#109400 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 8:47 am Subject: Re: intentional actions. ptaus1 Hi Alex, > A: When would akusala arise more often and be more unwholesome, > as one washes the dishes or does bhavana like Metta or Asubha or Anapanasati? pt: I guess the more unwholesome would be when wrong view arises. An argument is being made that wrong view is more likely to arise during purposeful practices like Metta, Asubha, etc, due to the beginner's lack of understanding what's kusala and what's akusala, than during other more mundane activities like washing the dishes, playing piano, etc. > A: Same could be said about washing dishes. Akusala can arise just as much and it may be even worse than during refined meditations. pt: I think others have pointed out several times that wrong view (so stronger akusala) is more likely to arise while engaging (with ignorance) in practices believing they lead to awakening. If one considers washing the dishes to be a practice that leads to awakening, then it's more likely that wrong view will arise, than when washing the dishes as just a mundane sort of activity. > A: But what is one accomplishing when washing dishes? Any useful paramis for Nibbana that one can't do just as well (or even better) when one does Bhavana (metta, asubha, anapanasati)? pt: Well, dhammas are conditioned, no? As such, what will be "accomplished" will be determined by what arises at the time. On the other hand, I think you're asking more in terms of whether washing the dishes can be a better/worse condition for the arising of kusala, than asubha practice for example. I think this is a whole another matter whether activities can be considered as conditions in the first place or not, since they are not dhammas, are they? If I'm not mistaken, only dhammas can be conditions. > > pt: Meaning that it's very easy to fall into doing a wrong practice (as >in with wrong view) even though one sincerely believes he's in fact >doing the right practice and following exactly what the Buddha was >saying. > > A: Right. One needs to be honest and discerning this. But if the argument is "don't try it because you can't be 100% perfect" then it is strawman. Nobody is perfect on the first try. That is why one doesn't become an Arahant the next moment after first coming into contact with the teaching. pt: Well, this is another one of those things that's under dispute. You (and me to some degree) believe that one can learn from mistakes - e.g. that arising of akusala can be a condition for kusala understanding to arise, which recognises akusala and so lessens the chance for more akusala to arise in the future. Others here on the other hand say that if akusala arises, then it only conditions more akusala in the future. So, in reference to our example, the person only keeps making mistakes and there's no learning from these mistakes, so things only get worse and worse. In other words, if any kusala happens at all during such practices, it is "in spite" of the practice, not - "thanks to" the practice (as you and me believe). > A: And when is kusala citta more likely to arise and be stronger? During lets say metta bhavana or washing dishes? pt: I would say both, depending on the conditions. Again, it's a disputable matter whether an activity can be considered as a condition in the first place, or not. And that's assuming that metta bhavana is actually metta bhavana and not just deluding oneself. > > pt: Which means that your category (a) is redundant really. I mean, why >bother with jhana-type samatha practice to suppress akusala, if >kusala citta (and hence seclusion from akusala) can happen at >anytime, anywhere? > > A: You are forgeting such variables as > INTENSITY of kusala moment and DURATION. Metta pre access concentration and metta AFTER Jhana are of far greater intensity levels. pt: Maybe, maybe not. Would the same principle also apply to akusala arising after jhana? Either way, what's the difference whether metta is stronger or weaker? It would simply give a different vipaka, but I don't think it would lead any closer to awakening? Unless there's understanding arising together with metta. So, it's understanding that makes the difference, not the strong/weak metta. > A: If you are so holy that you don't need strong force to counteract kusala, GOOD FOR YOU! I am so happy. But some of us are not perfect to that degree. pt: There's no need for such comments. > > pt: A moment of kindness, being generous, discussing Dhamma, etc, >providing it's really kusala, suppresses akusala at the time. > > To what strength and duration? pt: Why does it matter? Do you want to get to nibbana quicker? Whenever I think in those terms, it's lobha that motivates such thinking, not chanda. > A: So. Washing dishes, watching TV, etc is right - but doing metta, asubha or anapanasati is wrong? pt: There's no need for such comments. It's been repeatedly said that it's not metta, asubha or anapanasati that are under dispute, but the beginner's ability to actually engage in these practices in a wholesome way (without wrong view). > A: If one can't do anapanasati (universal subject of meditation) than what hope does one have about "Awakening moment while cooking" ? pt: In my case, such questions are again motivated by lobha that looks to the future and desires some result in the future. That of course is not the understanding of what's arising at the present moment, which is what actually leads to awakening. > > pt: Every time a kusala citta arises, there's no akusala arising. > > A: For what duration and intensity? Are one's defilements so weak that a little split second thought can make a lasting influence? pt: See above. > A: How can one expect to make progress rather than even regress if kusala arises 100 per 1 kusala moment? pt: You've discussed this with Jon before. As I remember, kusala now conditions more kusala in the future, no matter how much akusala happens in between. So, I gather that kusala is never lost. > A: If one can't suppress 5 hindrances for more than perhaps a second, how can one expect to permanently eradicate them? pt: One can suppress hindrances for aeons, but I gather that still wouldn't help a single bit with eradication. Eradication is about understanding, not suppression. So, I 'd say that one moment with understanding (satipatthana) is far more valuable than aeons of suppression (without satipattthana, like in jhana). Best wishes pt #109401 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 11:51 am Subject: Re: intentional actions. ptaus1 Hi Alex, One thing I forgot to address: > Alex: When would akusala arise more often and be more unwholesome, as one washes the dishes or does bhavana like Metta or Asubha or Anapanasati? pt: It's interesting to note the difference in definitions as to what "bhavana" actually is. For example, you (and me to a degree) often think about bhavana as something that's "done". Sort of like when one does an activity - practices piano, does the work, does the dishes, or does metta, asubha, etc. But I think Jon, Sarah and others here use the term "bhavana" for every occasion when mental development occurs. For example, every time understanding arises, that moment itself would be bhavana I guess. Meaning, if you're washing the dishes and a moment of understanding happens - that would be bhavana. Or if a moment of metta happens, that would be metta bhavana. So, "bhavana" as such does not depend on purposeful action/activity, but it depends on whether understanding or metta for example arise or not. Similarly, one doesn't meditate with or without understanding, but the arising of understnading would be the actual moment of meditation (bhavana). So, it's not about an activity/doing something, but about whether understnading or metta arise by conditions or not (spontaneously or not, so to speak). By the same logic, if there's no metta arising at a certain moment, then there's no bhavana at that time, even though one might be trying to do it. And if there's no metta at the moment, but one is still trying to do it, then there's probably some sort of akusala disguised as trying to do metta bhavana... Now, if we continue with that line of reasoning, it makes me wonder when in Vsm metta bhavana or asubha are described - to whom does the description actually refer to? Does it refer to a person for whom metta is