (saliva) has a function for tasting sense. --------- > > A: For a body-door process, why is only earth element said? If one > experiences cold or heat, doesn't the fire element is involved? If > one experiences sticky surface, doesn't water element gets > involved? And if one feels pressure or motion, doesn't air element > gets involved? -------- N: We have to distinguish the sense object that is experienced and the sense organ that is the means for experiencing this or that sense object. Quote: . It is also said that one does not know the hardness or softness of a bed without sitting down in it, and of fruits placed in the hand without pressing them. Very daily examples to remind us of the element of hardness, external and internal. The bodysense is The bodysense is all over the body, and it is base at that point where there is impingement of tactile object. There can only be impingement at one point at a time. > When experiencing cold or heat, the element of fire is the object that is experienced. But what is said above refers to the bodysense itself : . You speak of a sticky surface: this is a description in conventional way. Moreover, the water element can only be experienced through the mind-door, not through touch. Pressure or motion: the element of wind is the object. But as said, the sense-object has to be distinguished from the sense organ. -------- > A: So in essence the questions are: Can all 4 dhatus be involved in > each of 5 sense door process? It appears to be so. -------- N: They accompany each ruupa, thus, each sense object and each sense organ. See also Expositor II, p. 411. Similes are used to show that all this is very daily, it is not 'in the book'. Quote: Nina. #108071 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 18, 2010 7:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The role of samatha for insight nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 16-jun-2010, om 11:55 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > As an example of the latter is the commentary text which Nina > summarised in the Sangiiti cornere which I recently asked about. > (It would be useful to have a full translation of the particular > paragraph). -------- DN 33.2.1(24) 'Five elements making for deliverance (nissara.niiyaa dhatuyo) Co: Pa~ncamavaare sakkaayam. manasikarototi suddhasa.nkhaare parigga.nhitvaa arahatta.m pattassa sukkhavipassakassa phalasamaapattito vu.t.thaaya viima.msanattha.m pa~ncupaadaanakkhandhaabhimukha.m citta.m pesentassa. Idamakkhaata.m sakkaayanissara.nanti ida.m arahattamaggena ca phalena ca nibbaana.m disvaa .thitassa bhikkhuno puna sakkaayo natthiiti uppanna.m arahattaphalasamaapatticitta.m sakkaayassa nissara.nanti akkhaata.m. Co: As to the fifth element making for deliverance, the 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 the bhikkhu who is established (in this way) there is no more sakkaaya. The citta that has arisen with the attainment of the fruition of arahatship has been declared escape from personality. Tiika: samathayaanikaana.m vasena he.t.thaa catta-ro vaaraa kathitaa, ida.m pana sukkhavipassakassa vasenaati aaha ‘‘suddhasa.nkhaare’’tiaadi. Four elements have been spoken of above with reference to those who have samatha as vehicle (samatha- yaanika), but here with regard to the person who develops dry insight, he said 'mere conditioned dhammas' (suddhasa”nkhaare). -------- This text is not long, but in many passages in the commentary dry insight has been mentioned. -------- Nina. #108072 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Jun 18, 2010 10:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] 5 door process & 4 Elements truth_aerator Dear Nina, thank you for your reply and reference to VsM XIV,53 So to sum up, the other elements are still present in sense door process, and only salient ones were emphasized. Also you say that bodysense can cognize one kind of rupa at a time. So what happens when one holds red-hot iron ball? One experiences heat and hardness at different moments of time (all alternating in a rapid sequence)? Also is cognition of hardness/softness, heat/cold, etc, sanna or vinnana? With metta, Alex #108073 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Jun 18, 2010 4:23 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? kenhowardau Hi Antony, ------- <. . . > A: > I looked up the notes to Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation, which mention SN12.15 and conclude by saying "The affirmation of the existence of the five aggregates as impermanent processes, serves as a rejoinder to illusionist theories, which hold that the world lacks real being." ------- Thanks for passing that on. I am glad to see BB opposing illusionism. "No real being" and "no own being" are popular Mahayana theories that a lot of people try to import into Theravada. But I can't see how such theories could possibly coexist there. We sometimes hear, for example, that there is really only Nibbana. We are told that the conditioned world is a mere illusion and, if we would just see through it (or past it), we would find the only true reality, Nibbana. But that goes against the whole Theravada teaching, which is to directly know conditioned reality. BTW, I wonder why BB uses the word "processes" rather than "realities" or "things" etc. By preferring "processes" he seems to give aid and succour to the illusion theories. Or am I being too defensive? :-) Ken H #108074 From: "Mike" Date: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:59 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? mikenz66 Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > KH: BTW, I wonder why BB uses the word "processes" rather than "realities" or "things" etc. By preferring "processes" he seems to give aid and succour to the illusion theories. Or am I being too defensive? :-) Mike: "Processes" is a separate question from reality/non-reality. As I understand it, your view is that it is incorrect to describe a sequence of dependently-arisen dhammas as a process, whether or not the dhammas are "real". Mike: How you reconcile that view with the teachings on causality is still a mystery to me... Mike #108075 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:58 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? kenhowardau Hi Mike, Thanks for joining in. ---------------- <. . .> KH: > > BTW, I wonder why BB uses the word "processes" rather than "realities" or "things" etc. <. . .> Mike: "Processes" is a separate question from reality/non-reality. ---------------- Yes, I agree. A reality is a 'thing' that has absolute existence. It is different from a process. As you say, 'process' could refer to a *sequence* of realities (a citta viti). But I don't think it could refer to a single dhamma, or to a single group of co-arising dhammas, do you? ----------------------- M: > As I understand it, your view is that it is incorrect to describe a sequence of dependently-arisen dhammas as a process, whether or not the dhammas are "real". ----------------------- No, my view is that a *dhamma,* as distinct from a *sequence of dhammas,* is real (an absolute reality). A sequence of dhammas is something else: it does not have sabhava. I suppose it is 'a concept that is used to explain how a given dhamma has arisen in the way that it has'. In the original quote B Bodhi wrote: "The affirmation of the existence of the five aggregates as impermanent processes. . ." So he was referring to the *five aggregates* as processes. The five aggregates are paramattha dhammas - citta, cetasika and rupa. Therefore, BB was not referring to a *sequence* of any kind, was he? ------------------ Mike: > How you reconcile that view with the teachings on causality is still a mystery to me... ------------------ Have I cleared up the mystery? I understood BB to be referring to dhammas, not to processes. If I was correct then I wonder why he did so. It seems to me that by choosing the word 'processes' he has played into the hands of the illusion theorists. Isn't that how they refer to dhammas? Ken H #108076 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:01 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? ptaus1 Hi KenH and Mike, > KH: > > BTW, I wonder why BB uses the word "processes" rather than "realities" or "things" etc. <. . .> > > Mike: "Processes" is a separate question from reality/non-reality. > > KH: Yes, I agree. A reality is a 'thing' that has absolute existence. It is different from a process. > > As you say, 'process' could refer to a *sequence* of realities (a citta viti). But I don't think it could refer to a single dhamma, or to a single group of co-arising dhammas, do you? pt: Hm, I think I'd disagree with both of you. Of course, we can't know what Ven.BB meant to say exactly (unless someone asks him directly), but my guess would be that "process" is used to point out that dhamma(s) is(are) conditioned. So, although in Theravada (as defined by Mahavihara tradition) it's said that a dhamma "exists" and is "real" by referring to its individual and general characteristics (sabhava), that dhamma is nevertheless conditioned, so the "existence" and "reality" of it cannot be taken beyond the 3 sub-moments. To take the "existence" and "reality" beyond the 3 sub-moments would be falling into the other extreme of eternalism. Hence, using "process" serves quite well imo to remind us about conditionality. While I think KenH and most here do not take "reality" of a dhamma beyond the 3 sub-moments thanks to being familiar with abhidhamma (and hence have no trouble in using the terms "reality" and "existence" correctly), I think that the majority of Western Buddhist audience that Ven.BB writes for is usually not very familiar with abhidhamma. So for them terms like "reality" and "existence" will have different connotations - i.e. they'd be understood as asserting eternalism. Hence why it seems useful to me to remind them that dhammas are conditioned by using "process". Anyway, there's an interesting note in Vsm - chapter 8, note 68, which is quite long and touches on some of these issues. If you like, I can post it here in several installments, and we can discuss it? Best wishes pt #108077 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:08 pm Subject: Re: The role of samatha for insight kenhowardau Hi Sarah, I think I've got this straight now. Just one question: ----------- S: > . . . then there were those who 4)who were sukkha-vipassaka and never attained mundane jhanas before or after the attainment of vipassanas. ------------ Sukkha-vipassaka means "freed by vipassana alone" doesn't it? And 'freed' means attained arahantship. But does that necessarily mean sukkha-vipassakas will never, subsequently, practise mundane jhanas? (Not that it matters much what they do after arahantship, of course.) :-) Ken H #108078 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:36 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions ptaus1 Hi Howard (and Jon), > pt: Not sure if this will help the discussion, I came across a passage on > effort in Vsm (section on concentration(!) - mindfulness of breathing) > VIII, 202-3: ... > pt: So it seems interesting that even for samatha, effort is equated to > mind and body becoming wieldy, rather than - making the mind and body > wieldy by (what I guess Jon would call - 'intentional') effort. > ------------------------------------------- > H: Yes, that is what Buddhaghosa appears to be asserting. Thank you for > posting this. It is certainly relevant. > ------------------------------------------ > > pt: Though > it's another matter how does one become energetic in the first place... > ------------------------------------------- > H: Yes. Also, there seems to be a difference between what Buddhaghosa had > to say about effort and what the Buddha said - for example in what I > quoted in my post to Jon. > ----------------------------------------- pt: My apologies, I failed to note in the last post that the entire passage I quoted from Vsm was in fact taken by Buddhaghosa from Patisambhidamagga word for word - I just checked - it's the division III in Ps - Mindfulness of breathing, paragraph 170. Although Ps was also translated by Nanamoli, there he uses "endevour" instead of "effort". Best wishes pt #108080 From: "Mike" Date: Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:58 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? mikenz66 Re: What is the ALL actually? Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Mike, > > Thanks for joining in. > > ---------------- > <. . .> > KH: > > BTW, I wonder why BB uses the word "processes" rather than "realities" or "things" etc. <. . .> > > Mike: "Processes" is a separate question from reality/non-reality. > ---------------- > > KH: Yes, I agree. A reality is a 'thing' that has absolute existence. It is different from a process. Mike: I don't see any difference, sorry. Dhammas only arise because of previous dhammas. Hence "process". Mike: I think that what you mean is "thinking about the process is not reality". That I could agree with. > > KH: As you say, 'process' could refer to a *sequence* of realities (a citta viti). But I don't think it could refer to a single dhamma, or to a single group of co-arising dhammas, do you? Mike: Since I don't agree with your opinion that a process is not reality, I don't really care. > > ----------------------- > M: > As I understand it, your view is that it is incorrect to describe a sequence of dependently-arisen dhammas as a process, whether or not the dhammas are "real". > ----------------------- > > No, my view is that a *dhamma,* as distinct from a *sequence of dhammas,* is real (an absolute reality). A sequence of dhammas is something else: it does not have sabhava. I suppose it is 'a concept that is used to explain how a given dhamma has arisen in the way that it has'. > > In the original quote B Bodhi wrote: "The affirmation of the existence of the five aggregates as impermanent processes. . ." So he was referring to the *five aggregates* as processes. The five aggregates are paramattha dhammas - citta, cetasika and rupa. Therefore, BB was not referring to a *sequence* of any kind, was he? > > ------------------ > Mike: > How you reconcile that view with the teachings on causality is still a mystery to me... > ------------------ > > KH: Have I cleared up the mystery? I understood BB to be referring to dhammas, not to processes. > > KH: If I was correct then I wonder why he did so. It seems to me that by choosing the word 'processes' he has played into the hands of the illusion theorists. Isn't that how they refer to dhammas? Mike: I don't know, I don't think that worrying about whether dhammas do or don't "exist" is relevant. Either way, they only exist as part of a process. Without the causes and conditions they would not arise. Which, I think, it the point of the whole exercise... Mike #108081 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 20, 2010 1:42 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiitisutta 323, 6, suttas 9, 10, and commentary. nilovg Dear friends, DN 33.2.2(9) 'Six kinds of disrespect (agaaravaa): Here, a monk behaves disrespectfully and discourteously towards the Teacher, the Dhamma, the Sangha, the training, in respect of earnestness (appamaade), of hospitality (pa.tisanthaare). 9) Cha agaaravaa. Idhaavuso, bhikkhu satthari agaaravo viharati appatisso; dhamme agaaravo viharati appatisso; sa'nghe agaaravo viharati appatisso; sikkhaaya agaaravo viharati appatisso; appamaade agaaravo viharati appatisso; pa.tisanthaare [pa.tisandhaare (ka.)] agaaravo viharati appatisso. 10) RDs [ 6.10] Six forms of reverence. Herein, friends, a brother conducts himself in the opposite manner in the foregoing six cases. --------- N: the commentary explains agaaravo as without respect, unruly (appatissayo), conduct that is not humble (aniica). The bhikkhu who is irreverent does not render service to his teacher. When his teacher walks without sandals, he walks with sandals, when his teacher walks on a low walk, he walks on a high walk. As to irreverence to the Dhamma, when listening to the Dhamma has been anounced, he does not go there with attention, he does not listen thoroughly. Tiika: he does not approach with reverence. Co: He sits engaged with conversation and does not grap (what he hears) thoroughly. He does not recite the Dhamma. This is irreverence towards the Dhamma. Co: As to irreverence to the sangha, without being invited by an elderly bhikkhu, he teaches Dhamma, he sits and he asks questions. He walks, stands and sits jostling elderly bhikkhus. In the midst of the community he covers both shoulders, wears parasol and sandals. Also if he behaves badly towards one bhikkhu, he is actually irreverant towards the sangha. He is disrespectful towards the training (sikkha), that means the three kinds of training. -------------- N: The training in siila, samaadhi and pa~n~naa. The threefold training has been explained as higher siila, adhisiila, higher concentration (adhicitta) and higher pa~n~naa (adhipa~n~naa), Gradual Sayings, I, 234. ------- He is disrespectful with regard to earnestness (appamaada). Co: he does not develop the characteristic of earnestness. Tiika: The characteristic of earnestness, appamaada is the right practice, sammaapa.tipatti. -------- He lacks esteem for hospitality (pa.tisanthaare). Co: the twofold courtesy. Tiika: The twofold refers to Dhamma courtesy and to material hospitality (aamisa). N: As mentioned by Atthhasaalinii(397): ?carnal courtesy? (aamisa patisanthaaro) is helping someone with material things. Dhamma courtesy (Dhamma patisanthaaro) is helping others by explaining Dhamma. -------- As to the six forms of respect these are the opposites to what has been explained above about irreverence. --------- N: In this sutta many things that are mentioned as to siila concern the monks. But also layfollowers can show politeness and courtesy among each other. This is kusala siila, applied in daily life. We show disrespect when jostling others while entering a building, a bus or train. In this sutta we are reminded to listen to the Dhamma with respect, to listen carefully, not superficially, so that we can benefit from what we hear. As to the three kinds of training, at the moment of right mindfulness and right understanding of the naama or ruupa appearing at this moment these three kinds of training are being accomplished. Only in that way the four noble Truths can be penetrated. As to respect with regard to earnestness, appamaada, this is being fulfilled when satipa.t.thaana is being developed. At the moments of forgetfulness of realities, we lack respect with regard to earnestness, appamaada. When sati arises and right understanding of the present reality is being developed, we esteem the benefit of the teaching of satipa.t.thaana. We truly show respect for the Buddha's teaching. ******** Nina. #108082 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 20, 2010 1:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] 5 door process & 4 Elements nilovg Dear Alex, Op 18-jun-2010, om 19:05 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > So to sum up, the other elements are still present in sense door > process, and only salient ones were emphasized. ------ N: In the case of tasting-consciousness, tastingsense is a kind of ruupa and it is accompanied by at least the eight inseparable ruupas. It is produced by kamma, and thus, jiivitindriya ruupa accompanies it as well. The Atth explains with an example that the element of water has a specific role so that flavour can be experienced by tasting- consciousness. This does not mean that the other accompanying elements do not assist the tastingsense. --------- > > A: Also you say that bodysense can cognize one kind of rupa at a time. ------- N: To be more precise: bodyconsciousness can cognize one kind of rupa at a time. Bodysense is a kind of ruupa. It does not know anything, but as a doorway it is the means for knowing tactile object. --------- > A: So what happens when one holds red-hot iron ball? > > One experiences heat and hardness at different moments of time (all > alternating in a rapid sequence)? ------- N: It depends on conditions what kind of ruupa or naama is experienced at a given moment, but only one at a time. Painful feeling may be very strong, and also strong aversion is likely to arise. ---------- > > A: Also is cognition of hardness/softness, heat/cold, etc, sanna or > vinnana? ---------- N: Bodyconsciousness is citta or vi~n~naa.na, these are the same. Sa~n~naa remembers or recognizes, and this accompanies each citta. ------ Nina. #108083 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:53 am Subject: Re: Buddha forbade teaching on sekha stages to "unwise" (worldlings?). jonoabb Hi Alex (108022) > > J: What do you mean here by 'mundane right views'? > > "There is good and bad kamma. There is Father and Mother. There is another world and spontaneously reborn beings..." > =============== J: The view that there is good and bad kamma, as held by the follower of another teaching who also believes in the existence of a soul that transmigrates in accordance with that kamma, would not constitute mundane right view within the Buddha's teaching. I don't think that views held and developed under other teachings in previous lives can be a condition for the understanding of the Dhamma in this life, no matter how closely they may seem to parallel views expounded by the Buddha. Jon #108084 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:50 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions jonoabb Hi Howard (108020) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ... > J: Anything done with the idea that it would induce kusala to arise there > and then would be wrong practice. > ------------------------------------------------ > Jon, I believe the Buddha taught the opposite, for example as follows: > > > > "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is > unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not > say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' ... > =============== J: It's a question of how the unskilful is to be abandoned and the skilful developed. To my understanding, there is no specific activity to be undertaken for this purpose. There is just the arising of the various kinds of previously accumulated kusala, conditioned by one's intellectual understanding of the teachings and appropriate reflection. > =============== > "One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into _right view_ > (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-ditthi/index.html) : This > is one's right effort... > =============== J: To my understanding, right effort is one of the mental factors that arises with each kusala citta; it is not a conventional 'trying to have kusala' that precedes the actual arising of kusala. Jon #108085 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:56 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions jonoabb Hi Colette (108031) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > ... > In fact I've found that trying to remain focused on a single thought or single "thing" is of far less value than just letting the meditation follow it's own path without trying to force the round peg in the square hole, etc. > =============== J: It is I think a common misconception that the development of the path as taught by the Buddha involves remaining focussed on a single (or particular) thought or thing. I don't think it does. So I agree with you to that extent. Jon #108086 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:59 am Subject: Re: daily activities in satipatthana jonoabb Hi Robert (108028) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > ... > according to my very limited understanding of pali the phrase is saying that doer and reciver are vohara (conventional) and do not exist in ultimate terms. But it implies that action and result do exist in ultimate terms. > =============== J: Yes, I have no argument with that. 'Action', for example, exists in ultimate terms as the mental factor cetana (as we agreed earlier in this thread). My point was just that the expression 'taking place of any action', as used in the translation then under discussion, should not be taken as a reference to a conventional action. Jon #108087 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 20, 2010 12:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions upasaka_howard Hi, pt - In a message dated 6/20/2010 12:40:38 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ptaus1@... writes: Hi Howard (and Jon), > pt: Not sure if this will help the discussion, I came across a passage on > effort in Vsm (section on concentration(!) - mindfulness of breathing) > VIII, 202-3: ... > pt: So it seems interesting that even for samatha, effort is equated to > mind and body becoming wieldy, rather than - making the mind and body > wieldy by (what I guess Jon would call - 'intentional') effort. > ------------------------------------------- > H: Yes, that is what Buddhaghosa appears to be asserting. Thank you for > posting this. It is certainly relevant. > ------------------------------------------ > > pt: Though > it's another matter how does one become energetic in the first place... > ------------------------------------------- > H: Yes. Also, there seems to be a difference between what Buddhaghosa had > to say about effort and what the Buddha said - for example in what I > quoted in my post to Jon. > ----------------------------------------- pt: My apologies, I failed to note in the last post that the entire passage I quoted from Vsm was in fact taken by Buddhaghosa from Patisambhidamagga word for word - I just checked - it's the division III in Ps - Mindfulness of breathing, paragraph 170. Although Ps was also translated by Nanamoli, there he uses "endevour" instead of "effort". ------------------------------------------------ Interesting. I've long viewed much of PTSM as quite different in tone and format from the rest of the Sutta Pitaka. Now it appears that it differs in terms of content as well. It happens that there are certain things in the PTSM such as the expressed objections to "sabhava" that quite appeal to me, but they are also idiosyncratic and probably late developments influenced by Mahayana. So, whether I like something in the PTSM or dislike something, I don't find the PTSM to be entirely "trustworthy" as word of the Buddha. ------------------------------------------------ Best wishes pt ================================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #108088 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 20, 2010 1:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - We are nowhere close on this, Jon. What the Buddha taught in AN 2.19 and MN 117 is crystal clear to me as teaching intentional mental activities for thwarting unwholesome states and fostering wholesome ones. And certainly he also teaches proactive intentional effort in SN 45.8 when he teaches "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for ..." each of the following: a) "the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen," b) "the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen," c) "the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen," and d) "the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen," concluding that "This, monks, is called right effort." With metta, Howard In a message dated 6/20/2010 6:54:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (108020) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ... > J: Anything done with the idea that it would induce kusala to arise there > and then would be wrong practice. > ------------------------------------------------ > Jon, I believe the Buddha taught the opposite, for example as follows: > > > > "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is > unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not > say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' ... > =============== J: It's a question of how the unskilful is to be abandoned and the skilful developed. To my understanding, there is no specific activity to be undertaken for this purpose. There is just the arising of the various kinds of previously accumulated kusala, conditioned by one's intellectual understanding of the teachings and appropriate reflection. > =============== > "One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into _right view_ > (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-ditthi/index.html) : This > is one's right effort... > =============== J: To my understanding, right effort is one of the mental factors that arises with each kusala citta; it is not a conventional 'trying to have kusala' that precedes the actual arising of kusala. Jon #108089 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:46 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? kenhowardau Hi pt and Mike, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi KenH and Mike, > > > > KH: > > BTW, I wonder why BB uses the word "processes" rather than "realities" or "things" etc. <. . .