arising just as spontaneously in many consecutive moments? Or is it describing someone like me (and you possibly) where we sit down, try really hard to have metta (what would mean there's no metta at the time, so probably some sort of akusala cittas), then have a few brief moments of metta arising, then again try really hard for a long time before a short moment of metta again arises, etc? I mean, if we have a few moments of metta, with a lot of akusala moments in between, would the whole thing (the entire sitting session) count as metta bhavana? Or just the moments with actual metta would count as bhavana, while everything else would be simply akusala bhavana or something? Best wishes pt #109402 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 9:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 8/22/2010 1:04:05 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: Hi Howard, > Suk: I said 'usually' and not 'always'. > The point of the Dhamma is to understand whatever realities that appear > and know that they do so already. It is not about trying to change the > present reality or follow some projected good. A more conventional way > of saying this, is that the Dhamma is for the purpose of coming to > understand "who we are" and not "what we want to be". > ============================= > Coming to understand something is a changing of present reality, and > intending to do so and studying Abhidhamma has as much sense of self > involved in it as anything else. > The change of accumulations happens with each citta in a process arising and falling away. With regard to intention, it arises with all cittas. So it depends on the accompanying cetasikas, particularly the roots, whether this is right or wrong. Metta, Sukinder ============================= I fail to see how what you wrote answers my objection. You say that the point of the Dhamma is not about trying to change the present reality or follow some projected good. Well, of course, what is present is already here, and that is a done deed. The point is to create conditions that will help set a good future course and, indeed, to bring about a projected good. The Buddha urged us to do no evil, do good, and cultivate the mind. Without this, we might as well all become entirely secular. My point was that sense of self arises all the time with regard to all sorts of matters. In particular, 1) coming to understand something IS a changing of reality, 2) intending to come to understand something, including the Dhamma, is trying to change things, 3) intending to attain such understanding virtually always is tainted by a sense of self, and 4) studying the Abhidhamma (and suttas and commentaries and vinaya) has as much sense of self involved in it as anything else. Yes, sometimes the mind state is relatively free of sense of self, but that is rare. Far more often in fact, that is not the case, and there mind being tainted by sense of self is the case whether one is sitting down to read or discuss Abhidhamma no less than when one sits down to meditate. Study is carried out sue to desire. We are all beset by sense of self more so rather than less so, and nearly all the time. DSG Abhidhamikas are not selfless, Sukin. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #109403 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 9:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? upasaka_howard Hi, pt - In a message dated 8/22/2010 1:41:00 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ptaus1@... writes: Hi Howard, Thanks for replying. Your position seems a bit different to what I've encountered so far, so I'll ask a few more questions to get a better understanding of your position. > Howard: From my perspective, everything but nibbana is a matter of convention. > As I see it, there are actually no separate "realities," but just a single > reality. pt: What do you mean by "single reality"? ------------------------------------ Only one. ---------------------------------- > H: The paramattha dhammas are far simpler than the gross "objects of > the world," and, for that reason, are closer to being justifiably referred > to as "realities." But even they are matters of convention. What changes > while standing and whose very existence is contingent is not a separate > "reality." pt: I'm still not clear what you are saying - are you saying that (characteristics of) a dhamma cannot be experienced by panna, but can only be thought about? ------------------------------------ The quality of the content of experience is constantly changing. Our parsing of the experiential stream into conceived-of individual entities is exactly that, a conventional parsing, and, yes, a matter of thought. ------------------------------------- E.g. when the Buddha says "feeling is anatta", is he encouraging us to think about feeling in philosophical terms, or is he encouraging an actual experience of insight (where panna for a brief instant recognises the arisen feeling as having the characteristic of anatta), or something else? ----------------------------------- Everything that we seem to observe is a matter of convention. That is what I believe and what I believe the Buddha taught. That doesn't make these alleged things outright fictitious. Warmth and hardness and sights and sounds all have a basis in experience, but it is a mere convenience to conceive of them as entities. They are, in fact, ungraspable as such. ----------------------------------- > H: Dhammas are thought of as discrete entities with own being and separate > existence, and yet consisting of parts and changing. This is something > conceived of but not observed without thought. That makes them matters of > convention. We imagine them as discrete entities with exact starting and ending > points, but no aspect of reality is graspable in such a fashion. This is > merely a useful mode of thinking, especially for "navigating" at the more > gross, worldly level. pt: What then, in your opinion, is insight actually? ------------------------------------ There are stages of insight. They all involve more and more seeing *through* phenomena, first gross phenomena and later fine phenomena, as impermanent, unsatisfactory, without substance or self, and, finally, as mere convention and lacking in reality. There is no reality beyond convention even to the so-called paramattha dhammas, mere mirages, a magician's smoke & mirrors. The major insight moments are the paths and fruits which are steppings out from the realm of illusion and convention to reality itself, nibbana. ----------------------------------- At the moment, it seems that you're saying that insight is the same as (or maybe a bit more subtle form of) thinking about things, since dhammas are really just matters of convention. ------------------------------------ No, insight isn't thinking. ----------------------------------- Why can't we then think our way to nibbana? Why was there the need in the texts to differentiate between various philosophical views (thinking about things) and actual insight like "feeling is anatta"? How wold you explain the difference between insight and thinking about things? ------------------------------------- How would you distinguish between thinking about mustard and tasting mustard? ------------------------------------ > H: But even at the "paramattha-dhamma level," neither sights > nor sounds nor tastes nor odors etc are actually graspable as separate > entities, but are merely conceived of in such a fashion. pt: Hm, so you mean when the texts are talking about different sense objects (rupas) - they are encouraging us to do what? To think about those things? I mean, you seem to be denying the possibility that panna can actualy experience a rupa and recognise it as having the tilakkhana charteristics. So, in that case, if panna cannot really recognise form (or any of the other aggregates as a distinct dhamma/reality), then what are anicca, anatta and dukkha actually the characteristics of? Are they characteristics of thinking? -------------------------------------- Useful thinking can set us in the right direction and can plant useful mental seeds. It is very important. But it is calming body and mind, and heightening mindfulness and attention, that is transformative, leading to the wisdom that "sees through" and liberates. -------------------------------------- Best wishes pt ========================== With metta, Howard The Unreal and the Real /Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick — this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately./ (From the Phena Sutta) ____________________ /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) #109404 From: Ken O Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of the Present Moment - for Ken O ashkenn2k Dear Sukin > >Suk: You are interested only in talking about the javana cittas. But as >Sarah pointed out, I did mention the javana cittas in my original post, >if only you read further and saw. >It is fine if you want to respond only to those particular questions, >although I think it important that we should also include the vipaka >cittas as well as rupas in our discussion. > KO:?? But your quiz are all vipakas and nothing to do with javanas.? We must understand the different function of each cittas at which stage.? Vipakas and rupas are part of dhamma we should learn and understand as a whole.? I explaining that development of panna only happens in javana.? Even Buddha cannot?have sati of seeing during seeing citta, it? is at javana stage.?? there are only seven cetasiaks in the vipakas,? mindfulness only start at javana and not vipakas.? Satipatthana is not about vipakas, it is in the javana So it is not just?about seeing sees, it is about understanding that seeing sees and seeing does not hear or taste or having an I.? When we are aware of seeing sees, it is already in the javana process.? No way we could be aware of seeing sees at the point of seeing citta because there is no sati cetasikas.??There could be experience of seeing sees during the?arising of seeing citta?but there is no mindfulness at the moment of seeing sees. there are fundamental differences in the way we look at dhamma.? The understanding of anatta, seeing sees and?present moment are?the differences we?look at?dhamma.? By emphasing too much on vipakas and not? about the javanas, transfering these perceptions?towards all dhamma and that?clouded the process of the javanas.? That become the assumption of natural development which has fundamental flaw because it is deterministic, all due taking vipakas to the extreme.? taking the nature of anatta to the extreme.?? Development of dhamma is not about being natural, it about understanding dhamma and changing directions.? If it is natural, then everyone could have been a Buddha.??So it is impossible because it is not natural to be a Buddha, it takes lots of effort, suitable conditions, and arising of panna with chanda.? We cannot change the?nature?of?water but we could change?the way we use water.? We cannot change the result of kamma, but we can change the cause of next?kamma.????We cannot change the anatta of dhamma, but we can change the direction of dhamma through dhammas.? If there is no dhamma for?change, Buddha would not have exhort us to strive. Ken O #109405 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:39 pm Subject: Re: intentional actions. truth_aerator Hello Pt, Sarah, all, > > A: When would akusala arise more often and be more unwholesome, > > as one washes the dishes or does bhavana like Metta or Asubha or >Anapanasati? > >pt: I guess the more unwholesome would be when wrong view arises. An >argument is being made that wrong view is more likely to arise >during purposeful practices like Metta, Asubha, etc, due to the >beginner's lack of understanding what's kusala and what's akusala, >than during other more mundane activities like washing the dishes, >playing piano, etc. 1) A meditator doesn't have to think "*I AM* doing this". It can be done without wrong views and many teachers stress no Self. 2) The kusala gained from metta/asubha/anapanasati bhavana is far greater than from washing dishes. And kusala is helpful. As you've said, one act of kusala (ex: metta) conditions the future one. Washing dishes may make one a better washer but the skill in washing dishes isn't directly transferable for Nibbana. Metta, asubha, anapanasati on other hand is. > > > A: Same could be said about washing dishes. Akusala can arise just as much and it may be even worse than during refined meditations. > > pt: I think others have pointed out several times that wrong view >(so stronger akusala) is more likely to arise while engaging (with >ignorance) in practices believing they lead to awakening. But the Buddha himself often stressed the benefit of Metta, asubha, anapanasati. > > > A: But what is one accomplishing when washing dishes? Any useful >paramis for Nibbana that one can't do just as well (or even better) >when one does Bhavana (metta, asubha, anapanasati)? > > pt: Well, dhammas are conditioned, no? Conditionality doesn't imply changing the circumstances. If you are in a burning building and the flame is near you, would get out? Or don't do anything and hope for conditions to do everything? Wouldn't getting out of the burning building, perhaps jumping in a cold pool, change the feeling and object felt at the body-door? Similar is with development of wholesome qualities. Conditionality doesn't have to reject the possibility effort and intention. Of course all of this is conditioned. > As such, what will be "accomplished" will be determined by what >arises at the time. Sure. If a person is dropped into a lake and cannot swim... Or if the current is too strong... But not every case is like that. >On the other hand, I think you're asking more in terms of whether >washing the dishes can be a better/worse condition for the arising >of kusala, than asubha practice for example. Well, don't suttas recommend certain activities? Does VsM recomend Dhutanga practices? Doesn't it teach dhutanga practices, and many others (like metta, asubha, anapanasati)? Or does VsM state that any surrounding is equally good? Then why did it talk about faults of monastery and ten impediments? As to unfavourable monastery VsM - IV,2 : "Herein, one that is unfavourable has any one of eighteen faults. These are: largeness, newness, dilapidatedness, a nearby road, a pond, [edible] leaves, flowers, fruits, famousness, a nearby city, nearby timber trees, nearby arable fields, presence of incompatible persons, a nearby port of entry, nearness to the border countries, nearness to the frontier of a kingdom, unsuitability, lack of good friends. [119] One with any of these faults is not favourable. He should not live there. " Ten Impediments: VsM III, 29 A dwelling, family, and gain, A class, and building too as fifth, And travel, kin, affliction, books, And supernormal powers: ten." >pt:I think this is a whole another matter whether activities can be >considered as conditions in the first place or not, since they are >not dhammas, are they? If I'm not mistaken, only dhammas can be >conditions. "4. Herein, as to the profitable triad (see Dhs., p.l): all the ascetic practices, that is to say, those of trainers, ordinary men, and men whose cankers have been destroyed, may be either profitable or [in the Arahant's case] indeterminate. [80] No ascetic practice is unprofitable." - VsM II, 78 NO ASCETIC PRACTICE IS UNPROFITABLE AND ALL ARE PROFITABLE (kusala) for non-Arahats. > > > > pt: Meaning that it's very easy to fall into doing a wrong >practice (as >in with wrong view) even though one sincerely believes >he's in fact >doing the right practice and following exactly what >the Buddha was >saying. And if one is not doing anything to condition more kusala, does this means that it will arise and increase in strength and frequency? > pt: I would say both, depending on the conditions. Again, it's a >disputable matter whether an activity can be considered as a >condition in the first place, or not. And what does lets say VsM say for 100s of pages dealing with Ascetic practices, Samadhi, Sila and so on? "4. Herein, as to the profitable triad (see Dhs., p.l): all the ascetic practices, that is to say, those of trainers, ordinary men, and men whose cankers have been destroyed, may be either profitable or [in the Arahant's case] indeterminate. [80] No ascetic practice is unprofitable." - VsM II, 78 >And that's assuming that metta bhavana is actually metta bhavana and >not just deluding oneself. Same could be said about studying books. > > A: You are forgeting such variables as > > INTENSITY of kusala moment and DURATION. Metta pre access concentration and