> > > > > Mike: "Processes" is a separate question from reality/non-reality. > > > > KH: Yes, I agree. A reality is a 'thing' that has absolute existence. It is different from a process. > > > > As you say, 'process' could refer to a *sequence* of realities (a citta viti). But I don't think it could refer to a single dhamma, or to a single group of co-arising dhammas, do you? > > > pt: Hm, I think I'd disagree with both of you. Of course, we can't know what Ven.BB meant to say exactly (unless someone asks him directly), but my guess would be that "process" is used to point out that dhamma(s) is(are) conditioned. ------------ Yes, that might have been his reasoning. But couldn't he have just said "conditioned dhammas"? ---------------------- pt: > So, although in Theravada (as defined by Mahavihara tradition) it's said that a dhamma "exists" and is "real" by referring to its individual and general characteristics (sabhava), that dhamma is nevertheless conditioned, so the "existence" and "reality" of it cannot be taken beyond the 3 sub-moments. To take the "existence" and "reality" beyond the 3 sub-moments would be falling into the other extreme of eternalism. Hence, using "process" serves quite well imo to remind us about conditionality. While I think KenH and most here do not take "reality" of a dhamma beyond the 3 sub-moments thanks to being familiar with abhidhamma (and hence have no trouble in using the terms "reality" and "existence" correctly), I think that the majority of Western Buddhist audience that Ven.BB writes for is usually not very familiar with abhidhamma. So for them terms like "reality" and "existence" will have different connotations - i.e. they'd be understood as asserting eternalism. Hence why it seems useful to me to remind them that dhammas are conditioned by using "process". ----------------------- Sorry to be argumentative, but I see this as relating to a fundamental point, and that is that the Buddha did not simply teach non-existence (of self); he actually taught existence (of dhammas). Maybe you are right and BB wanted to avoid confusing Dhamma students who were not familiar with the Abhidhamma. But I would question that approach. Dhamma and Abhidhamma are one and the same. The Dhamma that is taught to beginners should Abhidhamma (for beginners). ----------------------------------- pt: > Anyway, there's an interesting note in Vsm - chapter 8, note 68, which is quite long and touches on some of these issues. If you like, I can post it here in several installments, and we can discuss it? ------------------------------------ Yes please, that would be good. Ken H #108090 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:29 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? kenhowardau Hi Mike, --------- <. . .> KH: > > A reality is a 'thing' that has absolute existence. It is different from a process. Mike: I don't see any difference, sorry. Dhammas only arise because of previous dhammas. Hence "process". --------- OK, maybe I was making a mountain out of a molehill. But maybe not. :-) ---------------------------- Mike: > I think that what you mean is "thinking about the process is not reality". That I could agree with. ---------------------------- Here again, we would have to be sure of our terminology. In some ways thinking *is* a reality. Thoughts are not realities, but the dhammas that think them (perform the function of thinking) are. And so we can say that thinking is real. But then we often refer to our thoughts as our "thinking," in which case thinking is (as you rightly say) not a reality. ---------------------------------------- <. . .> KH: > > If I was correct then I wonder why he did so. It seems to me that by choosing the word 'processes' he has played into the hands of the illusion theorists. Isn't that how they refer to dhammas? Mike: > I don't know, I don't think that worrying about whether dhammas do or don't "exist" is relevant. ----------------------------------------- Sure, worrying is never the way. But if you leave out "worrying about" would you still say the existence/non-existence of dhammas was not relevant? I would say it was paramount. If dhammas don't exist I don't want to waste my time learning about them. :-) ---------------------------- M: > Either way, they only exist as part of a process. Without the causes and conditions they would not arise. Which, I think, it the point of the whole exercise... ---------------------------- Yes, but causes and conditions are not separate from dhammas. Conditioned dhammas are both the causes and the results of causes. There is nothing else. Ken H #108091 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Jun 20, 2010 6:24 pm Subject: Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions truth_aerator >H: Hi, Jon - > >We are nowhere close on this, Jon. What the Buddha taught in AN 2.19 >and MN 117 is crystal clear to me as teaching intentional mental >activities for thwarting unwholesome states and fostering wholesome >ones. And certainly he also teaches proactive intentional effort in >SN45.8 Hello Howard, Jon, I am sure Jon will reply that at the moment of understanding, or as consequence of that, right-effort arises all by itself. However I am not 100% sure about how far does one push the conditionality and no control. Is it possible to over do the no-control teaching to end up holding a view something like: "study Abhidhamma, then one day sati and everything will appear for you, even if you are watching football." For example; one one of the requirements for, lets say, wise attention (yoniso manasikaro) is hearing the true teaching. This makes sense as you do need to know where (namarupa happening now) to look. You need to be able to know how to do it before you can do it. However knowing about swimming will not make you swim, you need to have an active effort to swim in order to swim. However after one learns theoretical right view, should one be aware of namarupa happening now in all daily circumstances? Or should one *avoid* trying to look at it because "thats Self trying to control". Maybe one of the conditions to make mindfulness arise is to actually try one's best, with right views, to *be* mindful? I wonder. Why is it okay to do intentional actions aimed at changing something (ex: sweeping the floor to make room more clean), and yet one shouldn't do mahakusala dhamma actions (such as active bhavana)? With metta, Alex #108092 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:18 pm Subject: Present moment truth_aerator Dear Nina, Sarah, Jon, KenH, all, In "Perfections" there was a point about not changing the present moment, being said over and over again. I have a small issue with that. Buddha's teaching in the suttas and even in Comy doesn't seem to suggest that "anything goes, just be mindful when it occurs". For example if a person has anger at another person. He should try his best to remove anger as quick as possible. Right? Of course it goes without saying that there should be right view and as much mindfulness and understanding as possible. Of course the present circumstances and personal temperament may be such that in some cases it may be nearly impossible to fully stop the arisen anger. But should there be at least the attempt to do so? The suttas are filled with passages like: "he doesn't tolerate the arisen unwholesome thought but wipes it out of existence ASAP" I understand that there is no-control, conditionality, etc. But with all of that, shouldn't there be intention in the present to stop unwholesome acts and develop wholesome ones? In this light the mindfulness seems to have an additional role, to monitor what is occurring so that if unwholesome intention is about to arise - there can be a counteracting thought to counteract it. Somewhere in "Perfections" there was a passage about Buddha teaching us how to be aware in the daily life without altering anything. Well, he ran away from the palace a day after his wife gave birth to Rahula, He gave up his wealth and status to be in the forest. When He Awakened, he didn't return to Lay life, and in fact He brought many of his kinsmen and other people to monasticism where they lived in forests and caves rather than palaces. With metta, Alex #108093 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Jun 21, 2010 5:22 pm Subject: Re: Present moment kenhowardau Hi Alex, ----------- A: > In "Perfections" there was a point about not changing the present moment, being said over and over again. I have a small issue with that. Buddha's teaching in the suttas and even in Comy doesn't seem to suggest that "anything goes, just be mindful when it occurs". For example if a person has anger at another person. He should try his best to remove anger as quick as possible. Right? ------------ Right! If there were such things as "a person" and "another person" then a person who was angry at another person should try his best to get rid if his anger. But what if the Buddha was right and there was *no* person or other person? What then? ----------------------- A: > Of course it goes without saying that there should be right view and as much mindfulness and understanding as possible. Of course the present circumstances and personal temperament may be such that in some cases it may be nearly impossible to fully stop the arisen anger. But should there be at least the attempt to do so? The suttas are filled with passages like: "he doesn't tolerate the arisen unwholesome thought but wipes it out of existence ASAP" ------------------------ Yes, if there is such a thing as a person then it stands to reason he should strive to do good, to avoid evil and to purify the mind. Or he might have a different philosophy that tells him striving is not the way, and that doing good, avoiding evil and purifying the mind are best accomplished by doing nothing. Or his philosophy might tell him to both strive and not strive: or to neither strive nor not strive. It all depends on his philosophy what he should do. But the question I am interested in is, what if the Buddha was right? What if there is no person? Would it still be possible to do good, avoid evil and purify the mind? ----------------------------------- A: > I understand that there is no-control, conditionality, etc. But with all of that, shouldn't there be intention in the present to stop unwholesome acts and develop wholesome ones? In this light the mindfulness seems to have an additional role, to monitor what is occurring so that if unwholesome intention is about to arise - there can be a counteracting thought to counteract it. ------------------------------------ Anyone who is prepared to accept that the Buddha may have been right, should study the Dhamma. Then they will see how there could be 'a way with no traveller on it.' ------------------------------------------------ A: > Somewhere in "Perfections" there was a passage about Buddha teaching us how to be aware in the daily life without altering anything. ------------------------------------------------ Yes, it's all a matter of understanding the present reality. It's not a matter of someone doing something or not doing something etc. ------------------------------------- A: > Well, he ran away from the palace a day after his wife gave birth to Rahula, He gave up his wealth and status to be in the forest. When He Awakened, he didn't return to Lay life, and in fact He brought many of his kinsmen and other people to monasticism where they lived in forests and caves rather than palaces. -------------------------------------- Lots of people run away to live in caves. Bats and outlaws live in caves without getting any nearer to nibbana. So that's obviously not the meaning the Buddha wanted us to derive. How do you think he would have wanted us to understand "living in a cave"? Ken H #108094 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Jun 21, 2010 5:36 pm Subject: Re: Present moment truth_aerator Hi KenH, all > ----------- > A: > In "Perfections" there was a point about not changing the >present moment, being said over and over again. > >I have a small issue with that. Buddha's teaching in the suttas and >even in Comy doesn't seem to suggest that "anything goes, just be >mindful when it occurs". > >For example if a person has anger at another person. He should try >his best to remove anger as quick as possible. Right? > ------------ > >Right! If there were such things as "a person" and "another person" >then a person who was angry at another person should try his best to >get rid if his anger. > >But what if the Buddha was right and there was *no* person or other >person? What then? > Ok, lets talk about Dosa, then. Should it he removed when it arises, or should it be allowed free reign for as long as there is mindfulness of it ? > > But the question I am interested in is, what if the Buddha was >right? What if there is no person? Would it still be possible to do >good, avoid evil and purify the mind? Should akusala states be counteracted ASAP? > > ------------------------------------- > A: > Well, he ran away from the palace a day after his wife gave birth to Rahula, He gave up his wealth and status to be in the forest. When He Awakened, he didn't return to Lay life, and in fact He brought many of his kinsmen and other people to monasticism where > they lived in forests and caves rather than palaces. > -------------------------------------- > > Lots of people run away to live in caves. Buddha, Ven.Sariputta, MahaKassapa, and many others Included. >Bats and outlaws live in caves without getting any nearer to >nibbana. So that's obviously not the meaning the Buddha wanted us to >derive. How do you think he would have wanted us to understand >"living in a cave"? Live in a cave while developing more mindfulness, more understanding of realites and more calm . Not to mention maggaphal. With metta, Alex #108095 From: "sukinderpal" Date: Mon Jun 21, 2010 7:53 pm Subject: Re: Present moment sukinderpal Hi Alex, > In "Perfections" there was a point about not changing the present moment, being said over and over again. > > I have a small issue with that. Buddha's teaching in the suttas and even in Comy doesn't seem to suggest that "anything goes, just be mindful when it occurs". S: The “anything goes” is your own conclusion. What is written in the “Perfections” comes from the understanding that the present moment is conditioned and already fallen away, hence thoughts about changing the present moment is reflection of wrong understanding. It does not imply in any way, overlooking akusala. The encouragement is to the development of Right View, which is that the present moment is conditioned, anicca, dukkha and anatta. That one would like to “do” something in reaction to what has already arisen and fallen away is reflection of a lack of right understanding. Moreover, in the context of the development of the Parami, the Perfection of Patience is being encouraged with regard to any perceived akusala arisen. ============ > For example if a person has anger at another person. He should try his best to remove anger as quick as possible. Right? Of course it goes without saying that there should be right view and as much mindfulness and understanding as possible. Of course the present circumstances and personal temperament may be such that in some cases it may be nearly impossible to fully stop the arisen anger. But should there be at least the attempt to do so? S: Seeing fault in anger is one thing. Seeing harm in akusala in general can be refection of a level of right understanding that of samatha. Right understanding about the conditioned nature of the present moment however is of utmost value, such that while one sees harm in such akusala as anger, the understanding that this has arisen by conditions and already fallen away, is the only real remedy. That states such as anger seem to last for a long time is precisely because there is not enough or no understanding about its momentary nature. That one tries to get rid of the anger and has no mind to understanding it for what it really is, is likely due to attachment conditioned by self view. =========== > The suttas are filled with passages like: "he doesn't tolerate the arisen unwholesome thought but wipes it out of existence ASAP" S: Not tolerating means seeing its harm. Depending on the accumulated Right Understanding and other conditions, kusala can arise at any time, including when there is rage. What one should be careful about however, is the fact of being propelled by self view to *do* something about the already arisen and in fact continually fallen away dosa. Seeing greater harm in wrong view is perhaps what is called for at anytime and in all situations. =========== > I understand that there is no-control, conditionality, etc. But with all of that, shouldn't there be intention in the present to stop unwholesome acts and develop wholesome ones? In this light the mindfulness seems to have an additional role, to monitor what is occurring so that if unwholesome intention is about to arise - there can be a counteracting thought to counteract it. S: Intention is not a problem. Thoughts about one’s present state of mind and where this could lead to for example, is conditioned, and can act as reminder pointing to the reality of the present moment, likewise if one has the intention to not have any dosa. However, coming back to the present moment is the key, and indeed this could then turn out to be anything but the dosa. So it is not that one must aim at dealing with the dosa, but because right understanding has been developed sufficiently, anything can act as reminder to be mindful of whatever it is that appears in the moment . If on the other hand however, this has not happened, and instead one is being moved by ‘self view’ to deal / get rid of the dosa, one becomes involved in stories about self and situations and nothing good can ever come out of this. ========== > Somewhere in "Perfections" there was a passage about Buddha teaching us how to be aware in the daily life without altering anything. Well, he ran away from the palace a day after his wife gave birth to Rahula, He gave up his wealth and status to be in the forest. S: He was awakened to the Path and taught it *after* that. ========== > When He Awakened, he didn't return to Lay life, and in fact He brought many of his kinsmen and other people to monasticism where they lived in forests and caves rather than palaces. S: He was an Arahatta and would have had great praise for all his Ariyan lay disciples. Indeed without his lay disciples, how could any monasteries for the monks come into existence? ;-) Metta, Sukinder Ps: I see Ken H has already responded, but I won’t read that one yet, because I may end up not wanting to send mine. ;-) #108096 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Jun 21, 2010 8:26 pm Subject: Re: Present moment kenhowardau Hi Alex, -------- <. . .> A: > Ok, lets talk about Dosa, then. Should it he removed when it arises, or should it be allowed free reign for as long as there is mindfulness of it ? -------------- Neither of those two options is possible. Dosa is a conditioned dhamma, which means it has the anicca characteristic - it falls away as soon as it has arisen. So there is no opportunity for anyone to either remove it or give it free reign. At a moment when there is mindfulness of dosa, dosa has already performed its functions and fallen way. It is then just the object of kusala consciousness. ------------------------- <. . .> A: > Should akusala states be counteracted ASAP? ------------------------- A person who has right understanding will understand that akusala states are counteracted by kusala states, not by people. Akusala states cannot arise at the same time as kusala states, and so all kusala states counteract akusala at least for that brief time. Kusala states with panna (of the 8fold path) will counteract akusala permanently. --------- <. . .> A: > Live in a cave while developing more mindfulness, more understanding of realites and more calm . Not to mention maggaphal. --------- What about now if we're not living in a cave? Should the present reality be understood now, or should we wait for a more opportune time? Can there be a more opportune time? Ken H #108097 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Present moment nilovg Dear Alex, Ken H, Sukin, Op 22-jun-2010, om 4:53 heeft sukinderpal het volgende geschreven: > Ps: I see Ken H has already responded, but I won't read that one > yet, because I may end up not wanting to send mine. ;-) -------- N: So, I am glad Sukin you send your response and read Ken's afterwards. I wonder, Alex, whether you still have problems, thinking about effort and wondering about 'everything goes'? A lot of thinking what one may do in case this or this happens does not help much, I think. While you are thinking about situations, dosa has not arisen yet. Whatever you think, you do, you will do, all this are mere conditioned phenomena. Remembering this will slowly eliminate the wrong idea of: I can do this or that. We never know ahead of time how things will turn out. It may be, and it usually is, contrary to expectations. This does not mean that you should not take th Buddha's exhortations to heart. It is always good to listen, to read, to consider, to develop all the perfections, and when there are conditons to be aware. Nina. #108098 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Jun 22, 2010 8:12 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Present moment truth_aerator Dear Nina, KenH, Sukin --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Alex, Ken H, Sukin, > Op 22-jun-2010, om 4:53 heeft sukinderpal het volgende geschreven: > > > Ps: I see Ken H has already responded, but I won't read that one > > yet, because I may end up not wanting to send mine. ;-) > -------- > N: So, I am glad Sukin you send your response and read Ken's >afterwards. > I wonder, Alex, whether you still have problems, thinking about > effort and wondering about 'everything goes'? What I can come up with right now is that the idea seems to: "gather as much knowledge and understanding now so that in the future there will be less akusala and more kusala states. Don't try to change or pick and choose the object of observation. Eventually at "maggaphala" moment the certain fetters will be cut for good and awakening achieved." But it doesn't fit with all that KS has said: "The beginner is not keen enough to be aware of all objects which appear. The beginner should begin with one doorway at a time until he is skilful enough to be able to be aware of any Object. This is the way. One should not try another way and neglect awareness of the object which appears. The beginner begins to develop right awareness of the object which appears, that is the duty of the beginner." - KS end of Ch4 Perfections. Seems like a method to me. In the suttas there are a lot of instructions to do things and very little is said that "it is being said only conventionally." I still find it a bit problematic that when the Buddha says about a: "does not tolerate an arisen thought of sensuality. He abandons it, destroys it, dispels it, & wipes it out of existence." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.than.html It is meant that one should not "not tolerate, abandon, destroy, dispel and wipe out of existence". Now if there were more (or any) cases explaining the "2 truths teaching" in the suttas, it wouldn't be a problem. Of course I do not take the above instruction to mean that there is Atta that does. Only a process does the above functions, and even then, depending on conditions it may not always work. Thank you all for your replies. With metta, Alex #108099 From: "Neo" Date: Tue Jun 22, 2010 9:07 am Subject: Jhanas as taught by Ajahn Brahmavamso nidive Hi All, Is anyone familiar with the jhana teachings of Ajhan Brahmavamso? http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books/Ajahn_Brahm_The_Jhanas.htm He describes the "beautiful breath" whereby the breath becomes subtler and subtler until it disappears. ------------------------------------------------------- Extract: But when one is on the stage of the beautiful breath, when it feels so delightful and effortless to be mindful of the breath for long periods of time, then as the mind grows in stillness, the perception of the breath grows more subtle. Soon one is not aware of an in breath, or of a beginning or middle or end of a breath. One is simply aware of a seemingly unchanging perception of breath, a single experience that hardly alters from moment to moment. What is happening is that some of the external features of breath, such as in and out, beginning and end, have been transcended, All one sees is the heart of the breath experience, beyond these labels. Because of the extreme simplicity of the meditation object, the breath, stillness and pitisukha can grow even stronger. Let them grow stronger. Don't fall onto the trap of doubt, wondering whether this very subtle bare breath experience is what one should be watching. Don't worry that perceptions of in and out, beginning and end, have disappeared. This is how it should be. Don't disturb the process. As the stillness and pitisukha grow ever stronger, the breath disappears. When in the stage of the beautiful breath, the breath disappears, only the beauty remains. One is aware not of nothingness, but of beauty, the pitisukha without any perception of breath. This is another important stage in one's meditation. It is a step closer to Jhana. ------------------------------------------------------- After the breath has disappeared, there arises a nimitta. This is usually a mental visual sign like a full bright moon in a cloudless sky. ------------------------------------------------------- Extract: When the breath disappears and delight fills the mind, the nimitta usually appears. Nimitta, in the context used here, refers to the beautiful "lights" that appear in the mind. I would point out, though, that the nimittas are not visual objects, in that they are not seen through the sense of sight. At this stage of the meditation, the sense of sight is not operating. The nimittas are pure mental objects, known by the mind sense. However, they are commonly perceived as lights. What is happening here is that perception struggles to interpret such a pure mental phenomenon. Perception is that function of mind that interprets experience in terms one can understand. Perception relies crucially on comparison, interpreting experience as in the same category as some similar previous experience. However, pure mental. phenomena are so rarely visited that perception has great difficulty finding anything at all comparable to these new experiences. This is why nimittas appear strange, like nothing one has ever experienced before. However, the phenomena in the catalogue of one's past experitinces which usually come closest to these nimitta are simple visual lights, such as a car headlight or a flashlight in the dark or the full moon in the night sky. So perception adopts this closest, but imperfect, comparison and interprets the nimitta as lights. Thus, one usually experiences nimitta as a light, a light seen in the mind. It was a fascinating discovery to realize that everyone who experiences these nimittas, experience exactly the same thing! It is only that meditators interpret one and the same experience in different ways. Some see in their mind the nimitta as a pure white light, others see it as a golden, some as a deep blue. Some see it as a circle, some as oblong in shape, some as sharp edged, and some as fuzzy edged. There is indeed no end to the features of nimitta, which meditators describe. The important thing to know is that color, shape and so on are