metta AFTER Jhana are of far greater intensity levels. > > pt: Maybe, maybe not. Would the same principle also apply to >akusala arising after jhana? Proper Jhana done within N8P diminishes hindrances, it cannot increase them. By the same argument one can say "don't study Dhamma because it can condition akusala arising after it." One can just as likely use learning information for arguing and akusala qualities... > pt: Why does it matter? Do you want to get to nibbana quicker? That is a wholesome wish. >Whenever I think in those terms, it's lobha that motivates such >thinking, not chanda. Lobha is more like wishing for a million $$$, a BMW, supermodels or whatever. > > > > A: So. Washing dishes, watching TV, etc is right - but doing metta, asubha or anapanasati is wrong? > > pt: There's no need for such comments. It's been repeatedly said >that it's not metta, asubha or anapanasati that are under dispute, >but the beginner's ability to actually engage in these practices in >a wholesome way (without wrong view). It seems to me to be harder to engage in Dhamma while doing such kind of activities. > pt: In my case, such questions are again motivated by lobha that >looks to the future and desires some result in the future. So when an Arahant makes a decision to do something it is done through lobha? Considering that ordinary people have lots of lobha, one might as well try to use it for kusala things rather than for akusala. Craving can be used to eliminate all craving as Ananda told a certain Bhikkhuni. > > A: How can one expect to make progress rather than even regress if kusala arises 100 per 1 kusala moment? > > pt: You've discussed this with Jon before. As I remember, kusala now conditions more kusala in the future, no matter how much akusala happens in between. So, I gather that kusala is never lost. > Akusala ALSO conditions more akusala. And when there are 100x as much akusala for 1 moment of kusala it seems to be 1 step forward, 99 steps back. A regress. Only if one either a) Makes more kusala than akusala or b) The kusala is much greater in strength than lots of weak akusala so forward progress is made. > > A: If one can't suppress 5 hindrances for more than perhaps a second, how can one expect to permanently eradicate them? > > pt: One can suppress hindrances for aeons, but I gather that still >wouldn't help a single bit with eradication. Why can't one study and investigate in a state with suppressed hindrances (lets say access concentration with jhana prior to it)? There are less hindrances to obstruct wisdom there. Also one doesn't need to have hindrances appear now to investigate them. One can reflect on previous ones. It appears to me that one can make the same mistakes while studying and reading the Dhamma as meditating. So all critiques about "your doing it with wrong view" can also be said about pariyatti with wrong views. With metta, Alex #109406 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:50 pm Subject: Re: intentional actions. truth_aerator Hi Pt, Sukin, Sarah, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > One thing I forgot to address: > > > Alex: When would akusala arise more often and be more unwholesome, > as one washes the dishes or does bhavana like Metta or Asubha or Anapanasati? > > > pt: It's interesting to note the difference in definitions as to >what "bhavana" actually is. For example, you (and me to a degree) >often think about bhavana as something that's "done". Sort of like >when one does an activity - practices piano, does the work, does the >dishes, or does metta, asubha, etc. Please don't attack my usage of words. Buddha and Arahants also talked about these things. I don't postulate a Self that can do anything. All I am saying is that actions do occur. > But I think Jon, Sarah and others here use the term "bhavana" for >every occasion when mental development occurs. For example, every >time understanding arises, that moment itself would be bhavana I >guess. Not every moment is equal. Kusala of lets say 1st Jhana is not as strong as kusala of 2nd Jhana. Doing dana & sila can make one reborn in kamaloka, but according to orthodox understanding it itself cannot make one be reborn in rupa or arupa loka. Moment of panna for a worldling vs a Buddha are different in intensity and quality. > I mean, if we have a few moments of metta, with a lot of akusala >moments in between, would the whole thing (the entire sitting >session) count as metta bhavana? The *Quality* should not be forgotten about. 1 strong moment of metta may be stronger than 100 weak ones. Also the effort to abstain from anger becomes accumulated. Again you and many others seem to say that external conditionality (lay life vs bhikkhu state) or (lay life vs retreats) isn't a supportive condition. What does VsM state? There are such things as impediments: A dwelling, family, and gain, A class, and building too as fifth, And travel, kin, affliction, books, And supernormal powers: ten." -VsM III, 29 There are unfavorable monasteries: "Herein, one that is unfavourable has any one of eighteen faults. These are: largeness, newness, dilapidatedness, a nearby road, a pond, [edible] leaves, flowers, fruits, famousness, a nearby city, nearby timber trees, nearby arable fields, presence of incompatible persons, a nearby port of entry, nearness to the border countries, nearness to the frontier of a kingdom, unsuitability, lack of good friends. [119] One with any of these faults is not favourable. He should not live there. " -VsM - IV,2 Metta bhavana IS recomended to be done in physical seclusion. ""A meditator who wants to develop firstly lovingkindness among these, if he is a beginner, should sever the impediments* and learn the meditation subject. Then, when he has done the work connected with the meal and got rid of any dizziness due to it, he should seat himself comfortably on a well-prepared seat in a secluded place." VsM IX,1 If VsM and suttas didn't have such teachings, than I would agree very much with what DSG teaches. But there are simply too many such teachings found in the suttas & commentaries (about physical seclusion, about right and wrong actions, etc). ""[5] And what are the fermentations to be abandoned by avoiding? There is the case where a monk, reflecting appropriately, avoids a wild elephant, a wild horse, a wild bull, a wild dog, a snake, a stump, a bramble patch, a chasm, a cliff, a cesspool, an open sewer. Reflecting appropriately, he avoids sitting in the sorts of unsuitable seats, wandering to the sorts of unsuitable habitats, and associating with the sorts of bad friends that would make his knowledgeable friends in the holy life suspect him of evil conduct. The fermentations, vexation, or fever that would arise if he were not to avoid these things do not arise for him when he avoids them. These are called the fermentations to be abandoned by avoiding." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.than.html With metta, Alex #109407 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana truth_aerator Hello Sukin, all, >Hi Alex, > S: Developing understanding at the level of Pariyatti is not the >same as > reading and memorizing. A few words understood deeply >could be a result of Bahusutta, whereas studying and being able to >recite the full Abhidhamma texts could be the feat of an >uninstructed worldling. So whats the difference between great learning that leads to proper results and great learning that doesn't? > although there is the background understanding of the Dhamma >as the only useful teaching, there is no thought to 'change the >present reality' / 'control'. Same about proper bhavana. > > I mean doesn't unlearned person becomes learned as s/he reads the > > "Abhidhamma in Daily Life", "Survey" and so on? > > > > Doesn't one know more after having read and memorized those wonderful > > books? There you go, changing the reality. > > > > S: Each arising of a citta in a process conditions change in the > accumulations. And there is a difference in this regard between >reading with right understanding and reading with wrong >understanding. And one can do bhavana with right understanding or with wrong understanding. The wrong views may attack both of them. >The intention to read thinking that this activity will > bring about right understanding would be in fact wrong >understanding, and is different from reading with an interest in >and desire to understand what the texts say. And without intention one will not pick up the book from the shelf and will not learn about Anatta, no-control, and so on. But reading about no-control and seeing it with wisdom during practice are of different qualities. > ======= > > > > Suk: All dhammas arise by causes and conditions. > > > > Sure. Swimming is conditioned and one of the conditions is to exert > > effort with hands and feet according to the way one knows in order to > > swim. > > > > S: And in the case of swimming one could do so with fear of >drowning or one could do it out of enjoyment, and in fact there >could be understanding of these and other realities in between. Same about Bhavana. One could do so with fear of Samsara or one could do it out of enjoyment, and in fact there could be understanding of these and other realities in between. > S: Where is "deliberate sitting in order to make metta arise" is >said to be one of the cause? Or in your reasoning, how do you see >the connection between the intention to make metta arise and its >actual arising? We can read VsM First as it comes about a proper surrounding: ""A meditator who wants to develop firstly lovingkindness among these, if he is a beginner, should sever the impediments* and learn the meditation subject. Then, when he has done the work connected with the meal and got rid of any dizziness due to it, he should seat himself comfortably on a well-prepared seat in a secluded place." VsM IX,1 - Just to start. > S: Kusala chanda, adhimokkha, yoniso manasikara, all play their >part at some time. But the question is, how do you know that in fact >this is what is involved when one decides to 'meditate'? This requires lots of discernment that is dealt induvidially by that induvidial. > S: Because the very idea is a denial of the possibility that such > understanding can arise now regardless of the conventional activity > being performed. This is clearly a case of having taken the >particular conventional activity of sitting in a particular posture >etc. as being 'cause' when in fact causes and conditions are between >paramattha dhammas only. This means that you start off with wrong >understanding expecting right understanding to arise, which is wrong >cause for the expected result. Are some activities more helpful than others? There are such things as impediments: A dwelling, family, and gain, A class, and building too as fifth, And travel, kin, affliction, books, And supernormal powers: ten." -VsM III, 29 There are unfavorable monasteries: "Herein, one that is unfavourable has any one of eighteen faults. These are: largeness, newness, dilapidatedness, a nearby road, a pond, [edible] leaves, flowers, fruits, famousness, a nearby city, nearby timber trees, nearby arable fields, presence of incompatible persons, a nearby port of entry, nearness to the border countries, nearness to the frontier of a kingdom, unsuitability, lack of good friends. [119] One with any of these faults is not favourable. He should not live there. " -VsM - IV,2 "4. Herein, as to the profitable triad (see Dhs., p.l): all the ascetic practices, that is to say, those of trainers, ordinary men, and men whose cankers have been destroyed, may be either profitable or [in the Arahant's case] indeterminate. [80] No ascetic practice is unprofitable." - VsM II, 78 NO ASCETIC PRACTICE IS UNPROFITABLE AND ALL ARE PROFITABLE (kusala) for non-Arahats. With metta, Alex #109408 From: Ken O Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: intentional actions. ashkenn2k Dear Alex >Metta bhavana IS recomended to be done in physical seclusion. >""A meditator who wants to develop firstly lovingkindness among these, if he is >a beginner, should sever the impediments* and learn the meditation subject. >Then, when he has done the work connected with the meal and got rid of any >dizziness due to it, he should seat himself comfortably on a well-prepared seat >in a secluded place." >VsM IX,1 KO:? There is no doubt about meditation is also a bhavana.? The question is have you sever the impediments before you practise these meditations.???I felt the assertation that meditations are conventional actions are not properly understand and miscontrue it is?must have a self.? Even listening are conventional actions, so does meditation.? It is not the conventional action that matters, it is the dhamma that develop that matters.? Seating to listen to dhamma is different from seating of having an object as a resort of meditation.? Conventional action does not mean there is a self, that is what I call not understanding how dhamma work.? Buddha never discourage conventional action, if not he will not taught the different meditation methods?and how it help to develop the understanding of dhamma.? though his teachings are different from those ascetics at that time. But I always said to you, do you have necessary pre-requsites.? As I always?said to?you, understanding dhamma first before meditation. Then it would be useful for development.? Concentration is only develop through, strong sila, sati and panna. Ken O #109409 From: Ken O Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? ashkenn2k Dear Howard ? > >> H: Dhammas are thought of as discrete entities with own being and >separate >> existence, and yet consisting of parts and changing. This is something >> conceived of but not observed without thought. That makes them matters >of >> convention. We imagine them as discrete entities with exact starting >and ending >> points, but no aspect of reality is graspable in such a fashion. This is > >> merely a useful mode of thinking, especially for "navigating" at the >more >> gross, worldly level. > >pt: What then, in your opinion, is insight actually? >------------------------------------ >There are stages of insight. They all involve more and more seeing >*through* phenomena, first gross phenomena and later fine phenomena, as >impermanent, unsatisfactory, without substance or self, and, finally, as mere >convention and lacking in reality. There is no reality beyond convention even >to the so-called paramattha dhammas, mere mirages, a magician's smoke & >mirrors. >The major insight moments are the paths and fruits which are >steppings out from the realm of illusion and convention to reality itself, >nibbana. >----------------------------------- ? KO:? It is graspable and visible,? Even insights itself is visible.? If it is not, how do Buddha understand the such characteristics and?explain the characteristics of Nibbana. >------------------------------------- >How would you distinguish between thinking about mustard and tasting >mustard? >------------------------------------ > KO:? tasting and thinking are two different process and experience by different type of cittas.? It can be distinguish. Ken O #109410 From: "lawstu_uk" Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:32 pm Subject: One question -- Citta, Counsciousness, Nama & Rupa and Dependent Origination lawstu_uk Hello all, I read in the survey that Cittas have to depend on rupa to arise. Eg, hearing consciousness depends on rupas (ear sense and sound) to arise (with contact bringing these together) (except birth consciousness?) However, I recently read a bit on dependent origination that ignorance -> volitional formations -> consciousness -> nama & rupa -> six senses -> contact and so on.... Here, it seems to indicate that dependent on consciousness, nama and rupa arise. Dependent on Nama and Rupa, six senses arise. Dependent on six senses, contact arises. Does the consciousness here in Dependent Origination Birth Consciousness? Or all consciousnesses including hearing consciousness and seeing consciousness? And is the volitional formations here in DO the same as that of the five aggregates? (the later as being included as Nama...) I am getting confused by these terms -Cittas, Nama and consciousness... If anyone can explain (Consciousness, nama and cittas) further, in regard to Dependent Origination and also in regard to the Survey 'Cittas depend on rupa to arise', I'd appreciate it. My knowledge of Dhamma and Abhidhamma is very limited, so please bear with my ignorance. I intend to read Nina's Conditions after Survey.. But I am very interested to know these briefly. Many thanks. Andrew #109411 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:33 