irrelevant. Because it is one's perception that colors the nimitta and gives it shape, just so one can make sense of it. The Best Nimitta. The best nimitta of all, that which is the most suitable for Jhanas, begins as being similar to the full moon at midnight in a sky free of clouds. It rises unhurried when the beautiful breath softly disappears. It takes three or four seconds to establish its presence and settle down, remaining still and very beautiful before the mind's eye. As it remains without effort it grows brighter, more luminous. Soon it appears brighter than the sun at midday, radiating bliss. It becomes, by far, the most beautiful thing one has ever seen. Its beauty and power will often feel more than one can bear. One wonders whether one can take so much bliss of such extreme power. But one can. There's no limit to the bliss one can feel. The nimitta explodes, drowning one in even more bliss, or one dives into the center of the radiating ecstasy. If one remains there, it is Jhana. ------------------------------------------------------- I have had a similar experience but it stopped short of exploding into the first jhana (as described) because the beautiful bright moon became quite overwhelming and quite a bit scary as it balloons up. The Ajahn did say that fear was quite a common reaction for someone unfamiliar with the territories of mind-only phenomenon. Does anyone has similar experiences or does anyone know a forum that is dedicated to discussing the jhanas as taught by Ajhan Brahmavamso? Swee Boon #108100 From: "Mike" Date: Tue Jun 22, 2010 7:13 pm Subject: Re: Jhanas as taught by Ajahn Brahmavamso mikenz66 Hi Neo --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Neo" wrote: > Does anyone has similar experiences or does anyone know a forum that is dedicated to discussing the jhanas as taught by Ajhan Brahmavamso? You can find some books, talks and other material by Ajahn Brahm here: http://www.dhammaloka.org.au/ That site used to have some guided meditations, a lot of written material, and a forum, but I believe they had some computer problems a few months ago and a lot of that is currently not available. Best Wishes, Mike #108101 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions jonoabb Hi Howard (108088) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Jon - > > We are nowhere close on this, Jon. What the Buddha taught in AN 2.19 > and MN 117 is crystal clear to me as teaching intentional mental activities > for thwarting unwholesome states and fostering wholesome ones. > =============== J: The important question is whether the factors mentioned in those suttas precede the wholesome mental states, or whether they in fact co-arise with them. If they are 'intentional mental activities' that precede the wholesome mental states being fostered, wouldn't this mean that they themselves are not wholesome mental states? > =============== And > certainly he also teaches proactive intentional effort in SN 45.8 when he teaches > =============== J: A similar question arises here: Are you saying that the 'proactive intentional effort' precedes the 4 kinds of kusala mentioned in the passage below? If so, then what is the ethical quality of that effort? Jon > =============== > "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his > intent for ..." each of the following: > a) "the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that > have not yet arisen," > b) "the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that > have arisen," > c) "the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet > arisen," and > d) "the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, > & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen," concluding that > "This, monks, is called right effort." #108102 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:23 pm Subject: Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions jonoabb Hi Alex (108091) > I am sure Jon will reply that at the moment of understanding, or as consequence of that, right-effort arises all by itself. > =============== J: Well nothing arises "all by itself". All dhammas arise because of a variety of conditions. In the case of kusala dhammas, those conditions do not include 'proactive intentional effort', to my understanding. > =============== > > However I am not 100% sure about how far does one push the conditionality and no control. Is it possible to over do the no-control teaching to end up holding a view something like: "study Abhidhamma, then one day sati and everything will appear for you, even if you are watching football." > =============== J: I don't believe anyone here is espousing that view. > =============== > > For example; one one of the requirements for, lets say, wise attention (yoniso manasikaro) is hearing the true teaching. This makes sense as you do need to know where (namarupa happening now) to look. You need to be able to know how to do it before you can do it. However knowing about swimming will not make you swim, you need to have an active effort to swim in order to swim. > > However after one learns theoretical right view, should one be aware of namarupa happening now in all daily circumstances? Or should one *avoid* trying to look at it because "thats Self trying to control". > Maybe one of the conditions to make mindfulness arise is to actually try one's best, with right views, to *be* mindful? > > I wonder. Why is it okay to do intentional actions aimed at changing something (ex: sweeping the floor to make room more clean), and yet one shouldn't do mahakusala dhamma actions (such as active bhavana)? > =============== J: It's not a question of one kind of intentional activity bein OK' and the other being 'not OK'. When sweeping the floor, the citta may be kusala or akusala or mixed kusala and akusala. Sweeping the floor could even be done with wrong view as a kind of 'practice'. It is important to realise that there are no 'mahakusala dhamma actions'; there are only mahakusala cittas. Similarly, there is no such thing in the texts as 'active bhavana'; there is only bhavana and this is a moment of consciousness accompanied by panna. The conditions for the arising of panna do not include the undertaking of any particular kind of activity. Jon #108103 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:32 pm Subject: The dusty life... sarahprocter... Dear Friends, We're very slowly getting our new home here in Sydney into shape. First of all we have to find homes for all the furniture items left behind - not an easy job. Then we have to find things we like, buy many basics, get jobs done in the flat and so on before the shipping delivery arrives. Unlike Hong Kong, it's very difficult to do many of these jobs without a car, as we found when we were stranded at a shopping centre at the weekend for a few hourse, unable to get a bus or a taxi back. We had quite a drama and another drama today when a cleaning agent in Jon's backpack exploded and all his several layers of clothing were ruined by the bleach in the cleaner. Fortunately he was only hurt a little. Yes, a very dusty life and moving houses, moving countries is about as dusty as it gets. And yet....and yet, I find it so helpful to reflect that it isn't the shopping, the drama, the house, the country, the life of chores that is dusty, but the akusala cittas. The monk's life is only not dusty when it is the life of the arahat, free from lobha, dosa and moha. For all the rest of us, it's very dusty most the time, full of the dust of our longings, aversions and ignorance all day long. And all that's gone has fallen away completely. Now there's always an opporitunity to be aware again, to understand this moment of seeing, visible object, hearing, sound or any other reality again. So, there really is an opportunity to "begin again", to let go of all that's gone, to forget about the future and be aware at this very moment. Metta Sarah =========== #108104 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Jhanas as taught by Ajahn Brahmavamso nilovg Dear Swee Boon, Good to see you again, after quite some time. How are you? Op 22-jun-2010, om 18:07 heeft Neo het volgende geschreven: > But when one is on the stage of the beautiful breath, when it feels > so delightful and effortless to be mindful of the breath for long > periods of time, then as the mind grows in stillness, the > perception of the breath grows more subtle. ------- N: Perhaps it was not Ajan's intention, but I think that when the readers see this they may have attachment. When I read the Visuddhimagga about this subject I find that detachment, detachment from sense objects is emphasized. This I am missing here. Nina. #108105 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The dusty life... nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 23-jun-2010, om 7:32 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > We had quite a drama and another drama today when a cleaning agent > in Jon's backpack exploded ------ N: Very good examples of happenings in daily life, and good you keep good spirits, thinking of what is dusty. Do give more examples when you are moving in, we never know what will happen. Nina. #108106 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Present moment nilovg Dear Alex, I appreciate it so much you are reading the Perfections. I try to add something. BTW if you like to have a hard cover we can send it to you if you give your postal address. Or do you prefer to just read on line? Op 22-jun-2010, om 17:12 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > What I can come up with right now is that the idea seems to: > "gather as much knowledge and understanding now so that in the > future there will be less akusala and more kusala states. Don't try > to change or pick and choose the object of observation. Eventually > at "maggaphala" moment the certain fetters will be cut for good and > awakening achieved." ------ N: But we do not think much of having less akusala in the future. Just understanding whatever arises as a conditioned dhamma. -------- > > A: But it doesn't fit with all that KS has said: > "The beginner is not keen enough to be aware of all objects which > appear. The beginner should begin with one doorway at a time until > he is skilful enough to be able to be aware of any Object. This is > the way. One should not try another way and neglect awareness of > the object which appears. The beginner begins to develop right > awareness of the object which appears, that is the duty of the > beginner." > - KS end of Ch4 Perfections. > > Seems like a method to me. --------- N: I do not have trouble with the word method. It depends what one means by it. She stresses that we cannot expect to be aware of all objects in the beginning. No expectations of understanding all, just step by step. quote end of ch 4: < Before we studied the Dhamma we had no understanding of the realities appearing through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the bodysense and the mind-door. We had a great deal of ignorance. By listening to the Dhamma we can come to know that realities appear each with their own characteristic and that we should study these. We should not merely study them in theory, or merely listen to the explanation about them without carefully considering their true nature. We should remember that at this very moment realities are appearing and that the true characteristics of those dhammas which arise and fall away should be penetrated. Hence we can be reminded that we should listen and thoroughly consider the Dhamma, so that understanding is accumulated. Understanding is a condition for being aware diligently of the characteristics of the dhammas appearing at this moment. If we know that we still have a great deal of ignorance, moha, and that this should be eradicated, we will not be neglectful, but continue to listen to the Dhamma and develop each kind of kusala.> ---------- > > A: In the suttas there are a lot of instructions to do things and > very little is said that "it is being said only conventionally." > > I still find it a bit problematic that when the Buddha says about a: > "does not tolerate an arisen thought of sensuality. He abandons it, > destroys it, dispels it, & wipes it out of existence." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.than.html > > It is meant that one should not "not tolerate, abandon, destroy, > dispel and wipe out of existence". -------- N: The citta and sobhana cetasikas are at work here, no problem. --------- > > Now if there were more (or any) cases explaining the "2 truths > teaching" in the suttas, it wouldn't be a problem. > > Of course I do not take the above instruction to mean that there is > Atta that does. Only a process does the above functions, and even > then, depending on conditions it may not always work. ------ N: Yes, that is right. Things do not always work out the way 'we' want. We are not master or owner of the cittas. Nina. #108107 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 23, 2010 3:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 6/23/2010 1:21:25 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (108088) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Jon - > > We are nowhere close on this, Jon. What the Buddha taught in AN 2.19 > and MN 117 is crystal clear to me as teaching intentional mental activities > for thwarting unwholesome states and fostering wholesome ones. > =============== J: The important question is whether the factors mentioned in those suttas precede the wholesome mental states, or whether they in fact co-arise with them. If they are 'intentional mental activities' that precede the wholesome mental states being fostered, wouldn't this mean that they themselves are not wholesome mental states? ---------------------------------------------- No, I don't see why they would be unwholesome. In fact, they seem wholesome to me. ------------------------------------------------- > =============== And > certainly he also teaches proactive intentional effort in SN 45.8 when he teaches > =============== J: A similar question arises here: Are you saying that the 'proactive intentional effort' precedes the 4 kinds of kusala mentioned in the passage below? If so, then what is the ethical quality of that effort? --------------------------------------------------------- Wholesome. ============================== With metta, Howard Jon > =============== > "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his > intent for ..." each of the following: > a) "the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that > have not yet arisen," > b) "the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that > have arisen," > c) "the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet > arisen," and > d) "the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, > & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen," concluding that > "This, monks, is called right effort." #108108 From: "Neo" Date: Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Jhanas as taught by Ajahn Brahmavamso nidive Hi Nina, > > But when one is on the stage of the beautiful breath, when it feels > > so delightful and effortless to be mindful of the breath for long > > periods of time, then as the mind grows in stillness, the > > perception of the breath grows more subtle. > ------- > N: Perhaps it was not Ajan's intention, but I think that when the > readers see this they may have attachment. When I read the > Visuddhimagga about this subject I find that detachment, detachment > from sense objects is emphasized. This I am missing here. According to the Ajhan, by attention given only to the breath, one has cut off the senses of the eye, ear, nose and tongue. What is left is the touch sense which is experienced via the breath. When the breath gets subtler and eventually disappears, one has cut off the touch sense as well, leaving one with only the mind sense. One perceives the breath as beautiful because of the arising of piti and sukha. The breath, being a bodily fabrication, will eventually disappear leaving only the beautiful, that is piti and sukha. Swee Boon #108109 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: books truth_aerator Dear Nina, > Dear Alex, > I appreciate it so much you are reading the Perfections. Do the online versions of your & KS books found at http://www.abhidhamma.org/contents.htm Contain all the pages? For example: the survey6.pdf has 292 pages but the hardcover book is said to contain 480 pages. Is it due to difference of formating (different page sizes) or does the hardcover book contains more? With metta, Alex #108110 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Jun 23, 2010 11:34 am Subject: Linear accumulations of defilements and paramis? truth_aerator Hello all, "One should know that defilements arise seven times more often than seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and body-consciousness, which types of citta arise only once." -survey pdf 67 And then somewhere it is said that "sati arises very seldom". By doing basic math it seems that if these accumulations are linear, even with occasional sati, one gathers much more akusala than sati through out the day. If this is the case, how can Awakening happen? It seems to me that there should be a non-linear component that solves this. Perhaps after a certain amount of accumulated knowledge it cuts out past, future and present defilements like a simile in Abhisamayakatha in Ptsm. Any comments? With metta, Alex #108111 From: "thomaslaw03" Date: Wed Jun 23, 2010 5:36 pm Subject: Re: Present moment thomaslaw03 Dear friends, What is the Pali term for the "present moment"? It seems this expression, at the present moment, is not presented in the texts for the practice (only the meaning implied)? Sincerely, Thomas Law --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Alex, > I appreciate it so much you are reading the Perfections. I try to add > something. > BTW if you like to have a hard cover we can send it to you if you > give your postal address. Or do you prefer to just read on line? > Op 22-jun-2010, om 17:12 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > > > What I can come up with right now is that the idea seems to: > > "gather as much knowledge and understanding now so that in the > > future there will be less akusala and more kusala states. Don't try > > to change or pick and choose the object of observation. Eventually > > at "maggaphala" moment the certain fetters will be cut for good and > > awakening achieved." > ------ > N: But we do not think much of having less akusala in the future. > Just understanding whatever arises as a conditioned dhamma. > -------- > > > > A: But it doesn't fit with all that KS has said: > > "The beginner is not keen enough to be aware of all objects which > > appear. The beginner should begin with one doorway at a time until > > he is skilful enough to be able to be aware of any Object. This is > > the way. One should not try another way and neglect awareness of > > the object which appears. The beginner begins to develop right > > awareness of the object which appears, that is the duty of the > > beginner." > > - KS end of Ch4 Perfections. > > > > Seems like a method to me. > --------- > N: I do not have trouble with the word method. It depends what one > means by it. > She stresses that we cannot expect to be aware of all objects in the > beginning. No expectations of understanding all, just step by step. > quote end of ch 4: > < Before we studied the Dhamma we had no understanding of the > realities appearing through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, > the bodysense and the mind-door. We had a great deal of ignorance. By > listening to the Dhamma we can come to know that realities appear > each with their own characteristic and that we should study these. We > should not merely study them in theory, or merely listen to the > explanation about them without carefully considering their true > nature. We should remember that at this very moment realities are > appearing and that the true characteristics of those dhammas which > arise and fall away should be penetrated. Hence we can be reminded > that we should listen and thoroughly consider the Dhamma, so that > understanding is accumulated. Understanding is a condition for being > aware diligently of the characteristics of the dhammas appearing at > this moment. If we know that we still have a great deal of ignorance, > moha, and that this should be eradicated, we will not be neglectful, > but continue to listen to the Dhamma and develop each kind of kusala.> > ---------- > > > > A: In the suttas there are a lot of instructions to do things and > > very little is said that "it is being said only conventionally." > > > > I still find it a bit problematic that when the Buddha says about a: > > "does not tolerate an arisen thought of sensuality. He abandons it, > > destroys it, dispels it, & wipes it out of existence." > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.than.html > > > > It is meant that one should not "not tolerate, abandon, destroy, > > dispel and wipe out of existence". > -------- > N: The citta and sobhana cetasikas are at work here, no problem. > --------- > > > > Now if there were more (or any) cases explaining the "2 truths > > teaching" in the suttas, it wouldn't be a problem. > > > > Of course I do not take the above instruction to mean that there is > > Atta that does. Only a process does the above functions, and even > > then, depending on conditions it may not always work. > ------ > N: Yes, that is right. Things do not always work out the way 'we' > want. We are not master or owner of the cittas. > Nina. > #108112 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Jun 23, 2010 6:41 pm Subject: Re: Present moment truth_aerator Dear Thomas, all, >What is the Pali term for the "present moment"? It seems this >expression, at the present moment, is not presented in the texts for >the practice (only the meaning implied)? In many suttas one is supposed to have all-encompasing understanding of triple characteristic that is not limited to present time. ex: "''I am now (etarahi) being chewed up by feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness. But in the past I was also chewed up by consciousness in the same way I am now being chewed up by present consciousness. And if I delight in future consciousness, then in the future I will be chewed up by consciousness in the same way I am now being chewed up by present consciousness.' Having reflected in this way, he becomes indifferent to past consciousness, does not delight in future consciousness, and is practicing for the sake of disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation with regard to present consciousness." Thus, monks, any form [alex: and other aggregates] whatsoever that is past, future, or present (paccuppanna); 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.' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.079.than.html Though there are suttas that imply the present moment awarenes: ex: satipatthana sutta or 3rd of 4 types of development of samadhi ""And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There is the case where feelings are known to the monk as they arise (uppajjanti), known as they persist, known as they subside. Perceptions are known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. Thoughts are known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. ." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.041.than.html The pali words can be: etarahi = adv. now; at present. paccuppanna = adj. existing; present. uppajjanti = [they] having been born. with metta, Alex #108113 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:11 pm Subject: Re: Present moment kenhowardau Hi Thomas, I don't know much Pali but I can add to the useful quotes already given by Alex. This one was posted here some time ago (by Sarah, I think). "There is but one moment (kha.no) and occasion (samayo), monks, for living the Brahmacariya" (AN iv 227). It's got a bit of Pali in it. :-) Ken H #108114 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 24, 2010 12:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Present moment nilovg Dear Thomas, Op 24-jun-2010, om 2:36 heeft thomaslaw03 het volgende geschreven: > What is the Pali term for the "present moment"? It seems this > expression, at the present moment, is not presented in the texts > for the practice (only the meaning implied)? ------- N: I think usually the word paccupanna is used. SN:1:10(10) "Forest", "[The Blessed One] They do not sorrow over the past, Nor do they hanker for the future. They maintain themselves with what is present: Hence their complexion is so serene. Through hankering for the future, Through sorrowing over the past, Fools dry up and wither away Like a green reed cut down." Let go of the past, relinquish of the future, stay in the present, and cross over to the further shore of all becoming & existence! With mind wholly liberated & released, you shall never return to birth & death! Dhammapada 348 The past should neither be longed for nor dwelled in and the future neither desired, searched nor urged; what is past, not real anymore, is dead & gone, and the future, not real now, have yet to come! Majjhima Nikaya III, 131 ------- N: Only the present reality can be directly experienced and investigated. Its characteristic has to be known as it really is. We can only think of what has fallen away or what has not appeared yet, and by thinking dhammas will not be known as they truly are. Nina. #108115 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 24, 2010 1:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Jhanas as taught by Ajahn Brahmavamso nilovg Dear Swee Boon, Thank you for answering. Op 23-jun-2010, om 18:10 heeft Neo het volgende geschreven: > One perceives the breath as beautiful because of the arising of > piti and sukha. The breath, being a bodily fabrication, will > eventually disappear leaving only the beautiful, that is piti and > sukha. ----------- N: But is the aim not seeing even piiti and sukha as impermanent and non-self? I quote from the Vis.: < As regards the second tetrad (marked V-VIII), the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 226) comments: (V) He trains thus , that is, making happiness (p?ti, also translated as rapture) known, making it plain. Herein, the happiness is experienced in two ways: (a) with the object, and (b) with non- confusion. As regards , the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 227) explains: How is happiness experienced with the object? He attains the two jh?nas in which happiness (p?ti) is present. At the time when he has actually entered upon them the happiness is experienced with the object owing to the obtaining of the jh?na, because of the experiencing of the object. After the jh?nacitta has fallen away pa??? realizes the characteristic of p?ti as it is: only a kind of n?ma, which is impermanent and not self. We read: ?How with non-confusion? When, after entering upon and emerging from one of the two jh?nas accompanied by p?ti, he comprehends with insight that happiness associated with the jh?na as liable to destruction and fall, then at the actual time of insight the happiness is experienced with non-confusion owing to the penetration of its characteristics (of impermanence, and so on). ------ Nina. #108116 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 24, 2010 1:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: books nilovg Dear Alex, Op 23-jun-2010, om 18:43 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > For example: the survey6.pdf has 292 pages but the hardcover book > is said to contain 480 pages. Is it due to difference of formating > (different page sizes) or does the hardcover book contains more? ------- N: They are the same. A question of formatting. Nina. #108117 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 24, 2010 1:22 am Subject: Abhidhamma Series, no. 20. Accumulated inclinations. nilovg Dear friends, Accumulated inclinations. The first citta in a life span is the rebirth-consciousness or pa.tisandhi-citta. It is a vipaakacitta produced by kamma and it links the past life to the present life. As we have seen, there are nineteen types of vipaakacitta that can perform the function of rebirth. The pa.tisandhi-citta is succeeded by the bhavanga-citta (life-continuum). The bhavanga-citta is the same type of citta as the pa.tisandhi-citta and it experiences the same object. As we have seen, this object is the same as the object experienced by the last javana-cittas of the previous life and it is conditioned by the kamma that produces the rebirth-consciousness of the following life. The bhavanga-citta keeps the continuity in a lifespan. So long as one is still alive, bhavanga-cittas arise and fall away during the time there is no sense-door process or mind-door process of cittas. Bhavanga-cittas arise in between the different processes of cittas which experience an object through one of the six doors. It performs its function of keeping the continuity in life until the dying- consciousness, the cuti-citta, arises and one passes away from this life. The dying-consciousness of a life that is ending experiences the same object as all the previous bhavangacittas and it is of the same type. Thus, the rebirth-consciousness, the bhavangacitta and the dying-consciousness do not experience objects that impinge on the six doors like the cittas that arise in the different processes. The whole day cittas arising in processes experience objects through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind-door and in between the processes there are bhavanga-cittas. Each citta is succeeed by a following citta in the long series of cittas in our life, there isn?t any moment without citta. In the course of life kammas produce different vipaakacittas which experience objects through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue and the bodysense. Vipaakacittas neither like nor dislike the object, they do not react to the object in an unwholesome or a wholesome way. However, shortly after they have fallen away there are cittas which react to the objects experienced through the senses either in an unwholesome way or in a wholesome way. Akusala cittas or kusala cittas arising in a sense-door process or mind-door process, are called javana-cittas (literally: readiness, impulse, going). They arise usually in a sequence of seven cittas of the same type. They fall away immediately but the inclination to akusala and kusala is accumulated so that there are conditions for the arising again of akusala citta and kusala citta. Since each citta is succeeded by the next citta without any interval, the process of accumulation can go on from moment to moment, from one life to a next life. Each moment of kusala citta or akusala citta arising today is a condition for the arising of kusala citta or akusala citta in the future. There are different types of kusala citta and of akusala citta. It is important to learn more about them in order to understand ourselves, about the way we behave towards others in action and speech, and the way we react towards pleasant and unpleasant events. It is citta which motivates good deeds and evil deeds and these will produce their results accordingly. The Buddha exhorted people to abstain from akusala, to perform kusala, to purify the mind (Dhp 183), and his impressive words were a real support for people to follow his advice. ---------- Nina. #108118 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 24, 2010 1:34 am Subject: Clinging to names. nilovg Dear friends, I heard on a Thai recording that someone said that he saw people and things all the time. He did not see visible object through the eyesense, but he thought immediately of concepts like people and things. Kh Sujin explained that we are taken in by the names of what we see and perceive, and she quoted S I, 39, 'Name', Naamasutta. Ven. Bodhi's translation: Kh Sujin explained that there is the world of names and the world of paramattha dhammas. We cling to names. Names conceal paramattha dhammas. When we are thinking of people and specific things there is the world of names. It seems that we 'see' a person and we think of a story about him. Nina. #108119 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 24, 2010 2:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Linear accumulations of defilements and paramis? nilovg Dear Alex, Op 23-jun-2010, om 20:34 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > "One should know that defilements arise seven times more often than > seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and body-consciousness, which > types of citta arise only once." -survey pdf 67 > > And then somewhere it is said that "sati arises very seldom". > > By doing basic math it seems that if these accumulations are > linear, even with occasional sati, one gathers much more akusala > than sati through out the day. If this is the case, how can > Awakening happen? ------- N: I am not inclined to think of lineair and non-lineair accumulations, but I understand what you mean. We cannot measure accumulations, since we do not know what happend in past lives. Some lives one may have developed right understanding and in other lives understanding has been forgotten and one lives with a great amount of ignorance. Moreover, accumulations go on from one citta to the next one, from life to life because of anantara-paccaya, contiguity-condition. There is also pakatupanissaya-paccaya, natural dependence-condition. Kusala of the past conditions kusala at present, and the same in the case of akusala. Several conditions operate at the same time. -------- > A: It seems to me that there should be a non-linear component that > solves this. Perhaps after a certain amount of accumulated > knowledge it cuts out past, future and present defilements like a > simile in Abhisamayakatha in Ptsm. ------ N: Awakening can happen inspite of many defilements by being aware of akusala and having right understanding of akusala, seeing it as impermanent and as only a conditioned dhamma, non-self. One can begin now and that is the development of the Path. Even right before attaining the stage of sotaapanna lobha-muulacitta may arise. Then this citta can be the object of right understanding in the process of cittas enlightenment occurs. It may be seen as impermanent, or as dukkha or as anattaa. Remember the sutta where the Buddha said: It can be done. Nina. #108120 From: "Neo" Date: Thu Jun 24, 2010 8:52 am Subject: Re: Jhanas as taught by Ajahn Brahmavamso nidive Hi Nina, > > One perceives the breath as beautiful because of the arising of > > piti and sukha. The breath, being a bodily fabrication, will > > eventually disappear leaving only the beautiful, that is piti > > and sukha. > ----------- > N: But is the aim not seeing even piiti and sukha as impermanent > and non-self? You are going too fast, Nina. We have not even tasted the first jhana, how would we know what it tastes like? For now, it is sufficient that we attain the jhanas because the Buddha encouraged us to do so. He said that the pleasure of the jhanas is to be pursued and developed and there should be nothing to be afraid of. Who knows? Maybe the secret to seeing piti and sukha as impermanent and non-self lies in attaining the very jhanas that we have very carefully and faithfully theorized and categorized as impermanent and non-self. ----------------------------------- Quote from The Jhanas by Ajahn Brahmavamso: THE BUDDHA'S REDISCOVERY In the ancient Buddhist texts, the Buddha is said to have discovered Jhana (SN 2,7). This claim is repeated with full explanation by Venerable Ananda in another Sutta (AN 9,42). The fact that the Buddha rediscovered Jhana should not be overlooked, for the rediscovery was a central act in the drama of the Enlightenment. When it is said that the Buddha discovered Jhana, it is not to be understood that no one had ever experienced Jhana before. For instance, in the era of the previous Buddha Kassapa, countless men and women achieved Jhana and subsequently realized Enlightenment. But in the India of twenty six centuries ago, all knowledge of Jhana had disappeared. This was one reason that there is no mention at all of Jhana in any religious text before the time of the Buddha. Some might raise an objection that the teachers Alara Kalama and Udaka Ramaputta preached on Jhana, because the texts state that they taught the Bodhisatta (the Buddha-to-be) the attainment of the state of nothingness and the attainment of the state of neither perception nor non-perception. However, those two attainments could not have been connected to Jhana, because the Bodhisatta recalled, just prior to sitting under the Bodhi Tree, that the only time in his life that he had experienced any Jhana was as a young boy, while sitting under a Rose Apple Tree as his father conducted the first-ploughing ceremony (MN 36). That spontaneous early experience of Jhana had been untaught, unplanned and since forgotten. If that was the only Jhana experienced by the Bodhisatta prior to his experience under the Bodhi Tree, then the two teachers Alara Kalama and Udaka Ramaputta could not have taught Jhana at all. Indeed, in the MAHASACCAKA SUTTA (MN 36), the Bodhisatta is shown as rejecting the experiences under those two teachers as not leading to Enlightenment, and then exhausting just about every form of ascetic practice before concluding that that too did not lead to Enlightenment. Remembering the early experience of Jhana as a boy, the Bodhisatta thought, "Perhaps this Jhana is the way to Enlightenment (Bodhi)." Thus the Bodhisatta realized the Jhanas under the Bodhi Tree and proceeded from there to Full Enlightenment and the attainment of Buddhahood. One of the reasons why Jhana was not practiced before the Buddha's Enlightenment was because people then either indulged in seeking pleasure and comfort of the body or else following a religion of tormenting the body. Both were caught up with the body and its five senses and knew no release from the five senses. Neither produced the sustained tranquility of the body necessary as the foundation for Jhana. When the Bodhisatta began the easy 'practices leading to such tranquility of body, his first five disciples abandoned - him in disgust. Such as practice was not regarded as valid. Therefore it was not practiced, and so Jhana never occurred. After the Buddha's Enlightenment, the very first teaching that he gave, even before the famous Four Noble Truths, was the exposition on the Middle Way, a way which had not existed before (except long ago in the eras of previous Buddhas), a way which leads automatically to Jhana and then to Enlightenment. , It was as if, the Buddha said, that He had discovered a long lost path leading to an ancient city (SN 12,65). The ancient city was Nibbana (Enlightenment) and the long lost path was the Eightfold Path culminating in Jhana. Since the Buddha rediscovered this path, it can be said that the Buddha rediscovered Jhana. CAN ONE BE ATTACHED TO JHANA? When the Bodhisatta had the insight that Jhana was the way to Enlightenment, he then thought, "Why am I afraid of that pleasure which has nothing to do with the five senses nor with unwholesome things? I will not be afraid of that pleasure {of Jhana)!" (MN 36). Even today, some meditators mistakenly believe that something as intensely pleasurable as Jhana cannot be conducive to the end of all suffering. They remain afraid of Jhana. However, in the Suttas the Buddha repeatedly stated that the pleasure of the Jhana "is to be followed, is to be developed and is to be made much o? It is not to be feared" (MN 66). In spite of this clear advice from the Buddha Himself, some students of meditation are misled by those who discourage Jhana on the grounds that one can become attached to Jhana and so never become enlightened. It should be pointed out that the Buddha's word for attachment, upadana, only refers to attachment to the comfort and pleasure of the five sense or world or to attachment to various forms of wrong view (such as a view of self). It never means attachment to wholesome things, like Jhana *. Simply put, Jhana states are stages of letting go. One cannot be attached to letting go. Just as one cannot be imprisoned by freedom. One can indulge in Jhana, in the bliss of letting go, and this is what some people are misled into fearing. But in the PASADIKA SUTTA (DN 29,25), the Buddha said that one who indulges in the pleasures of Jhana may expect only one of four consequences: Stream Winning, Once-returner, Non-returner, or Full Enlightenment! In other words, indulging in Jhana leads only to the four stages of Enlightenment. Thus, in the words of the Buddha "One should not fear Jhana" (MN 66). ----------------------------------- Swee Boon #108121 From: "Neo" Date: Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:16 am Subject: Re: Clinging to names. nidive Hi Nina, > and perceive, and she quoted S I, 39, 'Name', Naamasutta. Ven. > Bodhi's translation: > > What is most extensive? > What is the one thing that has > All under its control? > > Name has weighed down everything; > Nothing is more extensive than name. > Name is the one thing that has > All under its control. > > > Kh Sujin explained that there is the world of names and the world of > paramattha dhammas. We cling to names. Names conceal paramattha > dhammas. When we are thinking of people and specific things there is > the world of names. It seems that we 'see' a person and we think of a > story about him. I suspect Sujin has misinterpreted this sutta. This is called Namasutta. Nama is not about names of people or places. The Buddha defined nama as feeling, perception, intention, contact, & attention. In my opinion, the chief of nama is intention. And intention is kamma. Kamma has weighed down everything; Nothing is more extensive than Kamma. Kamma is the one thing that has All under its control. "Beings are the owners of their kamma, heir to their kamma, born of their kamma, related through their kamma, and have their kamma as their arbitrator." We all are under the control of our very own kamma, our past actions, our present actions and our future actions. Swee Boon #108122 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jun 24, 2010 12:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Jhanas as taught by Ajahn Brahmavamso sarahprocter... Hi Swee Boon, ? Just a one-liner to say how pleased I am to see you writing here again after a long break! Hope you're doing well! Are you still in Singapore? ? I look forward to joining in threads soon as soon as I have a little more time.... ? Best wishes ? Metta ? Sarah ======= #108123 From: "colette" Date: Thu Jun 24, 2010 12:39 pm Subject: Re: Clinging to names. ksheri3 Hi Nina, Thank You and thank Kh Sujin for illucidating on my acknowledgement that NAMES are nothing more than LABELS used to CATEGORIZE, used to CONTAIN, used to IMPRISON. I could not have done this without your assistance. Thank You BOTH. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > I heard on a Thai recording that someone said that he saw people and > things all the time. He did not see visible object through the > eyesense, but he thought immediately of concepts like people and things. > Kh Sujin explained that we are taken in by the names of what we see > and perceive, and she quoted S I, 39, 'Name', Naamasutta. Ven. > Bodhi's translation: > > What is most extensive? > What is the one thing that has > All under its control? > > Name has weighed down everything; > Nothing is more extensive than name. > Name is the one thing that has > All under its control. > > > Kh Sujin explained that there is the world of names and the world of > paramattha dhammas. We cling to names. Names conceal paramattha > dhammas. When we are thinking of people and specific things there is > the world of names. It seems that we 'see' a person and we think of a > story about him. > > Nina. > #108124 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 25, 2010 1:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Clinging to names. nilovg Dear Colette, Nicely put, imprisoned by names. Nina. Op 24-jun-2010, om 21:39 heeft colette het volgende geschreven: > Thank You and thank Kh Sujin for illucidating on my acknowledgement > that NAMES are nothing more than LABELS used to CATEGORIZE, used to > CONTAIN, used to IMPRISON. I could not have done this without your > assistance. Thank You BOTH. #108125 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Jun 25, 2010 3:36 am Subject: Re: Present moment jonoabb Hi Alex (108092) > For example if a person has anger at another person. He should try his best to remove anger as quick as possible. Right? Of course it goes without saying that there should be right view and as much mindfulness and understanding as possible. Of course the present circumstances and personal temperament may be such that in some cases it may be nearly impossible to fully stop the arisen anger. But should there be at least the attempt to do so? > =============== J: The Buddha encouraged the develoment of kusala at all times. However, each person has only a limited accumulations for kusala (much more limited than their accumulations for akusala). Actually there is subtle/mild akusala arising most of the day that we are not even aware of. The development of the path is all about gaining a better understanding of the true nature of dhammas, rather than having less akusala. Jon #108126 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Jun 25, 2010 3:39 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? jonoabb Hi Mike Butting in if I may ;-)) (108080) > Mike: I don't know, I don't think that worrying about whether dhammas do or don't > "exist" is relevant. Either way, they only exist as part of a process. Without > the causes and conditions they would not arise. Which, I think, it the point of > the whole exercise... > =============== J: I think the statement that dhammas only exist as part of a process is too broad a generalisation. Rupas arise and fall away independently of any citta process. Also, certain cittas (bhavanga cittas) are not part of any citta-process. But in any event, the fact that all sense- and mind-door cittas occur as part of a process does not mean that those dhammas can be called processes. The importance of this matter is that while cittas can be the object of insight, processes cannot, as I understand the teachings. Jon #108127 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Jun 25, 2010 3:42 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Difference between conventional and unconventional actions jonoabb Hi Howard (108107) > J: The important question is whether the factors mentioned in those > suttas precede the wholesome mental states, or whether they in fact co-arise > with them. > > If they are 'intentional mental activities' that precede the wholesome > mental states being fostered, wouldn't this mean that they themselves are not > wholesome mental states? > ---------------------------------------------- > No, I don't see why they would be unwholesome. In fact, they seem > wholesome to me. > =============== J: I've no doubt these intentional mental activities seem to be wholesome. But to put aside the subjective experience for a moment, you are saying that intentional mental activities that are undertaken in order to foster the arising of wholesome mental states are themselves wholesome states. If that's the case, then is the condition for those wholesome mental states simply the intention to have kusala? > =============== > J: A similar question arises here: Are you saying that the 'proactive > intentional effort' precedes the 4 kinds of kusala mentioned in the passage > below? If so, then what is the ethical quality of that effort? > --------------------------------------------------------- > Wholesome. > =============== J: You are saying, I think, that the 'proactive intentional effort' that precedes the 4 kinds of right effort is also kusala, even though not itself amounting to right effort (because it precedes the arising of the right effort). This seems to make the arising of kusala a matter of simply resolving to have kusala. Jon #108128 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 25, 2010 6:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Clinging to names. nilovg Dear Swee Boon, Op 24-jun-2010, om 18:16 heeft Neo het volgende geschreven: > Nama is not about names of people or places. The Buddha defined > nama as feeling, perception, intention, contact, & attention. ------- N: True, citta and cetasikas are naama, mental phenomena. But there is also another meaning of naama, and that is 'name'. See Ven. Bodhi's translation I quoted. See Dhsg 1306, the passages about adhivacana, nirutti, pa~n~natti. Nina. #108129 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Jhanas as taught by Ajahn Brahmavamso nilovg Dear Swee Boon, Op 24-jun-2010, om 17:52 heeft Neo het volgende geschreven: > N: But is the aim not seeing even piiti and sukha as impermanent > > and non-self? > > You are going too fast, Nina. We have not even tasted the first > jhana, how would we know what it tastes like? > > For now, it is sufficient that we attain the jhanas because the > Buddha encouraged us to do so. He said that the pleasure of the > jhanas is to be pursued and developed and there should be nothing > to be afraid of. > > Who knows? Maybe the secret to seeing piti and sukha as impermanent > and non-self lies in attaining the very jhanas that we have very > carefully and faithfully theorized and categorized as impermanent > and non-self. ---------- N: As I see it, pleasure or happiness should not be emphasized, but rather understanding and detachment. There should be pa~n~naa that knows the difference between happy feeling accompanying citta rooted in attachment, and happy feeling accompanyinmg kusala citta with pa~n~naa. Should this not be emphasized first of all, and right from the beginning? Nina. #108130 From: "Neo" Date: Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Clinging to names. nidive Hi Nina, > N: True, citta and cetasikas are naama, mental phenomena. But there > is also another meaning of naama, and that is 'name'. I have not seen a sutta passage where the Buddha defined nama as the names of people and places. I don't see what is so Dhamma-specific about this issue of names. A name is just that, a pointer to an object. Anyone who has knowledge of computer science/programming knows just that. In fact, names can get even wackier in computer programming. A big hoo-hah about nothing ... Swee Boon #108131 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:34 am Subject: Re: Present moment truth_aerator Hello Jon, all, >J: The development of the path is all about gaining a better >understanding of the true nature of dhammas, Right, and as a result there is less akusala. The point we may differ is the exact specifics of how to develop more understanding. Maybe passive effort at its development is NOT enough? Considering the amount of akusala developed, kusala must really catch up. If one can sweep the floor without wrong view, and with intention to alter the dirty floor into a clean floor, maybe one can study & practice without wrong view, and with the intention to increase understanding? With metta, Alex #108132 From: "Neo" Date: Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Jhanas as taught by Ajahn Brahmavamso nidive Hi Nina, > N: As I see it, pleasure or happiness should not be emphasized, > but rather understanding and detachment. > There should be pa~n~naa that knows the difference between happy > feeling accompanying citta rooted in attachment, and happy feeling > accompanyinmg kusala citta with pa~n~naa. > Should this not be emphasized first of all, and right from the > beginning? You have misunderstood the nature of the pleasure of the jhanas. See MN 66. ------------------------------------------ http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.066.than.html "Now, there is the case where a monk ? quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities ? enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation ? internal assurance. With the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain ? as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress ? he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm-pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure. And of this pleasure I say that it is to be cultivated, to be developed, to be pursued, that it is not to be feared. ------------------------------------------ The pleasure of the jhanas is called RENUNCIATION-PLEASURE, SECLUSION-PLEASURE, CALM-PLEASURE and SELF-AWAKENING PLEASURE. If this very assurance of the Buddha is not sufficient to instill confidence in you, then nothing will. Sorry for my bluntness. As I see it, you have more confidence in Sujin than in the Buddha. Swee Boon #108133 From: "Mike" Date: Fri Jun 25, 2010 3:59 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? mikenz66 Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Mike > > Butting in if I may ;-)) > > (108080) > > Mike: I don't know, I don't think that worrying about whether dhammas do or don't > > "exist" is relevant. Either way, they only exist as part of a process. Without > > the causes and conditions they would not arise. Which, I think, it the point of > > the whole exercise... > > =============== > > J: I think the statement that dhammas only exist as part of a process is too broad a generalisation. Rupas arise and fall away independently of any citta process. Also, certain cittas (bhavanga cittas) are not part of any citta-process. Mike: Are you saying that there are dhammas (apart from Nibbana) that don't arise due to causes and conditions? > > But in any event, the fact that all sense- and mind-door cittas occur as part of a process does not mean that those dhammas can be called processes. The importance of this matter is that while cittas can be the object of insight, processes cannot, as I understand the teachings. Mike: But without the processes the cittas wouldn't be there to be objects. Mike #108135 From: "gazita2002" Date: Fri Jun 25, 2010 9:11 pm Subject: Re: Clinging to names. gazita2002 hallo Nina, Gosh, even 'parramattha dhamma' is a name for me! however, I have confidence that sometime mayb it will be a reality. Seems like it might take a long, long time, but no use to cling as that is a hindrance - but I cling nonetheless!!! patience, courage and good cheer, azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > I heard on a Thai recording that someone said that he saw people and > things all the time. He did not see visible object through the > eyesense, but he thought immediately of concepts like people and things. > Kh Sujin explained that we are taken in by the names of what we see > and perceive, and she quoted S I, 39, 'Name', Naamasutta. Ven. > Bodhi's translation: > > What is most extensive? > What is the one thing that has > All under its control? > > Name has weighed down everything; > Nothing is more extensive than name. > Name is the one thing that has > All under its control. > > > Kh Sujin explained that there is the world of names and the world of > paramattha dhammas. We cling to names. Names conceal paramattha > dhammas. When we are thinking of people and specific things there is > the world of names. It seems that we 'see' a person and we think of a > story about him. > > Nina. > #108136 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:07 pm Subject: Re: Clinging to names. kenhowardau Hi Azita and Nina, You prompted me to have another look at the quote, and I like it even more every time I read it. Of course the Buddha is talking here about names (or pannatti)! The sutta makes perfect sense that way. It reminds us how every uninstructed worldling is "lost in an ocean of concepts." (K Sujin?) We are *so lucky* to be able to understand the Dhamma in the way it had been explained to us at DSG and by K Sujin. Otherwise, it would be just another religion to us. It would be just another list of things to do - or rituals to perform - (in order for the immortal soul to get to heaven). So lucky! :-) Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > > hallo Nina, > > Gosh, even 'parramattha dhamma' is a name for me! > however, I have confidence that sometime mayb it will be a reality. > Seems like it might take a long, long time, but no use to cling as that is a hindrance - but I cling nonetheless!!! > patience, courage and good cheer, > azita > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > > Dear friends, > > > > I heard on a Thai recording that someone said that he saw people and > > things all the time. He did not see visible object through the > > eyesense, but he thought immediately of concepts like people and things. > > Kh Sujin explained that we are taken in by the names of what we see > > and perceive, and she quoted S I, 39, 'Name', Naamasutta. Ven. > > Bodhi's translation: > > > > > What is most extensive? > > What is the one thing that has > > All under its control? > > > > Name has weighed down everything; > > Nothing is more extensive than name. > > Name is the one thing that has > > All under its control. > > > > > Kh Sujin explained that there is the world of names and the world of > > paramattha dhammas. We cling to names. Names conceal paramattha > > dhammas. When we are thinking of people and specific things there is > > the world of names. It seems that we 'see' a person and we think of a > > story about him. > > > > Nina. > > > #108137 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Jun 26, 2010 4:43 pm Subject: Can cause and its result arise together at exactly the same time? truth_aerator Dear all, Can cause and its result occur simultaneously? How can this be? Any examples? I can understand and see how there can be two mutual causes (example 2 cards supporting each other so they don't fall). But it seems hard to reconcile how two things arise together at the same time with one being cause and other the result. Ex: contact and feeling. Do they arise at the same time? According to Theravadin abhidhamma yes. But feeling doesn't cause contact, contact is the cause of feeling. How can effect arise together with its cause? Shouldn't it come (even a nanosecond) later? With metta, Alex #108138 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Jun 26, 2010 5:56 pm Subject: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, I am having a little trouble here. Is bhavanga a citta? If so, it has to have 7 universal cetasikas + other relevant cetasikas. Feeling (vedana), Perception (volition), Intention (cetana), attention (manasikara) to name a few, are universal cetasikas present in ALL (and I assume bhavanga CITTA) cittas. Is bhavanga-citta experienced? Or one can't experience it at all? If it is not experienced at all, that how can there be unfelt feeling, unperceived perception, unknown volition and so forth? Asannasatta beings as I understand it, have bhavangacitta. But they can't have sanna (one of universal cetasikas that is supposed to accompany bhavanga). Can someone explain this to me, please? With metta, Alex #108139 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 27, 2010 7:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? nilovg Dear Alex, Op 26-jun-2010, om 19:56 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > I am having a little trouble here. Is bhavanga a citta? If so, it > has to have 7 universal cetasikas + other relevant cetasikas. > Feeling (vedana), Perception (volition), Intention (cetana), > attention (manasikara) to name a few, are universal cetasikas > present in ALL (and I assume bhavanga CITTA) cittas. ---------- N: Yes, it is citta. Quote from my Abhidhamma series: The first citta in a life span is the rebirth-consciousness or pa.tisandhi-citta. It is a vipaakacitta produced by kamma and it links the past life to the present life. As we have seen, there are nineteen types of vipaakacitta that can perform the function of rebirth. The pa.tisandhi-citta is succeeded by the bhavanga-citta (life-continuum). The bhavanga-citta is the same type of citta as the pa.tisandhi-citta and it experiences the same object. As we have seen, this object is the same as the object experienced by the last javana-cittas of the previous life and it is conditioned by the kamma that produces the rebirth-consciousness of the following life. The bhavanga-citta keeps the continuity in a lifespan. So long as one is still alive, bhavanga-cittas arise and fall away during the time there is no sense-door process or mind-door process of cittas. Bhavanga-cittas arise in between the different processes of cittas which experience an object through one of the six doors. ----- Yes, it is accompanied by the universals and by other cetasikas, depending on which type out of the nineteen types of vipaakacitta it is. --------- > A: Is bhavanga-citta experienced? Or one can't experience it at > all? If it is not experienced at all, that how can there be unfelt > feeling, unperceived perception, unknown volition and so forth? ------- N: It can, but only when insight has been developed. But its object cannot be experienced. -------- > > A: Asannasatta beings as I understand it, have bhavangacitta. But > they can't have sanna (one of universal cetasikas that is supposed > to accompany bhavanga). ------ N: These beings have only ruupa, no naama. Thus, no citta arises for them. ------- Nina. #108140 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 27, 2010 7:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Can cause and its result arise together at exactly the same time? nilovg Dear Alex, Op 26-jun-2010, om 18:43 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > Can cause and its result occur simultaneously? How can this be? Any > examples? I can understand and see how there can be two mutual > causes (example 2 cards supporting each other so they don't fall). > But it seems hard to reconcile how two things arise together at the > same time with one being cause and other the result. ------- N: No, kamma and vipaaka could not arise together. --------- > > A: Ex: contact and feeling. Do they arise at the same time? > According to Theravadin abhidhamma yes. But feeling doesn't cause > contact, contact is the cause of feeling. How can effect arise > together with its cause? Shouldn't it come (even a nanosecond) later? ------ N: Here we have to distinguish cause that produces vipaaka and a factor that is a condition for another reality. Contact does not produce feeling, it is a condition in several ways for the conascent feeling. Vis. Ch XVII, 231: Text Vis. 231: Herein, in the five doors contact beginning with eye-contact is a condition in eight ways, as conascence, mutuality, support, result, nutriment, association, presence, and non-disappearance conditions, for the five kinds of feeling that have respectively eye sensitivity, etc., as their physical basis. -------- N: Eye-contact accompanies seeing-consciousness. This contact conditions the feeling accompanying seeing-consciousness by way of conascence and other conditions that are conascent. It is the same for the other sense-contacts. Nutriment-condition is mentioned, because contact is a mental nutriment for the other conascent dhammas including feeling. Contact as a mental nutriment supports the prolongation of the cycle of birth and death. Eye-contact ?contacts? visible object so that seeing and the other cetasikas, including feeling, can experience that object. The vipaakacittas that arise in the same process after seeing has fallen away, still experience visible object. The accompanying feelings are strongly dependent on eye-contact and it is the same in the case of the other sense-door processes. The cittas in a sense-door process succeed one another extremely rapidly. They all experience the same sense object and are dependent on the same sense-door which has not fallen away yet. ----------- Nina. #108141 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 27, 2010 9:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Clinging to names. nilovg Dear Swee Boon, Ken H and Azita, Thank you for your posts. Op 26-jun-2010, om 8:07 heeft Ken H het volgende geschreven: > Hi Azita and Nina, > > You prompted me to have another look at the quote, and I like it > even more every time I read it. > > Of course the Buddha is talking here about names (or pannatti)! The > sutta makes perfect sense that way. It reminds us how every > uninstructed worldling is "lost in an ocean of concepts." (K Sujin?) -------- N: Without the teachings we would only know the world in conventional sense, the world of names, of concepts. Indeed, lost in the ocean of concepts. Now we are beginning to learn paramattha dhammas, what is real in the ultimate sense. We can change the names of paramattha dhammas, but their characteristics are inalterable. We usually think of the name of paramattha dhammas, but through the development of insight, in being aware of realities, we shall know the characteristics of realities, and that is different from just knowing names. As Azita says, that may take a long time. Nina. #108142 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Jun 28, 2010 12:10 am Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? kenhowardau Hi Alex, I think I know what you are getting at here, and I am sure we have all asked the same sort of question from some to time. -------- A: > If it is not experienced at all, how can there be unfelt > feeling, unperceived perception, unknown volition and so forth? -------- Are you wondering what is the use of pleasant feelings if they not known to exist? That would seem to be a fair question. And yet that is exactly how things are in reality. For example, in the fine immaterial sphere (where jhana masters are reborn) jhana cittas and jhana cetasikas know a kasina (or some other meditation object) for billions of years. And yet in all that time there is never any consciousness of the actual blissful jhana-cittas or jhana-cetasikas - there is just blissful consciousness (of a kasina). So we might get the wrong idea that the sphere of jhana is not such a nice place after all. Even in our own kamavacara shere, where pleasant cittas and pleasant feelings can become objects of consciousness, they are experienced only by other cittas and feelings etc. In this way, we could find ourselves thinking that the cittas that experience pleasant feeling should also be experienced. And then the cittas that experience the cittas that experience the cittas . . . . . should also be experienced. There is no end to it! I think that is a kind of satipatthana, don't you? When we see that there are always only dhammas (experiences) - never any owner of the experiences? Ken H #108143 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Jun 28, 2010 2:33 am Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? truth_aerator Hi KenH, all, > -------- > A: > If it is not experienced at all, how can there be unfelt > > feeling, unperceived perception, unknown volition and so forth? > -------- > >KH:Are you wondering what is the use of pleasant feelings if they >not known to exist? I am wondering at how can there be unfelt feeling. Though I think that one feels feeling in bhavanga, but forgets the next moment. Kinda like waking up from a dream and immedeately forgeting it, although there was an experience of the dream during the dream. > > That would seem to be a fair question. And yet that is exactly how things are in reality. For example, in the fine immaterial sphere (where jhana masters are reborn) jhana cittas and jhana cetasikas know a kasina (or some other meditation object) for billions of years. And yet in all that time there is never any consciousness of the actual blissful jhana-cittas or jhana-cetasikas - there is just blissful consciousness (of a kasina). > >>>>>>>>>>> Where do you get this idea? In the suttas didn't the Brahma (of Rupaloka) do this and that? Didn't Buddha speak to him? Don't brahmas and other (except asannasatta) beings in rupa loka can achieve MaggaPhala? What about aryans reborn in Rupa loka? Or even in Aruppa lokas? With metta, Alex #108144 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Jun 28, 2010 3:17 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? ptaus1 Hi KenH (Mike and Jon), > > pt: Hm, I think I'd disagree with both of you. Of course, we can't know what Ven.BB meant to say exactly (unless someone asks him directly), but my guess would be that "process" is used to point out that dhamma(s) is(are) conditioned. > > KH: Yes, that might have been his reasoning. But couldn't he have just said "conditioned dhammas"? pt: Yes, I see your point. Don't know about Ven.BB. For me, "process" in the common meaning of the word (rather than abhidhamma-specific meaning of a certain citta-process that Jon recently pointed out to Mike) is much easier to understand as relating to anatta than "conditioned". I mean, "process" to me already seems to imply that the whole thing is functional and impersonal, thus hinting at anatta from the start, while "conditioned", well, I'm still struggling to understand that one properly. > KH: Sorry to be argumentative, but I see this as relating to a fundamental point, and that is that the Buddha did not simply teach non-existence (of self); he actually taught existence (of dhammas). pt: No worries, I think that lately I prefer when you're argumentative :) As for existence of dhammas, I think each person has a slightly different intellectual understanding of what "existence" of dhammas really entails, which then slowly changes with learning, and hopefully at some point becomes a direct experience. For now, for me, that "existence" means that the individual and general characteristics can be really experienced in insight. > > pt: Anyway, there's an interesting note in Vsm - chapter 8, note 68, which is quite long and touches on some of these issues. If you like, I can post it here in several installments, and we can discuss it? > > KH: Yes please, that would be good. pt: The excerpt will follow in the next message a bit later. Best wishes pt #108145 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Jun 28, 2010 10:05 am Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? kenhowardau Hi Alex, ---------- <. . .> KH: > > Are you wondering what is the use of pleasant feelings if they not known to exist? > > A: > I am wondering at how can there be unfelt feeling. ----------- Yes and I am having trouble understanding what you mean by unfelt feeling. -------------- A: > Though I think that one feels feeling in bhavanga, but forgets the next moment. Kinda like waking up from a dream and immedeately forgeting it, although there was an experience of the dream during the dream. -------------- There is feeling (vedana cetasika) in every bhavanga citta. I doubt very much that one of those vedana cetisakas will ever become the object of an uninstructed worldling's consciousness. But that might not be what you are talking about. (?) --------------------- <. . .> A: > Where do you get this idea? In the suttas didn't the Brahma (of Rupaloka) do this and that? Didn't Buddha speak to him? Don't brahmas and other (except asannasatta) beings in rupa loka can achieve MaggaPhala? What about aryans reborn in Rupa loka? Or even in Aruppa lokas? --------------------- Actually, I don't know where I get my ideas about these lofty spheres of existence. I suppose I pick things up in DSG conversations and form a general impression. But my general impression may be well wide of the mark. :-) The part that interests me most is that there are always only dhammas. We think there is something more, and that is why we are so attached to the world. But there are only dhammas. Ken H #108146 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jun 28, 2010 10:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The dusty life... sarahprocter... Dear Nina & all, --- On Wed, 23/6/10, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >N: Very good examples of happenings in daily life, and good you keep good spirits, thinking of what is dusty. Do give more examples when you are moving in, we never know what will happen. Nina. .... S: Yes, we never know what will happen. A few days ago, the previous owners of the flat we're moving into invited us out for coffee. They've been very kind and helpful and hadn't wished to move, but were forced to do so as a result of an accident the husband had a couple of years ago. They told us how they had been on holiday in Fiji(!), staying in a luxury hotel and had just checked out. The wife had walked ahead and found her husband hadn't followed. She turned back and found him collapsed having a major seizure. It seems he'd been attacked. They had a long story of how he very nearly lost his life, helicopter rescues and so on. He survived, but with severe physical impediments and as a result have been forced to move out of the lovely flat. A day in Fiji which changed their lives. All of this is on a conventional level that everyone can understand and yet, even on an absolute level, the cittas are completely unpredictable from moment to moment. We never have any idea whether seeing or hearing or thinking will occur and what the object will be exactly. We make guesses and plans, but these are also conditioned and unpredictable moments of thinking, all so very anatta. These days we have beautiful ocean views and walks, but then the less appealing shopping mall sights and sounds. And yet, just visible objects or sounds regardless. Whether it's an ocean view or shopping centre, a sound of waves or crying babies, there are just different sense objects. This is so apparent when there is any awareness and right understanding in between the stories, the dreams and the illusions. I feel like I'm taking an exam every day - so much to accomplish in a short-time, given the suddenness of our move here. (Two months ago, we had not the slightest idea of it or plan to move at this time!) An exam every day, and really, an exam at almost every moment. The exam now is whether there is any awareness of the visible object, the sound, the hardness, the thinking or whatever dhamma is appearing? Test time, again and again and again.... Thanks for all your encouragement and for all the great discussions. Metta Sarah ======= #108147 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jun 28, 2010 12:05 pm Subject: Re: Present moment jonoabb Hi Alex (108131) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello Jon, all, > > >J: The development of the path is all about gaining a better >understanding of the true nature of dhammas, > > Right, and as a result there is less akusala. > =============== J: Yes, the development of understanding is said to bring with it the lessening of akusala. But this lessening of akusala is a relative thing, so strong akusala is still possible. > =============== The point we may differ is the exact specifics of how to develop more understanding. Maybe passive effort at its development is NOT enough? > =============== J: To my understanding, the effort that is associated with the development of understanding is neither 'active' nor 'passive' in nature. It is just a conditioned element, a mental factor, that arises at the moment of understanding. > =============== > If one can sweep the floor without wrong view, and with intention to alter the dirty floor into a clean floor, maybe one can study & practice without wrong view, and with the intention to increase understanding? > =============== J: Anything that is done as part of a 'practice' risks being wrong practice. Things done for other purposes altogether obviously cannot involve wrong practice. Jon #108148 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jun 28, 2010 12:07 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? jonoabb Hi Mike (108133) > > J: I think the statement that dhammas only exist as part of a process is too broad a generalisation. Rupas arise and fall away independently of any citta process. Also, certain cittas (bhavanga cittas) are not part of any citta-process. > > Mike: Are you saying that there are dhammas (apart from Nibbana) that don't arise due to causes and conditions? > =============== J: Arising due to causes and conditions is not the same as arising as part of a process. In dhamma terminology, 'process' (Pali: vitthii) is found in the expression 'consciousness process' (Pali: citta vitthii). This refers to the series of cittas that occur each time an object is experienced through the sense- or mind-door. However. there are also cittas that are 'process freed' (Pali: vitthii-vimutti), such as the bhavanga citta mentioned in my last post. Rupas also arise independent of any specific process. Thus, all dhammas are conditioned, but not all dhammas arise as part of a (sense- or mind-door) process. > =============== > Mike: But without the processes the cittas wouldn't be there to be objects. > =============== J: But that doesn't mean that cittas can be regarded as processes. Jon #108149 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Jun 28, 2010 2:30 pm Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? truth_aerator Hi KenH, all, > KH: > > Are you wondering what is the use of pleasant feelings if >they not known to exist? > A: > I am wondering at how can there be unfelt feeling. > ----------- >KH: Yes and I am having trouble understanding what you mean by unfelt >feeling. There is feeling (vedana cetasika) in every bhavanga citta. I >doubt very much that one of those vedana cetisakas will ever become >the object of an uninstructed worldling's consciousness. But that >might not be what you are talking about. (?) What I am wondering is how can there be "vedana cetasika" and yet it is unfelt by consciousness ( of an uninstructed worldling)? How can there be unfelt feeling? With metta, Alex #108150 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Jun 28, 2010 3:01 pm Subject: Re: Present moment truth_aerator Hi Jon, all, >J: Anything that is done as part of a 'practice' risks being wrong >practice. Things done for other purposes altogether obviously >cannot >involve wrong practice. why wrong practice? Why can one put on the cloth to warm the body, sweep the floor to make it cleaner, eat food to stop hunger, and so on? Or are you saying that a person needs to turn into happy-clam lying on the floor like a insentient piece of wood? Maybe because one can do these things without self belief. So why can't one develop more kusala through wise practice and without holding wrong view of "my practice, or I am doing it"? People who don't practice Dhamma are stuck in samsara, otherwise we would all be free since we didn't practice Dhamma enough. With metta, Alex #108151 From: "Neo" Date: Mon Jun 28, 2010 3:07 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Clinging to names. nidive Hi Nina, > N: Without the teachings we would only know the world in conventional sense, the world of names, of concepts. Indeed, lost in the ocean of concepts. It is not Name that weighs down everything. And it is not Name that has all under its control. If this were so, there would be no escape. Name is the means whereby we designate the world. Without such a designation, there is no way we can communicate with one another. It is the thought proliferation on the Name that weighs down everything. With thought proliferation, we create kamma both good and bad. And here, we are trapped under the control of our very own mental, verbal and bodily actions. I still don't agree with Sujin's interpretation on this sutta. Swee Boon #108152 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 28, 2010 1:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Ken) - In a message dated 6/28/2010 10:36:59 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi KenH, all, > KH: > > Are you wondering what is the use of pleasant feelings if >they not known to exist? > A: > I am wondering at how can there be unfelt feeling. > ----------- >KH: Yes and I am having trouble understanding what you mean by unfelt >feeling. There is feeling (vedana cetasika) in every bhavanga citta. I >doubt very much that one of those vedana cetisakas will ever become >the object of an uninstructed worldling's consciousness. But that >might not be what you are talking about. (?) What I am wondering is how can there be "vedana cetasika" and yet it is unfelt by consciousness ( of an uninstructed worldling)? How can there be unfelt feeling? With metta, Alex ============================= We are all aware of feeling. We know when something feels pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral. Who claims that feeling is not observed? With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #108153 From: "Mike" Date: Mon Jun 28, 2010 10:21 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? mikenz66 Hi Jon, Thanks for the clarification. I forgot that it was common to use "process" in that very particular technical sense in the Abhidhamma literature. My use of the word was more general. I could just have used "conditioned" instead. Mike --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Mike > > (108133) > > > J: I think the statement that dhammas only exist as part of a process is too broad a generalisation. Rupas arise and fall away independently of any citta process. Also, certain cittas (bhavanga cittas) are not part of any citta-process. > > > > Mike: Are you saying that there are dhammas (apart from Nibbana) that don't arise due to causes and conditions? > > =============== > > J: Arising due to causes and conditions is not the same as arising as part of a process. > > In dhamma terminology, 'process' (Pali: vitthii) is found in the expression 'consciousness process' (Pali: citta vitthii). This refers to the series of cittas that occur each time an object is experienced through the sense- or mind-door. > > However. there are also cittas that are 'process freed' (Pali: vitthii-vimutti), such as the bhavanga citta mentioned in my last post. Rupas also arise independent of any specific process. > > Thus, all dhammas are conditioned, but not all dhammas arise as part of a (sense- or mind-door) process. > > > =============== > > Mike: But without the processes the cittas wouldn't be there to be objects. > > =============== > > J: But that doesn't mean that cittas can be regarded as processes. > > Jon > #108154 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:20 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? truth_aerator Hi Howard, KenH, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Alex (and Ken) - > > In a message dated 6/28/2010 10:36:59 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > truth_aerator@... writes: > > Hi KenH, all, > > > KH: > > Are you wondering what is the use of pleasant feelings if >they > not known to exist? > > A: > I am wondering at how can there be unfelt feeling. > > ----------- > >KH: Yes and I am having trouble understanding what you mean by unfelt > >feeling. There is feeling (vedana cetasika) in every bhavanga citta. I >doubt > very much that one of those vedana cetisakas will ever become >the object > of an uninstructed worldling's consciousness. But that >might not be what > you are talking about. (?) > > What I am wondering is how can there be "vedana cetasika" and yet it is > unfelt by consciousness ( of an uninstructed worldling)? > > How can there be unfelt feeling? > > With metta, > > Alex > ============================= > We are all aware of feeling. We know when something feels pleasant, > unpleasant, or neutral. Who claims that feeling is not observed? > > With metta, > Howard Is the feeling of Bhavanga experienced? And if it isn't, then how can it be called "feeling"? The best that I can come up is that it is felt, but forgotten immediately later unless it is recalled with lots of mindfulness (perhaps only for aryans with superpowers). With metta, Alex #108155 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 28, 2010 7:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 6/28/2010 7:26:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Is the feeling of Bhavanga experienced? And if it isn't, then how can it be called "feeling"? ---------------------------------------- The notion of "bhavanga cittas" is largely a commentarial one, being mentioned 2 or 3 times in the Patthana and nowhere else in the Tipitaka, I believe, and it is a notion that I have no particular belief in or "felt need" for. And, of course, if there are no such things, then there also is no associated feeling of them. It would just be silliness to ascribe qualities to mind states that don't exist simply don't exist. Of course, I don't KNOW that there are no such things. There MIGHT be. There might be all sorts of non-experienced things! There is no limit to what we can hypothesize. ------------------------------------ The best that I can come up is that it is felt, but forgotten immediately later unless it is recalled with lots of mindfulness (perhaps only for aryans with superpowers). With metta, Alex ========================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #108156 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Jun 29, 2010 12:22 am Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? kenhowardau Hi Howard and Alex, ---------- <. . .