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: intentional actions. truth_aerator Dear KenO, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Alex > > >Metta bhavana IS recomended to be done in physical seclusion. > >""A meditator who wants to develop firstly lovingkindness among these, if he is > > >a beginner, should sever the impediments* and learn the meditation subject. > >Then, when he has done the work connected with the meal and got rid of any > >dizziness due to it, he should seat himself comfortably on a well-prepared seat > > >in a secluded place." > >VsM IX,1 > > KO:? There is no doubt about meditation is also a bhavana.? The >question is have you sever the impediments before you practise these >meditations.? While in the perfect world it would be more beneficial to severe them, conditions don't always allow it, yet. So I guess what is good is to do the best the conditions allow. This doesn't mean that one avoids doing the best, it is just that "man proposes, conditions disposes." Even imperfect bhavana is VERY Kusala. >I felt the assertation that meditations are conventional actions. So is grabbing an Abhidhamma book of the shelf... >are not properly understand and miscontrue it is?must have a self.? >Even listening are conventional actions, so does meditation.? It is >not the conventional action that matters, it is the dhamma that >develop that matters.? Seating to listen to >dhamma is different from seating of having an object as a resort of >meditation.? I agree that it is WISDOM that ultimately finishes the job. However the trick is plant the conditions for it. What are things required for it, what are obstructions for it? While of course "concentration in and of itself" doesn't increase wisdom I nowhere approve this concentration. Concentration removes the hindrances and allows wisdom to shine through, it also gives useful skills for wisdom to use and useful things to reflect on. > > Conventional action does not mean there is a self, that is what I call not > understanding how dhamma work.? Buddha never discourage conventional action, if > not he will not taught the different meditation methods?and how it help to > develop the understanding of dhamma.? though his teachings are different from > those ascetics at that time. > > But I always said to you, do you have necessary pre-requsites.? As >I always?said to?you, understanding dhamma first before meditation. >Then it would be useful for development. If one doesn't have the perfect environment (and can't yet get to it) it doesn't mean that one should wait for better times. "Do the best with what you have" as the saying goes. Again: If one cannot suppress hindrances for a short time, what makes you think you can permanently root them out? Which is easier to do? To suppress them for one hour or cut them out permanently? Before doing the latter, one has to be able to do the former. Before you can run you need to be able to stand. It is true that Understanding is more advanced than concentration, but to build the 2nd floor, one needs the first floor to be built and well set. A quickly built 2nd floor without well made 1st floor can quickly go up, but it will also quickly go down. Without sila and samadhi, "panna" is just book knowledge with 0% usefulness. Only if panna has something (sila and samadhi) to show for it, only then it is not just book knowledge but actual wisdom. I consider sila to be a sort of wisdom as well. One needs to know what is kusala what is akusala and act in a proper way despite irrational urges. Same with samadhi. Is one wise in regards to the hindrances and really understand their drawbacks? Does on have enough faith in Buddha's teaching to counteract them? If one is wise, fulfills sila, then one will have no problem setting them aside and reach at least some "samatha". With metta, Alex #109412 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:55 pm Subject: Re: One question -- Citta, Counsciousness, Nama & Rupa and Dependent Origination truth_aerator Hello Andrew, all, > I read in the survey that Cittas have to depend on rupa to arise. >Eg, hearing consciousness depends on rupas (ear sense and sound) to >arise (with contact bringing these together) (except birth >consciousness?) > > However, I recently read a bit on dependent origination that >ignorance -> volitional formations -> consciousness -> nama & rupa >-> six senses -> contact and so on.... > > Here, it seems to indicate that dependent on consciousness, nama and rupa arise. Dependent on Nama and Rupa, six senses arise. Dependent on six senses, contact arises. > > Does the consciousness here in Dependent Origination Birth >Consciousness? Or all consciousnesses including hearing >consciousness and seeing consciousness? In the context of D.O. consciousness is of 6 kinds: 58...There are these six classes of consciousness: eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, mind-consciousness. With the arising of formations there is the arising of consciousness. With the cessation of formations there is the cessation of consciousness. : http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.009.ntbb.html So in context of DO: sankhara->consciousness In the context of 5 aggregates: name&form->consciousness "Name-&-form is the cause, name-&-form the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of consciousness." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.109.than.html Dependent on the eye & forms there arises consciousness at the eye. Dependent on the ear & sounds there arises consciousness at the ear. Dependent on the nose & aromas there arises consciousness at the nose. Dependent on the tongue & flavors there arises consciousness at the tongue. Dependent on the body & tactile sensations there arises consciousness at the body. Dependent on the intellect & ideas there arises consciousness at the intellect. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.148.than.html My personal opinion: In one context it talks about consciousness as kammic result of avijja. In the 2nd and 3rd context consciousness as resultant of bare process. Or perhaps all these proximate conditions are valid and can be causes. Conditionality is complex, interdependent and with many feedback loops. With metta, Alex #109413 From: "bhikkhu3" Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 10:48 pm Subject: The Uncreated! bhikkhu5 Friends: Nibbâna is the Highest Happiness, & Peace!!! The Buddha once said about Nibba-na: The Uncreated Dimension: That, truly, is peace, this is the absolute supreme, namely, the end of every kammic formation, the final stilling of all mental construction, the letting go and leaving behind of any substrate for rebirth and all fuel for becoming, the fading away of all craving, & the relinquishing of all forms of clinging, silencing, stilling, ceasing, Nibba-na.... AN 3:32 Enraptured, ensnared and obsessed with greed, lust, urge & desire, enraged with hate, fuming with anger, stirred by ill will & irritation, blinded by ignorance, agitated by confusion, and fooled by delusion, overwhelmed, with mind entangled, one aims at own ruin, at the ruin of others, at the ruin of both, & one experiences frustration & pain! But if lust, hate, and ignorance are eliminated, one aims neither at own ruin, nor at the ruin of others, nor at the ruin of both, and one experiences neither mental frustration, nor any pain, nor any grief! Thus is Nibba-na immediate, visible in this life, inviting, captivating, fascinating & comprehensible to any intelligent & wise being. AN 3:55 The elimination of all Greed, the stilling of all Hate, the eradication of all Confusion: This quenching, indeed, is the true Nibba-na. SN 38:1 FREED For him, who has completed this journey. For him, who is untouched by any pain or sorrow. For him, who is in every-way wholly freed. For him, who has broken all chains. For such one, no Suffering is ever Possible! Dhammapada 90 Background Story <....> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Sama-hita _/\_ * .... #109414 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 11:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Sukin - > > In a message dated 8/21/2010 8:54:31 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > sukinder@... writes: > > Suk: I said 'usually' and not 'always'. > The point of the Dhamma is to understand whatever realities that appear > and know that they do so already. It is not about trying to change the > present reality or follow some projected good. A more conventional way > of saying this, is that the Dhamma is for the purpose of coming to > understand "who we are" and not "what we want to be". > ============================= > Coming to understand something is a changing of present reality, and > intending to do so and studying Abhidhamma has as much sense of self > involved in it as anything else. > Hi Howard, I don't know why you would want to dispute Sukin's statement. It was clear, in accordance with the Abhidhamma, and potentially helpful to Alex. So why dispute it? Your concept of "changing reality" may be valid in the conventionally understood world. However, Sukin was referring to the satipatthana-understood world. There is no changing of reality there. When the present reality has fallen away, it will be replaced by another one. But that is a matter of two separate realities at two separate times, not one reality changing into another. Ken H #109415 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 11:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana truth_aerator Hello KenH, All, > Your concept of "changing reality" may be valid in the >conventionally >understood world. However, Sukin was referring to >the satipatthana - >understood world. There is no changing of >reality there. When lets say citta with panna arises, doesn't it change the reality in some way? Doesn't it condition more panna (as opposed to moha) to arise later on? > When the present reality has fallen away, it will be replaced by >another one. Is time concept or reality? Is reality (as in present reality) concept or reality? >But that is a matter of two separate realities at two >separate >times, not one reality changing into another. KenH, are there such thing as "two separate realities"? Does time really exist on paramattha level? With metta, Alex #109416 From: Kevin F Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:02 am Subject: Right Concentration and Samadhi farrellkevin80 Hi all, Many times it is mentioned that meditation is usually undertaken with wrong concentration. This still leaves the interpretation that it can be endeavored upon with Right Concentration. Can people please explain what this is like for meditators and bhikkhus and describe how you understand it? For example, do bhikkhus who have Right Understanding while meditating still go through the body parts in order, doing the first tetrad first in order and then in reverse before moving on to the other tetrads like is mentioned in the Visuddhimagga, etc.? I would like to come to understand the views on meditation from "DSGer's" better. Thank you, With metta, Kevin ___________ #109417 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:21 am Subject: Intentional action of Kusala vs Akusala. Panna vs Moha truth_aerator Hi Sukin, KenH, all, If any kind of intentional act is wrong, than what about intention for kusala vs intention for akusala? Kusala is an intentional action and so is akusala. Isn't kusala more preferable than akusala citta? Shouldn't there be intention for more kusala as opposed to akusala? Doesn't citta with panna cetasika change reality in a different way than cittta with moha cetasika? Isn't citta with panna more preferable than citta with moha? Shouldn't there be choice and intention for more panna as opposed moha? Isn't an intentional decision to stop trying to produce more panna and more kusala itself akusala? "'I am the owner of my actions (kamma), heir to my actions, born of my actions, related through my actions, and have my actions as my arbitrator. Whatever I do, for good or for evil, to that will I fall heir'... http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.057.than.html With metta, Alex #109418 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:22 am Subject: Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi chandrafabian Dear Kevin and all, There are several interpretations on what we called wrong Samadhi. I believe the statement "we start with wrong concentration" is because we can not achieve Jhana at the beginning. In Mahasatipatthana Sutta mention about the right concentration is Jhana. Therefore they think other than Jhana is not right concentration, some people think right concentration must achieve Jhana, if no Jhana is wrong. But this statement is seems quite contradictory with other statement in the Sutta. Sutta mention 40 meditation objects, not all of them have Jhana as the highest achievement, some objects only ended up at access- concentration only. So? does this means among 40 meditation objects included some wrong meditation objects simply because it can not take us to Jhana? So? what's wrong? In Mahasatipatthana Sutta it doesn't say right concentration must be Jhana. The actual word is: "THERE IS THE CASE where monk......." So definitely doesn't say must be or any other statement saying Jhana as absolute necessity. So Mahasatipatthana is still not contradictory to other part of Tipitaka. Therefore in my opinion as far as we practice according to the Noble Eightfold Path, we are practicing right concentration regardless Jhana or not Jhana. Mettacittena, fabian #109419 From: Kevin F Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi farrellkevin80 Hi Chandra Fabian, ChandraFabian: There are several interpretations on what we called wrong Samadhi. I believe the statement "we start with wrong concentration" is because we can not achieve Jhana at the beginning. In Mahasatipatthana Sutta mention about the right concentration is Jhana. Therefore they think other than Jhana is not right concentration, some people think right concentration must achieve Jhana, if no Jhana is wrong. But this statement is seems quite contradictory with other statement in the Sutta. Sutta mention 40 meditation objects, not all of them have Jhana as the highest achievement, some objects only ended up at access- concentration only. So? does this means among 40 meditation objects included some wrong meditation objects simply because it can not take us to Jhana? So? what's wrong? In Mahasatipatthana Sutta it doesn't say right concentration must be Jhana. The actual word is: "THERE IS THE CASE where monk......." So definitely doesn't say must be or any other statement saying Jhana as absolute necessity. So Mahasatipatthana is still not contradictory to other part of Tipitaka. Therefore in my opinion as far as we practice according to the Noble Eightfold Path, we are practicing right concentration regardless Jhana or not Jhana. Kevin: Great reply. I think jhana is right concentration as well as access, as well as any citta that has Right Concentration. However, I want to get to the heart of as to why many DSGer's feel that most people cannot meditate without having only wrong concentration. I think that is a load of gabugala. Kevin ___________ #109420 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:35 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi truth_aerator Dear Kevin, all, > > Kevin: However, I want to get to the heart of as to why many >DSGer's feel that most people cannot meditate without > having only wrong concentration. I think that is a load of gabugala. Because they lump all kinds of intention and effort as wrong effort. IMHO right effort (and many other path factors) are a skill and as any skill it is not all-or-nothing. One doesn't go from totally ignorant to totally wise without an interval in between. That is why the path is gradual and there are 4 maggaphalas rather than one. noble truth of stress is to be comprehended 'noble truth of the origination of stress is to be abandoned' 'noble truth of the cessation of stress is to be directly experienced' noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress is to be developed http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.011.than.html IMHO wisdom is a personal skill at comprehending what is dukkha, abandoning its origin, experiencing its cessation and developing the path leading to its cessation. Skill like all skills, is gained through repeated application, trial-and-error and development. Since any moment of citta already has intention, one can't be without intentional action, so one might as well intend for more kusala rather than akusala. Even if