> H: > We are all aware of feeling. We know when something feels pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral. Who claims that feeling is not observed? ---------- To tell the truth I don't know where I stand on this issue. According to the Abhidhamma, vedana and other cetasikas can become objects of consciousness. However, I don't understand the significance of that. I don't know if that is how we get our impressions of pleasant and unpleasant feeling, or if it is only through thinking that we get such impressions. I suppose that is one of the benefits of Dhamma discussion, isn't it? It requires us to test our own understanding. Or lack thereof! :-) Ken H #108157 From: "ptaus1" Date: Tue Jun 29, 2010 3:36 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? ptaus1 Hi KenH, Mike and all, Here's the Visuddhimagga bit I thought we could discuss relating to sabhava. I'll post it in parts as it one pretty long note. So, here is firstly the Vsm text itself: Chapter VIII (10) RECOLLECTION OF PEACE 245. One who wants to develop the recollection of peace mentioned next to mindfulness of breathing (Ch. III,105) should go into solitary retreat and recollect the special qualities of nibbana, in other words, the stilling of all suffering, as follows: 'Bhikkhus, in so far as there are dhammas, whether formed or unformed, fading away is pronounced the best of them, that is to say, the disillusionment of vanity, the elimination of thirst, the abolition of reliance, the termination of the round, the destruction of craving, fading away, cessation, nibbana' (A.ii,34). 246. Herein in so far as means as many as. Dhammas [means] individual essences. Note 68. Whether formed or unformed: whether made by conditions going together, coming together, or not so made. Note 69. Fading away is pronounced the best of them: of these formed and unformed dhammas, fading away is pronounced the best, is called the foremost, the highest. ---end quote So, the two most interesting statements to note I think are: - "Dhammas [means] individual essences". - "Whether formed or unformed: whether made by conditions going together, coming together, or not so made." Next, I'll post the first part of the Note 68, which addresses the first statement. Best wishes #108158 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Jun 29, 2010 6:53 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? kenhowardau Hi Alex, --------- A: > Is the feeling of Bhavanga experienced? And if it isn't, then how can it be called "feeling"? The best that I can come up is that it is felt, but forgotten immediately later unless it is recalled with lots of mindfulness (perhaps only for aryans with superpowers). ------------ In an earlier post you expressed similar concerns about other cetasikas. You asked, ". . . how can there be unfelt feeling, unperceived perception, unknown volition and so forth?" I couldn't see the problem then, and I still can't. Why would those dhammas have to be experienced before they could exist? Ken H #108159 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Jun 29, 2010 7:40 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? kenhowardau Hi pt, ---------- <. . .> pt: > As for existence of dhammas, I think each person has a slightly different intellectual understanding of what "existence" of dhammas really entails, which then slowly changes with learning, and hopefully at some point becomes a direct experience. For now, for me, that "existence" means that the individual and general characteristics can be really experienced in insight. ----------- Some revision will certainly do me good. At the moment I can't even remember if you are right about the individual characteristics. Are they known by insight? Or does insight only know general characteristics? It's a good thing we don't have exams at DSG. I can see my report card now: 'can do better' 'needs improvement.' :-) Ken H #108160 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is the ALL actually? nilovg Dear Ken H, Op 29-jun-2010, om 9:40 heeft Ken H het volgende geschreven: > Some revision will certainly do me good. At the moment I can't even > remember if you are right about the individual characteristics. Are > they known by insight? Or does insight only know general > characteristics? ------- N: I the beginning insight turns towards the visesa lakkhana, the distinctive characteristics of the different dhammas taht appear. It knows that seeing is a naama different from feeling or visible object. In the course of the development of insight the attention turns towards the three general characteristics. (As described in the Visuddhimagga). As to the bhavangacitta I heard Kh Sujin explain on a Thai recording. There is not all the time seeing, hearing or thinking. Bhavangacittas arise in between porocesses, and these do not experience objects through one of the six doors. At such moments there is as it were an empty space in between the experience of objects through the doorways. Such moments can be known by insight. She also said that we should not say that this cannot be known. To what use would the Buddha teach this? He taught all those subjects so that people would understand these. Nina. #108161 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? nilovg Hi Howard, Op 29-jun-2010, om 1:44 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > The notion of "bhavanga cittas" is largely a commentarial one, being > mentioned 2 or 3 times in the Patthana and nowhere else in the > Tipitaka, I > believe, and it is a notion that I have no particular belief in or > "felt > need" for. -------- N: What I find helpful to understand that there is bhavangacitta is as follows. There is not all the time the experience of objects through the six doors, but there still has to be citta at such moments, otherwise we would not stay alive. Each citta that arises falls away and it is succeeded by the next citta, and this is according to contiguity-condition, anantara-paccaya. Our life is along series of cittas succeeding one another and that is why kamma is accumulated from moment to moment so that it can produce result later on. Also kusala and akusala is being accumulated so that similar types can arise again. We can notice that we can learn good things and bad things in the course of life. People can develop kusala and understanding. Nina. #108162 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:00 am Subject: Sangiitisutta, Sixes, Suttanta, 324 , 11-13 and commentary. nilovg Suttanta, 324 , 11-13: Walshe DN 33.2.2(11) 'Six pleasurable investigations (somanassuupavicaaraa) *: When, on seeing a sight-object with the eye, on hearing ..., smelling ..., tasting ..., touching ..., knowing a mind-object with the mind, one investigates a corresponding object productive of pleasure. [iii 245] ( Cha somanassuupavicaaraa. Cakkhunaa ruupa.m disvaa somanassa.t.thaaniya.m ruupa.m upavicarati; sotena sadda.m sutvaa.. ghaanena gandha.m ghaayitvaa.. jivhaaya rasa.m saayitvaa.. kaayena pho.t.thabba.m phusitvaa. Manasaa dhamma.m vi~n~naaya somanassa.t.thaaniya.m dhamma.m upavicarati.) 12) Walshe Six unpleasurable investigations: (as (11) but: productive of displeasure) (Cha domanassuupavicaaraa. Cakkhunaa ruupa.m disvaa domanassa.t.thaaniya.m ruupa.m upavicarati;....) . 13) Walshe Six indifferent investigations: (as (11) but: productive of indifference (upekhaa)) (Cha upekkhuupavicaaraa. Cakkhunaa ruupa.m disvaa upekkhaa.t.thaaniya.m ruupa.m upavicarati;....) ---------- N: As to pleasurable investigation, the Co explains: vicaara accompanied by pleasant feeling. The term upavicarati is used in the text, meaning, closely examining. The Co explains, ?having thought with vitakka, he determines with vicaara? (vitakkena vitakketvaa vicaarena paricchindati). Tiika: with regard to the cittas of the sense sphere, vitakka, applied thought, and vicaara, sustained thought, are not separated. But they have different functions. That is why in the text ?having thought?, vitakketva, is used in the past tense, and it is said: having thought with vitakka, he determines with vicaara. The Tiika states that the function of vicaara that was repeated in the past is similar to pa~n~naa. That is why it is said in the scriptures that vicaara is opposed to doubt. N: Vicaara investigates the meditation subject again and again and thus doubt about it is subdued. ------ N: Vitakka hits ior touches the object that is experienced and vicaara keeps the citta occupied with the object, anchored on it. When vicaara is developed as a jhaanafactor in samatha it inhibits the hindrance that is doubt. We read in these suttas about the feelings arising on account of an object experienced through one of the six doorways, and these may be pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling or indifferent feeling. We are often misled by feeling and we are inclined to take pleasant feeling and indifferent feeling that are akusala for kusala. Pleasant feeling may arise with kusala citta as well as with akusala citta that is rooted in attachment. Indifferent feeling may arise with kusala citta as well as with akusala citta that is rooted in attachment or in ignorance. Pa~n~naa that has been developed can distinguish between feelings that are kusala and akusala. ************ Nina. #108163 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Jun 29, 2010 12:47 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? truth_aerator Hello KenH, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > > > Hi Alex, > > --------- > A: > Is the feeling of Bhavanga experienced? And if it isn't, then how can it be called "feeling"? > > The best that I can come up is that it is felt, but forgotten immediately later unless it is recalled with lots of mindfulness (perhaps only for aryans with superpowers). > ------------ > > In an earlier post you expressed similar concerns about other cetasikas. You asked, ". . . how can there be unfelt feeling, unperceived perception, unknown volition and so forth?" > > I couldn't see the problem then, and I still can't. Why would those dhammas have to be experienced before they could exist? > > Ken H Because they are experience, and to talk about unexperienced experience is contradiction in terms. With metta, Alex #108164 From: "ptaus1" Date: Tue Jun 29, 2010 1:50 pm Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? ptaus1 Hi Alex, > > KH: I couldn't see the problem then, and I still can't. Why would those dhammas have to be experienced before they could exist? > > A: Because they are experience, and to talk about unexperienced experience is contradiction in terms. As far as i understand, it's not so much about there being unexperienced experience, but more that we are not aware that it is happening. For a much simpler example, consider an ordinary arising of anger - usually what happens is that we're not even aware of the anger itself because we are focused on the situation/story - "he hurt me, he insulted me, how dare he do that to me,"etc. So, we in fact completely miss the actual arising of anger, which is the real culprit, so to speak. It's experienced, but there's no awareness that it happened. I would think that bhavanga cittas are much more subtle, so would be even easier to miss them than anger. So, imo, it's the same with the feeling, perception and other cetasikas that rise with bhavanga citta - they do arise, and they are experienced, but there's no awareness that they happened. I guess that with developed insight, awareness of these can arise. Anyway, that's how I understand the topic. Best wishes pt #108165 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Jun 29, 2010 2:05 pm Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? truth_aerator > Hi Alex, > > As far as i understand, it's not so much about there being unexperienced experience, but more that we are not aware that it is happening. For a much simpler example, consider an ordinary arising of anger - usually what happens is that we're not even aware of the anger itself because we are focused on the situation/story - "he hurt me, he insulted me, how dare he do that to me,"etc. So, we in fact completely miss the actual arising of anger, which is the real culprit, so to speak. It's experienced, but there's no awareness that it happened. I would think that bhavanga cittas are much more subtle, so would be even easier to miss them than anger. > > So, imo, it's the same with the feeling, perception and other cetasikas that rise with bhavanga citta - they do arise, and they are experienced, but there's no awareness that they happened. I guess that with developed insight, awareness of these can arise. Anyway, that's how I understand the topic. > > Best wishes > pt > Hello Pt, Thank you very much for your answer. With metta, Alex #108166 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 29, 2010 2:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Clinging to names. nilovg Dear Swee Boon, Op 28-jun-2010, om 17:07 heeft Neo het volgende geschreven: > It is not Name that weighs down everything. And it is not Name that > has all under its control. > > If this were so, there would be no escape. Name is the means > whereby we designate the world. Without such a designation, there > is no way we can communicate with one another. > > It is the thought proliferation on the Name that weighs down > everything. With thought proliferation, we create kamma both good > and bad. And here, we are trapped under the control of our very own > mental, verbal and bodily actions. ------ N: Yes, it all depends on the citta. This sutta is a reminder that we are usually trapped by names. At the moments that there is no awareness of paramattha dhammas, naama and ruupa, we think of concepts and names and take them for real. In a following sutta the same question is asked about citta and this helps us to understand also the sutta about name. Ven. Bodhi (The Connected Discourses, I, 7, 62, Citta) : Ven. Bodhi adds from the commentary: -------- Nina. #108167 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 29, 2010 2:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The dusty life... nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 28-jun-2010, om 12:08 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > I feel like I'm taking an exam every day - so much to accomplish in > a short-time, given the suddenness of our move here. (Two months > ago, we had not the slightest idea of it or plan to move at this > time!) An exam every day, and really, an exam at almost every > moment. The exam now is whether there is any awareness of the > visible object, the sound, the hardness, the thinking or whatever > dhamma is appearing? ------- N: Thank you for your report about happenings. I thought that you had your appartment for rent meanwhile when still in Hongkong. It seems I still hear Kh Sujin saying: the test is at this moment. We used to say: I did not pass the examination, forgetfulness most of the time. Soon this trying time of moving in will be forgotten. Nina. #108168 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Jun 30, 2010 5:13 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? ptaus1 Hi KenH, > KH: At the moment I can't even remember if you are right about the individual characteristics. Are they known by insight? Or does insight only know general characteristics? Thankfully, Nina already answered this. Also, if I'm not mistaken, the argument that individual characteristics can be experienced in insight is probably the cornerstone of the Mahavihara tradition. And in particular the sabhava and "the existence" of dhammas. E.g. I get the impression that those who reject the commentarial position would generally say that individual characteristics are no different to concepts and conceptual proliferation. Best wishes pt #108169 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Jun 30, 2010 5:29 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? ptaus1 Hi KenH, Mike and all, Continuing with the Visuddhimagga VIII,246 - here is the start of Note 68, which addresses the sentence - "Dhammas [means] individual essences". Note 68. In such pasages as "Dhammas that are concepts" (Dhs., p. 1; par.1308) even a non-entity (abha-va) is thus called a "dhamma" since it is borne (dha-riyati) and affirmed (avadha-riyati) by knowledge. That kind of dhamma is excluded by his saying "Dhammas [means] individual essences'. The act of becoming (bhavana), which constitutes existingness (vijjama-nata-) in the ultimate sense, is essence (bha-va); it is with essence (saha bha-vena), thus it is an individual essence (sabha-va); the meaning is that it is possible (labbhama-narupa) in the true sense, in the ultimate sense. For these are called "dhammas (bearers)" because they bear (dha-rana) their own individual essences (sabha-va), and they are called "individual essences" in the sense already explained' (Pm. 282; cf. Ch. VII,n.l). ---- end quote So the interesting bits (to me): 1. In the first sentence which speaks of concepts as dhammas, what does "borne and affirmed" actually mean? 2. In the third sentence that speaks of the act of becoming, what does "existingness in the ultimate sense" actually mean? Does that refer to an experience insight, or maybe it's more like a scientific statement on the nature of the world, etc? Best wishes pt #108170 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Jun 30, 2010 7:44 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? kenhowardau Hi Nina, --- KH: > > At the moment I can't even > remember <. . .> about the individual characteristics. Are > they known by insight? Or does insight only know general > characteristics? N: > In the beginning insight turns towards the visesa lakkhana, the distinctive characteristics of the different dhammas that appear. It knows that seeing is a naama different from feeling or visible object. --- Thanks, Nina, that is helpful. However, I did not express my question clearly enough. When I asked if individual characteristics were known by insight I was thinking of, for example, the individual characteristic of alobha, which is (from your book, Cetasikas): "freedom from churlishness or resentment, like an agreeable friend." Can that type of characteristic be directly known by panna? This brings me back to something I was saying (or asking) in a recent post. We are commonly aware of feelings (in the conventional sense); we often say, for example, that we are enjoying pleasant mental feelings. But is that because vedana has recently become an object of consciousness? Or is our so-called 'awareness' of pleasant feelings due purely to thinking, and nothing to do with any direct experiencing of vedana (or of any other cetasika)? Ken H #108171 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Jun 30, 2010 8:18 am Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? kenhowardau Hi pt and Alex, ----- > > > KH: I couldn't see the problem then, and I still can't. Why would those dhammas have to be experienced before they could exist? > > > A: Because they are experience, and to talk about unexperienced experience is contradiction in terms. > pt: As far as i understand, it's not so much about there being unexperienced experience, but more that we are not aware that it is happening. For a much simpler example, consider an ordinary arising of anger - usually what happens is that we're not even aware of the anger itself because we are focused on the situation/story - "he hurt me, he insulted me, how dare he do that to me,"etc. So, we in fact completely miss the actual arising of anger, which is the real culprit, so to speak. <. . .> ------------ Yes, I can see that, pt, but there is another, broader, aspect to this discussion, too. I was describing to Alex the way I understood (rightly or wrongly) the sphere of jhana absorption. For long periods of time (sometimes for billions of years) there is blissful jhana consciousness (including rapture and joy, equanimity, etc). However, there is never direct consciousness of those blissful jhana factors. The object of consciousness is always just the meditation object. That seems perfectly acceptable to me. I don't see any need for consciousness *of* consciousness. The experiencing (pleasant or unpleasant) of an object exists; it doesn't have to be in turn experienced, does it? Ken H #108172 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Jun 30, 2010 2:37 pm Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > Hi pt and Alex, > > ----- > > > > KH: I couldn't see the problem then, and I still can't. Why would those dhammas have to be experienced before they could exist? > > > > > A: Because they are experience, and to talk about unexperienced experience is contradiction in terms. > > > pt: As far as i understand, it's not so much about there being unexperienced experience, but more that we are not aware that it is happening. For a much simpler example, consider an ordinary arising of anger - usually what happens is that we're not even aware of the anger itself because we are focused on the situation/story - "he hurt me, he insulted me, how dare he do that to me,"etc. > So, we in fact completely miss the actual arising of anger, which is the real culprit, so to speak. <. . .> > ------------ > > Yes, I can see that, pt, but there is another, broader, aspect to this discussion, too. I was describing to Alex the way I understood (rightly or wrongly) the sphere of jhana absorption. For long periods of time (sometimes for billions of years) there is blissful jhana consciousness (including rapture and joy, equanimity, etc). However, there is never direct consciousness of those blissful jhana factors. The object of consciousness is always just the meditation object. > > That seems perfectly acceptable to me. I don't see any need for consciousness *of* consciousness. The experiencing (pleasant or unpleasant) of an object exists; it doesn't have to be in turn experienced, does it? > > Ken H > Hello KenH, My original question was not related to Jhana. It was related to daily existence and all the bhavangacittas in between cittas. But after you brought the Jhana issue up, I've asked additional questions. Yours in Dhamma, Alex #108173 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Jun 30, 2010 11:54 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? kenhowardau Hi pt, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > > > Hi KenH, Mike and all, > > Continuing with the Visuddhimagga VIII,246 - here is the start of Note 68, which addresses the sentence - "Dhammas [means] individual essences". > > Note 68. In such pasages as "Dhammas that are concepts" (Dhs., p. 1; par.1308) even a non-entity (abha-va) is thus called a "dhamma" since it is borne (dha-riyati) and affirmed (avadha-riyati) by knowledge. That kind of dhamma is excluded by his saying "Dhammas [means] individual essences'. The act of becoming (bhavana), which constitutes existingness (vijjama-nata-) in the ultimate sense, is essence > (bha-va); it is with essence (saha bha-vena), thus it is an individual essence (sabha-va); the meaning is that it is possible (labbhama-narupa) in the true sense, in the ultimate sense. For these are called "dhammas (bearers)" because they bear (dha-rana) their own individual essences (sabha-va), and they are called "individual essences" in the sense already explained' (Pm. 282; cf. Ch. VII,n.l). > > ---- end quote > > So the interesting bits (to me): > > 1. In the first sentence which speaks of concepts as dhammas, what does "borne and affirmed" actually mean? > ------------ KH: The two major categories of dhammas are pannatti dhammas (concepts) and paramattha dhammas (ultimate realities). For most practical purposes the former are simply called pannatti, and the latter, dhammas. My guess is that "borne" is meant here to have virtually the same meaning as "affirmed." I think the text is saying that a concept owes it's existence to - is borne out by - is affirmed by - knowledge of it. (So a concept is not an *ultimate* reality, it is merely a reality that is created, and experienced, by the mind.) I am not sure why the word 'knowledge' was used, though. "Consciousness" or "experience" would have been better if my guess was right. (Which it probably wasn't!) ----------------- pt: > 2. In the third sentence that speaks of the act of becoming, what does "existingness in the ultimate sense" actually mean? Does that refer to an experience insight, or maybe it's more like a scientific statement on the nature of the world, etc? ----------------- I think the commentaries use that term quite frequently. They often distinguish between existence in the conventional sense (concepts) and existence in the ultimate sense (paramattha dhammas). Ken H #108174 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Jul 1, 2010 5:29 am Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? ptaus1 Hi KenH, > KH: Yes, I can see that, pt, but there is another, broader, aspect to this discussion, too. I was describing to Alex the way I understood (rightly or wrongly) the sphere of jhana absorption. For long periods of time (sometimes for billions of years) there is blissful jhana consciousness (including rapture and joy, equanimity, etc). However, there is never direct consciousness of those blissful jhana factors. The object of consciousness is always just the meditation object. > > That seems perfectly acceptable to me. I don't see any need for consciousness *of* consciousness. The experiencing (pleasant or unpleasant) of an object exists; it doesn't have to be in turn experienced, does it? pt: I see. Perhaps you can say a bit more then about what exactly you mean by: a. direct consciousness (of those blissful jhana factors) b. consciousness *of* consciousness c. experience of experiencing For example, if we were to make a very rough range of understanding of the present experience, we could put it smth like this: 1. deep sleep - no awareness of what's going on now 2. ordinary experiences - there's some understanding of what's happening now, but it's just on an intellectual level. For example, I'm watching a comedy on TV, and I can tell I'm sort of happy, but there's no direct awareness of the cittas and cetasikas like pleasant feeling for example. So, I'm making sense of what's going on now through thinking about it, rather than insight. 3. direct insight - there's direct awareness of a certain cetasika, or citta that arose. So, in your examples a-c, my guess is that you're trying to say that there's no direct insight happening for brahmas? Or are you going even further to say that an experience of a brahma is like deep sleep - i.e. no insight, nor just intellectually being aware that you're sort of happy? Best wishes pt #108175 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Jul 1, 2010 5:44 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? ptaus1 Hi KenH, Thanks for your reply. > KH: My guess is that "borne" is meant here to have virtually the same meaning as "affirmed." I think the text is saying that a concept owes it's existence to - is borne out by - is affirmed by - knowledge of it. > > (So a concept is not an *ultimate* reality, it is merely a reality that is created, and experienced, by the mind.) > > I am not sure why the word 'knowledge' was used, though. "Consciousness" or "experience" would have been better if my guess was right. (Which it probably wasn't!) pt: Yes, I think I'm wondering about the same thing. E.g. does "knowledge" means that: 1. there's simply an occurrence of a specif concept - so in essence, just the fact that a certain concept arises in the process of thinking is already enough to qualify as "knowledge" 2. there's some intellectual understanding of the content of thinking for example - e.g. I'm not just thinking about monkeys, but I'm also aware that I'm currently thinking about monkeys? 3. Or is it more in the sense of direct insight - there's awareness of sanna as a cetasika, or perhaps vitaka and vicara, rather than paying attention to the content of the concepts that sanna provides (e.g. monkeys)? 4. Or something else entirely? > > pt: 2. In the third sentence that speaks of the act of becoming, what does "existingness in the ultimate sense" actually mean? Does that refer to an experience insight, or maybe it's more like a scientific statement on the nature of the world, etc? > > KH: I think the commentaries use that term quite frequently. They often distinguish between existence in the conventional sense (concepts) and existence in the ultimate sense (paramattha dhammas). pt: Hm, ok, but what does "ultimate sense" actually mean? Does it refer strictly to an experience during insight? Or is it also a statement on par with "the world is round, oxygen and hydrogen make water" and that sort of thing? Best wishes pt #108176 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Jul 1, 2010 6:49 am Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? kenhowardau Hi pt, --- <. . .> KH: > I don't see any need for consciousness *of* consciousness. The experiencing (pleasant or unpleasant) of an object exists; it doesn't have to be in turn experienced, does it? > > pt: I see. Perhaps you can say a bit more then about what exactly you mean by: > a. direct consciousness (of those blissful jhana factors) > b. consciousness *of* consciousness > c. experience of experiencing --- After a citta or cetasika has arisen, performed its functions and fallen away, it can become the object of a following citta and its cetasikas. In other words, a citta or cetasika can be experienced by other cittas and cetasikas. ----------- pt: > For example, if we were to make a very rough range of understanding of the present experience, we could put it smth like this: 1. deep sleep - no awareness of what's going on now 2. ordinary experiences - there's some understanding of what's happening now, but it's just on an intellectual level. For example, I'm watching a comedy on TV, and I can tell I'm sort of happy, but there's no direct awareness of the cittas and cetasikas like pleasant feeling for example. So, I'm making sense of what's going on now through thinking about it, rather than insight. ------------ Yes, I think that's right. In ultimate reality, visible objects are being experienced at the eye door and audible objects are being experienced at the ear door. Concepts of a TV comedy are being created and experienced at the mind door. (Because of a lack of understanding of visible object and audible object we are oblivious to everything except the concepts.) When we think "I am enjoying this comedy" that would indicate that there has been lobha and sukha-vedana. However, I don't know if it indicates that lobha and/or sukha-vedana have actually appeared at the mind door. That's what I was asking in a recent post to Nina. Your next question goes beyond the things I have been saying: -------------- pt: > 3. direct insight - there's direct awareness of a certain cetasika, or citta that arose. So, in your examples a-c, my guess is that you're trying to say that there's no direct insight happening for brahmas? Or are you going even further to say that an experience of a brahma is like deep sleep - i.e. no insight, nor just intellectually being aware that you're sort of happy? ---------------- No, I wasn't considering the possibility of insight. I was considering Alex's questions. He seemed to think that our experiences had to be experienced before they could mean anything. He asked what would be the use of "unfelt feeling, unperceived perception and unknown cetana etc?" I don't know much about Brahmas. Do they inhabit the fine non-material sphere? I had the idea that the fine non-material sphere was inhabited by jhana masters who simply blissed-out on jhana meditation for several aeons before being eventually reborn in the lower realms. To answer your question, however, I would say that the inhabitants of the non-material sphere could not practise insight because they could not hear the Dhamma there. Hearing depends on material phenomena. I don't believe their existence would be anything like deep sleep. It would be blissful concentration. Ken H #108177 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Jul 1, 2010 7:11 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? kenhowardau Hi pt, ----- <. . .> pt: > Yes, I think I'm wondering about the same thing. E.g. does "knowledge" mean that: 1. there's simply an occurrence of a specif concept - so in essence, just the fact that a certain concept arises in the process of thinking is already enough to qualify as "knowledge" 2. there's some intellectual understanding of the content of thinking for example - e.g. I'm not just thinking about monkeys, but I'm also aware that I'm currently thinking about monkeys? 3. Or is it more in the sense of direct insight - there's awareness of sanna as a cetasika, or perhaps vitaka and vicara, rather than paying attention to the content of the concepts that sanna provides (e.g. monkeys)? 4. Or something else entirely? ----------- I think your first guess might be the closest. The fact that a specific concept has become known (in the process of thinking) is enough to qualify that concept as a thing (a dhamma) in the broadest sense of the word. --------------------- <. . .> KH: > > I think the commentaries use that term quite frequently. They often distinguish between existence in the conventional sense (concepts) and existence in the ultimate sense (paramattha dhammas). pt: > Hm, ok, but what does "ultimate sense" actually mean? Does it refer strictly to an experience during insight? ---------------------- No, it doesn't necessarily refer to an experience during insight. It refers to *the way things are*. Regardless of whether we have insight or not the fact remains; dhammas are all that really exists. ----------- pt: > Or is it also a statement on par with "the world is round, oxygen and hydrogen make water" and that sort of thing? ----------- Yes, if I understand you correctly: it is a statement of ultimate truth (as known and taught only by Buddhas). Ken H #108178 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 1, 2010 9:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is the ALL actually? nilovg Dear Ken H, Op 30-jun-2010, om 9:44 heeft Ken H het volgende geschreven: > When I asked if individual characteristics were known by insight I > was thinking of, for example, the individual characteristic of > alobha, which is (from your book, Cetasikas): "freedom from > churlishness or resentment, like an agreeable friend." > > Can that type of characteristic be directly known by panna? ------- N: It can be known, but clear, direct understanding of it is after the first stage of insight. At this moment we are not sure what naama is, we mix naama and ruupa. When the first stage of insight is reached it is known what naama is and what ruupa. This does not mean that before this stage is reached there cannot be sometimes awareness of realities, but usually we think of the name of a reality instead of directly knowing its characteristic. -------- > > This brings me back to something I was saying (or asking) in a > recent post. We are commonly aware of feelings (in the conventional > sense); we often say, for example, that we are enjoying pleasant > mental feelings. But is that because vedana has recently become an > object of consciousness? Or is our so-called 'awareness' of > pleasant feelings due purely to thinking, and nothing to do with > any direct experiencing of vedana (or of any other cetasika)? ------- N: For the same reason there cannot be precise understanding of the feeling appearing now before the first stage of insight. Feeling is pure naama, and ruupa is not blended into it. And how difficult to know kusala happy feeling as different from akusala happy feeling. Cittas and its accompanying cetasikas arise and fall away so fast. Kusala feeling alternates with akusala feeling. We may like the happy feeling accompanying generosity when we help others. "How good I am doing this", we may think with lobha. We cling so much to feeling, it is a separate khandha. Nina. #108179 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jul 1, 2010 7:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and pt) - In a message dated 7/1/2010 2:50:16 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi pt, --- <. . .> KH: > I don't see any need for consciousness *of* consciousness. The experiencing (pleasant or unpleasant) of an object exists; it doesn't have to be in turn experienced, does it? > > pt: I see. Perhaps you can say a bit more then about what exactly you mean by: > a. direct consciousness (of those blissful jhana factors) > b. consciousness *of* consciousness > c. experience of experiencing --- After a citta or cetasika has arisen, performed its functions and fallen away, it can become the object of a following citta and its cetasikas. In other words, a citta or cetasika can be experienced by other cittas and cetasikas. ---------------------------------------------------- As a memory and as content of thinking, but not as something directly observed, for it no longer exists if "fallen away." On a related, but different, matter, what sort of "reality" exists and then ceases to exist? If any single "reality" is then utterly destroyed, how is not utter and total destruction of anything and everything not the result? Consider the enormity of the ceasing to exist of a true "reality." I raise this matter to indicate why I believe that any belief in real, i.e., not merely conventional, conditioned entities is untenable. I'm not looking to argue the point ("Yes!" "No!" "Yes!" "No!"), but just to raise it as a matter for contemplating. ----------------------------------------------------- ================================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #108180 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Jul 1, 2010 1:44 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? truth_aerator >KH After a citta or cetasika has arisen, performed its functions >and fallen away, it can become the object of a following citta and >its cetasikas. In other words, a citta or cetasika can be >experienced by other cittas and cetasikas. > ---------------------------------------------------- >H: As a memory and as content of thinking, but not as something >directly observed, for it no longer exists if "fallen away." >On a related, but different, matter, what sort of "reality" exists >and then ceases to exist? If any single "reality" is then utterly >destroyed, how is not utter and total destruction of anything and >everything not the result? Hello KenH, Howard, all, It appears to me that in a model of radical impermanence, re-cognizing, determining, registering, responding is always at what has already ceased. The full sense process happens for 16-17 moments of citta. Since only one citta exists at a time, it would mean that the recognizing and retention happens of no longer existing object. I wonder at the possible implications of that. With metta, Alex #108181 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Jul 2, 2010 12:46 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? kenhowardau Hi Howard, ------ <. . .> KH: > > After a citta or cetasika has arisen, performed its functions and fallen away, it can become the object of a following citta and its cetasikas. <. . .> H: > > As a memory and as content of thinking, but not as something directly observed, ----------- How could there be a *memory* of something that had never been directly observed? Also, if we could never directly observe a nama, but only theorise about it, then we could never directly know (understand) a nama. That would mean no satipatthana with nama as object. But we know from the Four Foundaions of Mindfulness that there *can* be satipatthana with nama as object. --------------- H: > for it no longer exists if "fallen away." --------------- It can exist in the form of an arammana, but I take your point - it has fallen away. That, however, does not prevent direct observation. A Buddha's mind-door consciousness can directly observe dhammas that existed aeons in the past. Ordinary mind-door consciousness can directly observe dhammas that existed a billionth of a second in the past. Whether we believe or not, that's the way it is according to the Dhamma. In conventional reality the situation is even more bizarre; we never directly observe anything that is not in the past! Because of the limited speed of light, for example, we see a sun that existed eight minutes in the past: we see a computer-screen that existed a billionth of a second (?) in the past . . . etc. Similarly, touch, taste and smell all depend on the transmission of signals through the nervous system - which takes time. And so we never directly observe a presently existing conventional reality of either kind - mental or material. At least in ultimate reality there can be direct experience of presently existing (not yet fallen away) *material* phenomena! :-) ----------------------- H: > On a related, but different, matter, what sort of "reality" exists and then ceases to exist? ----------------------- A conditioned reality. --------------------------- H: > If any single "reality" is then utterly destroyed, how is not utter and total destruction of anything and everything not the result? --------------------------- Because it has already conditioned another dhamma to arise in its place. ---------------------------------- H: > Consider the enormity of the ceasing to exist of a true "reality." ---------------------------------- Yes, conditioned dhammas have an inbuilt enormity characteristic called dukkha. It is particularly bad when those dhammas have been regarded as self. -------------------------------------- H: > I raise this matter to indicate why I believe that any belief in real, i.e., not merely conventional, conditioned entities is untenable. -------------------------------------- So, according to your sensibilities, reality has to be permanent and unconditioned - only Nibanna can be real. There are millions of Mahayanists who will agree with you. But it is not what the Theravada texts say. ---------------------- H: > I'm not looking to argue the point ("Yes!" "No!" "Yes!" "No!"), but just to raise it as a matter for contemplating. ---------------------------------- I think we have to start by having the Buddha tell us, "Yes, this is the way it is!" "No, that is not the way it is!" If we haven't heard that to begin with, our own contemplations will get us nowhere (other than samsara). Ken H #108182 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jul 1, 2010 10:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 7/1/2010 8:47:04 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ------ <. . .> KH: > > After a citta or cetasika has arisen, performed its functions and fallen away, it can become the object of a following citta and its cetasikas. <. . .> H: > > As a memory and as content of thinking, but not as something directly observed, ----------- How could there be a *memory* of something that had never been directly observed? --------------------------------------------------- That is a very interesting point!!! Good one, Ken! Yet it must be some sort of "re-call-ing," for the nama is not present. ---------------------------------------------------- Also, if we could never directly observe a nama, but only theorise about it, then we could never directly know (understand) a nama. That would mean no satipatthana with nama as object. But we know from the Four Foundaions of Mindfulness that there *can* be satipatthana with nama as object. ---------------------------------------------------- And this is explained without contradiction HOW? ---------------------------------------------------- --------------- H: > for it no longer exists if "fallen away." --------------- It can exist in the form of an arammana, but I take your point - it has fallen away. That, however, does not prevent direct observation. ------------------------------------------------------------- If not involving memory, does it then involve rime travel? [Kidding, of course.] ----------------------------------------------------- A Buddha's mind-door consciousness can directly observe dhammas that existed aeons in the past. ------------------------------------------------------ Who says so? What does 'directly' mean? The Buddha *recalled* his past lives. ---------------------------------------------------- Ordinary mind-door consciousness can directly observe dhammas that existed a billionth of a second in the past. --------------------------------------------------- Just a fresh memory. ------------------------------------------------ Whether we believe or not, that's the way it is according to the Dhamma. ------------------------------------------------------ Some quotes to back that up, please? --------------------------------------------------- In conventional reality the situation is even more bizarre; we never directly observe anything that is not in the past! ------------------------------------------------ Entirely untrue. What is ever observed is ONLY what is present: NOW, NOW, NOW!!! ------------------------------------------------ Because of the limited speed of light, for example, we see a sun that existed eight minutes in the past: we see a computer-screen that existed a billionth of a second (?) in the past . . . etc. ------------------------------------------------ No. What we see is present visible object. We don't see concepts. We cognize them, and that is also NOW. ---------------------------------------------- Similarly, touch, taste and smell all depend on the transmission of signals through the nervous system - which takes time. ---------------------------------------------- I give the analogous reply. (You're just reciting physics stories now, Ken.) And I find it interesting that you mention "touch, taste, and smell" when speaking of "conventional realities." BTW, isn't 'conventional reality' an oxymoron? What is a matter of convention is not a reality of any sort. ---------------------------------------------- And so we never directly observe a presently existing conventional reality of either kind - mental or material. ----------------------------------------------- If you would change "never" to "always," I would agree! :-) ---------------------------------------------- At least in ultimate reality there can be direct experience of presently existing (not yet fallen away) *material* phenomena! :-) ----------------------------------------------- What the heck ARE "conventional realities"? ----------------------------------------------- ----------------------- H: > On a related, but different, matter, what sort of "reality" exists and then ceases to exist? ----------------------- A conditioned reality. -------------------------------------------- Wherein lies it's "reality"? ---------------------------------------------- --------------------------- H: > If any single "reality" is then utterly destroyed, how is not utter and total destruction of anything and everything not the result? --------------------------- Because it has already conditioned another dhamma to arise in its place. ---------------------------------- H: > Consider the enormity of the ceasing to exist of a true "reality." ---------------------------------- Yes, conditioned dhammas have an inbuilt enormity characteristic called dukkha. It is particularly bad when those dhammas have been regarded as self. --------------------------------------------------- C'mon, Ken. You are purposely missing my point here. The point is the usage of "reality". -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- H: > I raise this matter to indicate why I believe that any belief in real, i.e., not merely conventional, conditioned entities is untenable. -------------------------------------- So, according to your sensibilities, reality has to be permanent and unconditioned - only Nibanna can be real. ---------------------------------------------- Yes, I think exactly that! ------------------------------------------- There are millions of Mahayanists who will agree with you. But it is not what the Theravada texts say. ---------------------------------------------- The suttas do not ascribe reality to conditioned phenomena. The suttas say "This is all unreal." ----------------------------------------------- ---------------------- H: > I'm not looking to argue the point ("Yes!" "No!" "Yes!" "No!"), but just to raise it as a matter for contemplating. ---------------------------------- I think we have to start by having the Buddha tell us, "Yes, this is the way it is!" "No, that is not the way it is!" If we haven't heard that to begin with, our own contemplations will get us nowhere (other than samsara). Ken H ================================ With metta, Howard Unreal /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 ) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ /See how the world together with the devas has self-conceit for what is not-self. Enclosed by mind-and-body it imagines, 'This is real.' Whatever they imagine it to be, it is quite different from that. It is unreal, of a false nature and perishable. Nibbana, not false in nature, that the Noble Ones know as true. Indeed, by the penetration of the true, they are completely stilled and realize final deliverance./ (From the Dvayatanupassana Sutta) #108183 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Jul 2, 2010 4:36 am Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? ptaus1 Hi KenH, > KH: Yes, I think that's right. In ultimate reality, visible objects are being experienced at the eye door and audible objects are being experienced at the ear door. Concepts of a TV comedy are being created and experienced at the mind door. (Because of a lack of understanding of visible object and audible object we are oblivious to everything except the concepts.) > > When we think "I am enjoying this comedy" that would indicate that there has been lobha and sukha-vedana. However, I don't know if it indicates that lobha and/or sukha-vedana have actually appeared at the mind door. That's what I was asking in a recent post to Nina. pt: Ah, I see, that's an interesting question. As far as I understand you and Nina's response to your question, even when a person is just conceptually unerstanding that "I feel so good right now", etc, I think that would mean that sukha-vedana must have become an object of the mind-door to spark that chain of thought in the first place. But, this is not direct insight - not a distinct experience of vedana as a nama, but it's covered up by thinking about it, as I understand what Nina is saying. I guess that this conceptual understanding of the present state (as in "I feel so good right now") would still signify some sort of panna, but it wouldn't be nearly strong enough to recognise vedana directly and distinctly from other aggregates, nor recognise it as anatta, anicca and dukkha. > KH: I don't know much about Brahmas. Do they inhabit the fine non-material sphere? I had the idea that the fine non-material sphere was inhabited by jhana masters who simply blissed-out on jhana meditation for several aeons before being eventually reborn in the lower realms. pt: I'm not sure either, I think fine-material brahmas (reborn as a result of first four form-jhanas) can do all the things that other lower beings can, but they only have three senses - mind, eye and ear, so no taste, touch and smell. Non-material brahmas on the other hand (reborn as a result of four formless jhanas) have no senses, save the mind sense (and non-percipient brahmas don't have the mind-sense either). > KH: To answer your question, however, I would say that the inhabitants of the non-material sphere could not practise insight because they could not hear the Dhamma there. Hearing depends on material phenomena. pt: Not sure either. I think only non-material brahmas can't hear Dhamma teachings because they don't have eyes and ears. Though I'm not sure. Wouldn't they posses divine eye and divine ear? I mean, are divine eye/ear a part of the mind-sense or eye- and ear-sense? > KH: I don't believe their existence would be anything like deep sleep. It would be blissful concentration. pt: Hm, isn't bliss their vipaka so to speak? I mean, it's not like every single citta in their life would be a jhana citta? I assume they would still have a/kusala javanas, and still have cetana, thus committing acts, thus generating kamma, which would mean, they are not in jhanic concentration their whole life... Don't know. Best wishes pt #108184 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Jul 2, 2010 4:38 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? ptaus1 Hi KenH, Thanks for your reply. Best wishes pt > I think your first guess might be the closest. The fact that a specific concept has become known (in the process of thinking) is enough to qualify that concept as a thing (a dhamma) in the broadest sense of the word. > > No, it doesn't necessarily refer to an experience during insight. It refers to *the way things are*. Regardless of whether we have insight or not the fact remains; dhammas are all that really exists. > > Yes, if I understand you correctly: it is a statement of ultimate truth (as known and taught only by Buddhas). #108185 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Jul 2, 2010 4:54 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? ptaus1 Hi Howard, KenH, Alex, > KH: After a citta or cetasika has arisen, performed its functions and fallen away, it can become the object of a following citta and its cetasikas. In other words, a citta or cetasika can be experienced by other cittas and cetasikas. > ------ > H: As a memory and as content of thinking, but not as something directly observed, for it no longer exists if "fallen away." On a related, but different, matter, what sort of "reality" exists and then ceases to exist? If any single "reality" is then utterly destroyed, how is not utter and total destruction of anything and everything not the result? pt: This is a topic that easily drags us into philosophical speculation - e.g. how is a "reality" that has fallen away actually a "reality"? etc. For that reason I kind of remain satisfied with the explanation that the way it happens is just the way that the process of congition works. I.e. regardless of how we thoerize about it, it just happens in the way that it does, and that's just how things are. Afaik, at least according to ACMA, Ledi Sayadaw and Mahasi saydaw, the cognition process goes like this (an example with a sense-object): 1. There is a rupa process of cittas (16-17 cittas) that have a rupa as object. Rupa falls away during this time. 2. There's the first mind-door process (10 cittas) that has the rupa that has just fallen away as the object - as I remember, the object is called "not so classsifiable" and is in fact equated with a dhamma - the actual rupa that has just fallen away. 3. There then follow multiple mind-door processes (10 cittas each) each of which now has a certain concept as the object, as related to that original rupa - it's color, it's shape, it's name, etc. So, that's how it's said to happen, and well, that's how things are. Unless the description of the process of cognition is wrong and doesn't in fact happen like that in real life. Best wishes pt #108186 From: "billybobby717" Date: Fri Jul 2, 2010 4:21 am Subject: Idol worshiping billybobby717 Somebody has told me that Buddhism is Idol worshiping but I've heard that this was not the teaching of the Buddha. Where does he teach AGAINST worshiping idols? Thank You Everyone. Billy #108187 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Jul 2, 2010 7:14 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? kenhowardau Hi Howard, -------- <. . .> KH: > Also, if we could never directly observe a nama, but only theorise about it, then we could never directly know (understand) a nama. That would mean no satipatthana with nama as object. But we know from the Four Foundaions of Mindfulness that there *can* be satipatthana with nama as object. H: > And this is explained without contradiction HOW? --------- Perhaps I have not understood your question correctly but my answer is, there is no contradiction: a nama that has just fallen away *can* become the object of consciousness, and therefore there can be satipatthana at the mind door (where all dhamma-arammana are of the "just fallen away" variety. ----------------- <. . .> H: > If not involving memory, does it then involve time travel? [Kidding, of course.] ----------------- I am sure a science fiction writer could come up with several explanations. I have a few ideas of my own, but I wouldn't bother anyone with them. :-) The fact remains that is how things happen at the mind door; every dhamma (nama or rupa) that appears there does so after having ceased to exist. It appears there as an exact replica of its former self. ----------------------------- <. . .> KH: > > A Buddha's mind-door consciousness can directly observe dhammas that existed aeons in the past. H: > Who says so? What does 'directly' mean? The Buddha *recalled* his past lives. ------------------------------ As usual, I don't have references to hand but that is how I understand what I have been told. The Buddha was omnipotent; he could observe any citta - his own or others' - past or present (or even future, I think(?)) ------------------- <. . .> KH: > > Ordinary mind-door consciousness can directly observe dhammas that existed a billionth of a second in the past. <. . .>Whether we believe or not, that's the way it is according to the Dhamma. H: > Some quotes to back that up, please? ------------------- I'm not good with quotes. But isn't that the way it is clearly set out in the Abhidhamma? ----------------------------------- <. . .> H: > I give the analogous reply. (You're just reciting physics stories now, Ken.) And I find it interesting that you mention "touch, taste, and smell" when speaking of "conventional realities." BTW, isn't 'conventional reality' an oxymoron? What is a matter of convention is not a reality of any sort. ------------------------------------ Yes, I was just reciting stories from popular physics. Physics is a part of conventional reality. Anything that is believed to experienced through the senses or the mind is a reality of some sort. If it is taught in the Dhamma it is an ultimate reality: if it is taught anywhere else it is a conventional reality. --------------------- <. . .> KH: > > A conditioned reality. H: > Wherein lies it's "reality"? --------------------- We've had this discussion a hundred times already, and it's always a pleasure. :-) But I won't go into it again this time. Except to say it is a reality "because it has its own nature (sabhava)." See pt's recent thread for a quote from Vism. ------------------------------------ H: > > > Consider the enormity of the ceasing to exist of a true "reality." KH: > > Yes, conditioned dhammas have an inbuilt enormity characteristic called dukkha. It is particularly bad when those dhammas have been regarded as self. H: > C'mon, Ken. You are purposely missing my point here. The point is the usage of "reality". ------------------------------------- No, I wasn't purposely missing your point, just missing it. Still am! ----------------------------------------------- <. . .> H: > The suttas do not ascribe reality to conditioned phenomena. The suttas say "This is all unreal." ----------------------------------------------- The suttas do ascribe reality to conditioned dhammas, and when they occasionally contain the words "this is all unreal" we need to understand the context in which they are contained. Ken H #108188 From: "Christine" Date: Fri Jul 2, 2010 8:15 am Subject: Re: Idol worshiping christine_fo... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "billybobby717" wrote: > > Somebody has told me that Buddhism is Idol worshiping but I've heard that this was not the teaching of the Buddha. > Where does he teach AGAINST worshiping idols? > > Thank You Everyone. > > Billy > Hello Billy, This article may be of assistance: Are Buddhists Idol-Worshippers? http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books6/Dhammananda_Are_Buddhists_Idol_Worshipp\ ers.pdf with metta Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- ---It's not what happens to you that is importanct ~ it's what you do with it--- #108189 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Jul 2, 2010 8:48 am Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? kenhowardau Hi pt, ------ <. . .> pt: > As far as I understand you and Nina's response to your question, even when a person is just conceptually unerstanding that "I feel so good right now", etc, I think that would mean that sukha-vedana must have become an object of the mind-door to spark that chain of thought in the first place. --------------- I think that is possibly the way it happens. But I think it could also possibly happen without lobha or vedana ever appearing at the mind door. Very often we think we have a particular type of feeling when actually we don't: or we think we are being kind, or generous (etc), when actually we are being cruel or selfish (etc). So I don't think our conventional experiences of pleasure and pain (etc) are necessarily linked to actual experiences of the corresponding cetasikas. ---------------------------- pt: > But, this is not direct insight - not a distinct experience of vedana as a nama, but it's covered up by thinking about it, as I understand what Nina is saying. ----------------------------- It is definitely not insight. For us beginners insight is a long way off. But it can be a direct experience. Dhammas are being directly experienced all the time. Visible objects, for example, are appearing at the eye door now - millions of times every second. However, as mere uninstructed worldlings, we don't experience them "with insight*. We just experience them. If visible object and other sense objects are appearing all the time without us knowing them with insight, then it stands to reason that other dhammas (lobha and sukha-vedana, for example) could be also appearing at the mind door with similar regularity. I am just not sure whether they are or not. And that's all I have been asking about. ------------------------------------ pt: > I guess that this conceptual understanding of the present state (as in "I feel so good right now") would still signify some sort of panna, but it wouldn't be nearly strong enough to recognise vedana directly and distinctly from other aggregates, nor recognise it as anatta, anicca and dukkha. ------------------------------------- No, I don't see why panna would be arising in that case. Anyone can have thoughts about how they feel. --------------------- <. . .> pt: I'm not sure either, I think fine-material brahmas (reborn as a result of first four form-jhanas) can do all the things <. . .> --------------------- Thanks for the interesting material on brahmas, I will try to remember it. -------------------------------------- KH: > > I don't believe their existence would be anything like deep sleep. It would be blissful concentration. pt: > Hm, isn't bliss their vipaka so to speak? I mean, it's not like every single citta in their life would be a jhana citta? I assume they would still have a/kusala javanas, and still have cetana, thus committing acts, thus generating kamma, which would mean, they are not in jhanic concentration their whole life... Don't know. ---------------------------------------- I don't know much about brahmas and other inhabitants of the various spheres, but I can summarise what I had in mind: Before the Buddha's teaching, jhana meditation was thought to be the way out of suffering. Each of the Bodhisatta's jhana teachers, for example, thought that their experiences of jhana were experiences of nibbana. And they believed that, after death, they would be reborn there - in nibbana. After death they were in fact reborn in the fine non-material sphere (or whatever its proper name is). And they presumed they were in nibbana. They presumed that because their life in that sphere was one long, continuous, ecstatic, jhana absorption. Nothing else, just one jhana citta after another for countless aeons. Ken H #108190 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 2, 2010 9:13 am Subject: Abhidhamma Series, no 21. The Four Planes of Consciousness (part 1). nilovg Dear friends, The Four Planes of Consciousness (part 1). There are many ways of classifying citta and one way is the classification by way of plane of consciousness, in Pali: bhuumi. There are four planes of consciousness: the sensuous plane of consciousness, kaama-bhuumi, the plane of ruupa-jhaana, ruupa-bhuumi, the plane of aruupa-jhaana, aruupa-bhuumi, the plane of supramundane citta, lokuttara-bhuumi. As we have seen, plane of consciousness is different from plane of existence which is the place where one is born. What plane of consciousness a citta belongs to depends on the object it experiences. The sensuous plane of consciousness (kaamaavacara cittas) are the cittas that experience sense objects, such as seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, the experience of tangible object through the bodysense and the experience of these objects through the mind-door. On account of pleasant and unpleasant objects experienced through the senses, kusala cittas (wholesome cittas) and akusala cittas (unwholesome cittas) arise. We usually cling to all the sense objects. Those who see the disadvantage of sense impressions and the defilements bound up with them cultivate samatha (tranquil meditation) and may attain absorption (jhaana). The jhaanacitta is another plane of citta, it is higher than the sensuous plane of citta. Jhaanacittas do not experience sense objects, they experience with absorption a meditation subject through the mind-door. For the development of samatha, tranquil meditation, it is essential to have a keen understanding of the characteristic of calm and of the way to develop calm with a suitable meditation subject. True calm has to be wholesome, it is freedom from defilements. Right understanding. pa~n~naa, that knows precisely when the citta is kusala citta and when akusala citta is indispensable. When the objective of citta is not daana, siila or mental development, bhaavanaa, the citta is usually akusala, but we may not notice this. Indifferent feeling seems to be very calm, but actually, indifferent feeling arises with kusala citta as well as with akusala citta rooted in attachment or rooted in ignorance. One may be attached to silence, and without right understanding one may erroneously believe that there is kusala citta with calm. The Visuddhimagga (Chapters IV-XII) describes forty meditation subjects which can condition calm such as disks (kasinas), recollection of the excellent qualities of the Triple gem, mindfulness of death, loving-kindness or mindfulness of breathing. A meditation subject does not necessarily bring about calm. Only when there is right understanding of calm and the way to develop it, calm can grow. Through samatha the ``hindrances'' (niivara.na), which are akusala cetasikas, are temporarily suppressed. The hindrances arise time and again in daily life. They are sensuous desire (kaamacchandha), ill- will (vyaapaada), torpor and languor (thiina and middha), restlessness and worry (uddhacca and kukkucca) and doubt (vicikicchaa). Someone who wants to develop samatha so as to be able to attain jhaana, has to develop five jhaana-factors which can inhibit the hindrances, and these are the following cetasikas: applied thinking (vitakka) sustained thinking (vicaara) rapture (piiti) happy feeling (sukha) concentration (samaadhi) Jhaana is developed in stages, with each succeeding stage being more refined than the preceding one. For the first stage of ruupa-jhaana it is still necessary that all five jhaana-factors arise with the jhaanacitta, but at each higher stage, when one has become more advanced, jhaana-factors are successively abandoned. Jhaanacittas do not produce vipaaka in the same lifespan: their result is rebirth in higher planes of existence. The result of ruupaavacara kusala cittas is rebirth in ruupa-brahma planes. Those who have attained the highest stage of ruupa-jhaana and see the disadvantages of ruupa-jhaana which is still dependent on materiality, might want to cultivate aruupa-jhaana or ``immaterial jhaana''. The meditation subjects of aruupa-jhaana are not connected with materiality. There are four stages of aruupa-jhaana and each one of these is more subtle and more peaceful than the preceding one. These stages are: the ``Sphere of Boundless Space'' (aakaasaana~ncaayatana), the ``Sphere of Boundless Consciousness'' (vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatana), the ``Sphere of Nothingness'' (aaki~nca~n~naayatana), and the ``Sphere of Neither Perception Nor Non-Perception'' (n'eva-sa~n~aa-n?aasa~n~naayatana). Even when one has attained the highest stage of aruupa-jhaana, defilements cannot be eradicated. They can only be eradicated by lokuttara magga-citta. ************ Nina. #108191 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 2, 2010 8:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 7/2/2010 3:15:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, -------- <. . .> KH: > Also, if we could never directly observe a nama, but only theorise about it, then we could never directly know (understand) a nama. That would mean no satipatthana with nama as object. But we know from the Four Foundaions of Mindfulness that there *can* be satipatthana with nama as object. H: > And this is explained without contradiction HOW? --------- Perhaps I have not understood your question correctly but my answer is, there is no contradiction: a nama that has just fallen away *can* become the object of consciousness, and therefore there can be satipatthana at the mind door (where all dhamma-arammana are of the "just fallen away" variety. ----------------- <. . .> H: > If not involving memory, does it then involve time travel? [Kidding, of course.] ----------------- I am sure a science fiction writer could come up with several explanations. I have a few ideas of my own, but I wouldn't bother anyone with them. :-) The fact remains that is how things happen at the mind door; every dhamma (nama or rupa) that appears there does so after having ceased to exist. It appears there as an exact replica of its former self. ------------------------------------------------------ That sounds much the same as what I call a "fresh memory". ------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------- <. . .> KH: > > A Buddha's mind-door consciousness can directly observe dhammas that existed aeons in the past. H: > Who says so? What does 'directly' mean? The Buddha *recalled* his past lives. ------------------------------ As usual, I don't have references to hand but that is how I understand what I have been told. The Buddha was omnipotent; he could observe any citta - his own or others' - past or present (or even future, I think(?)) ------------------- <. . .> KH: > > Ordinary mind-door consciousness can directly observe dhammas that existed a billionth of a second in the past. <. . .>Whether we believe or not, that's the way it is according to the Dhamma. H: > Some quotes to back that up, please? ------------------- I'm not good with quotes. But isn't that the way it is clearly set out in the Abhidhamma? ----------------------------------- <. . .> H: > I give the analogous reply. (You're just reciting physics stories now, Ken.) And I find it interesting that you mention "touch, taste, and smell" when speaking of "conventional realities." BTW, isn't 'conventional reality' an oxymoron? What is a matter of convention is not a reality of any sort. ------------------------------------ Yes, I was just reciting stories from popular physics. Physics is a part of conventional reality. Anything that is believed to experienced through the senses or the mind is a reality of some sort. If it is taught in the Dhamma it is an ultimate reality: if it is taught anywhere else it is a conventional reality. --------------------- <. . .> KH: > > A conditioned reality. H: > Wherein lies it's "reality"? --------------------- We've had this discussion a hundred times already, and it's always a pleasure. :-) But I won't go into it again this time. ------------------------------------------------ I honestly don't fault you on that. :-) ------------------------------------------- Except to say it is a reality "because it has its own nature (sabhava)." See pt's recent thread for a quote from Vism. ---------------------------------------------- For me, this is a grasping at what is ungraspable. ---------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------ H: > > > Consider the enormity of the ceasing to exist of a true "reality." KH: > > Yes, conditioned dhammas have an inbuilt enormity characteristic called dukkha. It is particularly bad when those dhammas have been regarded as self. H: > C'mon, Ken. You are purposely missing my point here. The point is the usage of "reality". ------------------------------------- No, I wasn't purposely missing your point, just missing it. Still am! ----------------------------------------------------- Okay. Then you don't give much meaning to the oft used (on DSG) 'reality'. ---------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- <. . .> H: > The suttas do not ascribe reality to conditioned phenomena. The suttas say "This is all unreal." ----------------------------------------------- The suttas do ascribe reality to conditioned dhammas, and when they occasionally contain the words "this is all unreal" we need to understand the context in which they are contained. Ken H ============================== With metta, Howard Reality vs Unreality /See how the world together with the devas has self-conceit for what is not-self. Enclosed by mind-and-body it imagines, 'This is real.' Whatever they imagine it to be, it is quite different from that. It is unreal, of a false nature and perishable. Nibbana, not false in nature, that the Noble Ones know as true. Indeed, by the penetration of the true, they are completely stilled and realize final deliverance./ (From the Dvayatanupassana Sutta) #108192 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Jul 3, 2010 6:36 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? kenhowardau Hi Howard, ---------- <. . .> H: > Reality vs Unreality /See how the world together with the devas has self-conceit for what is not-self. Enclosed by mind-and-body it imagines, 'This is real.' Whatever they imagine it to be, it is quite different from that. It is unreal, of a false nature and perishable. Nibbana, not false in nature, that the Noble Ones know as true. Indeed, by the penetration of the true, they are completely stilled and realize final deliverance./ (From the Dvayatanupassana Sutta) ----------- KH: One thing we know for sure is that dhammas are real. :-) So I am wondering what the words "it is unreal" mean in that quote. I suspect the sutta is using "unreal" "false by nature" and "perishable" as synonyms. In that case "unreal" would simply mean anicca. That would make sense to me. Worldlings are ignorant of dhammas and so they regard the things of the world as lasting. The wise understand dhammas, and they know nibbana is the only lasting dhamma. BTW, I was having trouble finding the rest of the sutta. Are you sure you have the right name? The Dvayatanupassana Sutta I found on ATI did not contain those lines. Ken H #108193 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Jul 3, 2010 6:55 am Subject: How to induce right effort? szmicio Dear friends, How to induce right effort and stop laziness? Best wishes Lukas #108194 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 3, 2010 7:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] How to induce right effort? nilovg Dear Lukas, nice to hear from you again, I missed you. I was just thinking of you. Op 3-jul-2010, om 8:55 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > How to induce right effort and stop laziness? ------- N: When you study the Tipitaka you come to see how precious, how valuable are the Buddha's teachings. We learn that paryatti and pa.tipatti are not to be separated. We should not just read but we should also verify what he taught. He taught about seeing and visible object. All realities appearing at this moment. Should we not understand more about these? We come to understand that there is no person who can induce seeing, hearing, kusala citta with right effort and akusala citta with laziness. They arise when there are conditions for their arising. It is so valuable that the Buddha taught the truth about all these realities. When we see the benefit of the Dhamma there are conditions for right understanding to develop, and right understanding is accompanied by right effort. It does not matter what the object of right understanding is, be it kusala or akusala. They are all conditioned dhammas. We have no preference for this or that reality. What is most important is right understanding. This can only be developed in being aware of what appears now, just any reality. No matter you like it or not. If you have preference for this or that dhamma, it shows the clinging to self which is very powerful. How beneficial it is to lessen the clinging to a self, and this is thanks to the Buddha's teachings. We should be very grateful to be in the position that we can begin to develop understanding of realities. ****** Nina. #108195 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Jul 3, 2010 9:20 am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma Series, no 21. The Four Planes of Consciousness (part 1). ptaus1 Dear Nina, I was wondering about this: > N: For the development of samatha, tranquil meditation, it is > essential to have a keen understanding of the characteristic of calm > and of the way to develop calm with a suitable meditation subject. > True calm has to be wholesome, it is freedom from defilements. > Right understanding. pa~n~naa, that knows precisely when the citta is > kusala citta and when akusala citta is indispensable. pt: How can panna in samatha know when the citta is a/kusala if there was no insight knowledges attained? As I understood your reply to KenH, before the first insight knowledge, there's no direct knowing of a nama (like a citta) and its distinct characteristics. I guess the same could be asked regarding having a keen understanding of the characteristic of calm - how can there be such a keen understanding prior to the first insight knowledge? Also, while calm in samatha is wholesome, and the citta in jhana is a mahakusala citta, would it be classed as sammasamadhi though? Thanks. Best wishes pt #108196 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Jul 3, 2010 9:32 am Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? ptaus1 Hi KenH, > pt: > I guess that this conceptual understanding of the present state (as in "I feel so good right now") would still signify some sort of panna, but it wouldn't be nearly strong enough to recognise vedana directly and distinctly from other aggregates, nor recognise it as anatta, anicca and dukkha. > ------------------------------------- > > KH: No, I don't see why panna would be arising in that case. Anyone can have thoughts about how they feel. pt: I was just wondering about this - isn't panna responsible for any kind of understanding - from arithmetics, to thinking, to direct insight? I thought it's just different kinds of panna, but still some sort of panna? Best wishes pt #108197 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jul 3, 2010 7:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 7/3/2010 2:40:23 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ---------- <. . .> H: > Reality vs Unreality /See how the world together with the devas has self-conceit for what is not-self. Enclosed by mind-and-body it imagines, 'This is real.' Whatever they imagine it to be, it is quite different from that. It is unreal, of a false nature and perishable. Nibbana, not false in nature, that the Noble Ones know as true. Indeed, by the penetration of the true, they are completely stilled and realize final deliverance./ (From the Dvayatanupassana Sutta) ----------- KH: One thing we know for sure is that dhammas are real. :-) So I am wondering what the words "it is unreal" mean in that quote. I suspect the sutta is using "unreal" "false by nature" and "perishable" as synonyms. In that case "unreal" would simply mean anicca. That would make sense to me. Worldlings are ignorant of dhammas and so they regard the things of the world as lasting. The wise understand dhammas, and they know nibbana is the only lasting dhamma. BTW, I was having trouble finding the rest of the sutta. Are you sure you have the right name? The Dvayatanupassana Sutta I found on ATI did not contain those lines. ------------------------------------------------------ There are 3 versions on ATI. Two of them are excerpts. The one I quoted from is by John Ireland. Olendzki's doesn't include that paragraph. The only full version is, unfortunately, by Ven T. His includes the material, but I think it is poor compared to Ireland's. The sutta name is correct. ------------------------------------------------------ Ken H ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #108198 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 3, 2010 12:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma Series, no 21. The Four Planes of Consciousness (part 1). nilovg Dear pt, appreciating your keen questions. Op 3-jul-2010, om 11:20 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > How can panna in samatha know when the citta is a/kusala if there > was no insight knowledges attained? As I understood your reply to > KenH, before the first insight knowledge, there's no direct knowing > of a nama (like a citta) and its distinct characteristics. -------- N: In samatha akusala citta can be known as akusala citta and kusala citta can be known as kusala citta, but these are not known as just a dhamma, non-self. However, it must be great understanding that knows kusala as kusala and akusala as akusala. It is no small matter to develop samatha. Also in samatha sati and pa~n~naa are necessary, but these are not of the same level as in vipassanaa. ---------- > > pt:I guess the same could be asked regarding having a keen > understanding of the characteristic of calm - how can there be such > a keen understanding prior to the first insight knowledge? -------- N: It is the same as above. There is calm with each kusala citta, but in samatha more calm is developed. --------- > > pt:Also, while calm in samatha is wholesome, and the citta in jhana > is a mahakusala citta, would it be classed as sammasamadhi though? ------- N: Yes, there is sammaadi.t.thi and sammaasamaadhi in samatha, but these are not of the eightfold Path leading to the eradication of defilements. Thus, when mentioning sammaadi.t.thi and sammaasamaadhi we should add of the eightfold Path if we refer to these as factors of the eightfold Path. I would like to continue this dialogue, but now I am first taking a break for a while. Nina. #108199 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 3, 2010 12:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: levels of pa~n~naa, was Bhavangacitta ... nilovg Dear pt, Op 3-jul-2010, om 11:32 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > pt: I was just wondering about this - isn't panna responsible for > any kind of understanding - from arithmetics, to thinking, to > direct insight? I thought it's just different kinds of panna, but > still some sort of panna? ------- N: Many levels of pa~n~naa. In the Vis. even making a plough to help people raising crops is some kind of pa~n~naa. Kh Sujin said; even knowing the right time when to stretch out after sitting is a kind of pa~n~naa. I like this one, Vis. Ch XIV, 14, see: science and craft: Vis. 14: < And this is said: 'Herein, what is understanding consisting in what is reasoned? In the spheres of work invented by ingenuity, or in the spheres of craft invented by ingenuity, or in the sorts of science invented by ingenuity, any preference, view, choice, opinion, judgement, liking for pondering over things, that concerns ownership of deeds (kamma) or is in conformity with truth or is of such kind as to conform with (the axioms) "Materiality is impermanent" or "Feeling ... perception ... formations ... consciousness is impermanent" that one acquires without hearing it from another--that is called understanding consisting in what is reasoned. ' (In the spheres ... ) that one acquires by hearing it from another--that is called understanding consisting in what is learnt (heard). 'And all understanding in anyone who has attained (an attainment) is understanding consisting in development' (Vbh. 324-25). So it is of three kinds as consisting in what is thought out, in what is heard, and in development.> Nina.