one keeps failing, the effort at resisting akusala and intending for kusala will condition good appropriate results later on. Since only the present moment exist, all development has to happen in the present. One can't postpone development or samadhi "sometime later on when conditions are right". a) Because "later" never arrives. Every moment it will be "later" b) In order for something to be developed, it needs to be developed. I consider the path factors to be a skill. One must learn to recognize kusala for kusala and akusala for akusala. One must know how to function with panna as opposed to moha. I really disagree with Mahayanist teaching of "the path is the goal" or "practicing without any expectations or goals". Nothing could further be from the truth. A simile: Buddha compares Nibbana as far shore while samsara is this shore and the sea is in between. In order to stand on the other shore one must cross it with a use of a raft. Swimming is different from standing on the other shore, but without swimming one will simply not get there! Furthermore one should NOT abandon the raft until one actually crosses the sea. This is another wrong teaching found (in Diamond sutra if I am right) that one needs to abandon the raft even prior to crossing the sea. This is a sure recipe for drowning or never making it. As for "goal less practice, practice without set destination" it seems like a path to nowhere. Without a clear direction one might never make it toward the other shore and instead swim into an ocean, get lost in middle of nowhere and be eaten by the nearest shark. So effort must be done, but it must be proper effort. Proper effort is a skill that doesn't become perfect in one moment. That is why there are different levels of it and why there are many intermediate stages. If one avoids putting in kusala effort, then there will not be any accumulations for kusala effort. Simple as that. Perfect skill doesn't appear out of nowhere and it isn't perfect from the get-go. Just like you cannot run before you can walk, same is here. To refuse doing "XYZ because one doesn't have proper accumulations for it" will never by itself create the need accumulations for XYZ. IMHO. With metta, Alex #109421 From: Sukinderpal Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of the Present Moment - for Ken O sukinderpal Hi Ken O, This is from my original post: == 2a- When anger arises to experience and object now, this is conditioned already. 2b- Being conditioned already, this is its nature and nothing can be done to alter this. 2c- This is what it means to be 'beyond control'. == 3a- Seeing arises and falls away followed by Receiving consciousness, Investigating consciousness and the rest of the cittas in the process. All these do so by conditions beyond control. 3b- Highlighting Determining consciousness in this process, this too is conditioned and beyond control. 3c- The Javana cittas that follow is also likewise conditioned and beyond control. == 4- In the mind door process beginning with the adverting consciousness, all the cittas involved are conditioned and beyond control. == 5a- When anger for example arises, it falls away instantly. 5b- Whether this is followed by more instances of anger or some other kind of citta, each and every one of these are conditioned and fall away instantly. 5c- Whether they constitute cittas arising in a process or process-freed, with reference to the conditioned nature of any instance of citta, they are conditioned already and beyond control. == 6a- Anger normally arises followed by more and more anger, however there can be sati of one level or the other arise at any time which would then make a difference to this normal pattern. 6b- This sati is as in the case of the anger, arises by conditions and is beyond control. 6c- Say, this was of the level of satipatthana, this wouldn't arise if there were no accumulations for it, as it is the case with the anger itself. 6d- Anger and Satipatthana are of the same nature in this regard, namely arising by conditions which include past accumulations, and being beyond control. == 7a- Seeing experiences visible object, and this is present, otherwise it wouldn't happen. 7b- Aversion arises to experience an object and this is either nama, rupa or concept. 7c- The object here again, is present else it would be meaningless to say there is aversion towards something. 7d- When there is aversion to colour at the sense door process, the rupa has not fallen away. 7e- If aversion to colour arise at the mind-door process, this rupa would be a photocopy, so to speak. 7f- If aversion arises towards a nama object, this must necessarily be one which has just fallen away. == 8a- When there is satipatthana, the object is either a nama or a rupa. 8b- As in the case of aversion above in 7d, 7e and 7f, the same principle applies to satipatthana. == 9a- In making a statement about the present moment, this necessarily is about what is just past. 9a- If about the object, it has already fallen away beyond control. 9b- If about the experience itself, this too has already fallen away beyond control. ==== Are not most of the above reference to javana cittas? Metta, Sukinder On 8/22/2010 10:12 PM, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Sukin > > > > >Suk: You are interested only in talking about the javana cittas. But as > >Sarah pointed out, I did mention the javana cittas in my original post, > >if only you read further and saw. > >It is fine if you want to respond only to those particular questions, > >although I think it important that we should also include the vipaka > >cittas as well as rupas in our discussion. > > > > KO: But your quiz are all vipakas and nothing to do with javanas. > We must > understand the different function of each cittas at which stage. > Vipakas and > rupas are part of dhamma we should learn and understand as a whole. I > explaining that development of panna only happens in javana. Even Buddha > cannot have sati of seeing during seeing citta, it is at javana > stage. there > are only seven cetasiaks in the vipakas, mindfulness only start at > javana and > not vipakas. Satipatthana is not about vipakas, it is in the javana > #109422 From: Sukinderpal Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana sukinderpal Hi Howard, > > Suk: I said 'usually' and not 'always'. > > The point of the Dhamma is to understand whatever realities that appear > > and know that they do so already. It is not about trying to change the > > present reality or follow some projected good. A more conventional way > > of saying this, is that the Dhamma is for the purpose of coming to > > understand "who we are" and not "what we want to be". > > ============================= > > Coming to understand something is a changing of present reality, and > > intending to do so and studying Abhidhamma has as much sense of self > > involved in it as anything else. > > > > S: The change of accumulations happens with each citta in a process > arising > and falling away. > With regard to intention, it arises with all cittas. So it depends on > the accompanying cetasikas, particularly the roots, whether this is > right or wrong. > > ============================= > H: I fail to see how what you wrote answers my objection. You say that > the point of the Dhamma is not about trying to change the present > reality or > follow some projected good. Well, of course, what is present is already > here, and that is a done deed. The point is to create conditions that > will > help set a good future course and, indeed, to bring about a projected > good. > Suk: I may not have understood exactly your point. But I was addressing not only the nature of 'change' due to the arising and falling away of the citta, but also that of intention. You had said that "studying Abhidhamma has as much sense of self involved in it as anything else" and so I thought to point out the fact of intention being conditioned and its ethical value being determined by the accompanying cetasikas, particularly the roots. But the important thing is that no matter what this is, it has arisen and already fallen away. You say: "The point is to create conditions that will help set a good future course and, indeed, to bring about a projected good". Is this a reference to the citta which has already been conditioned to arise and fallen away or are you encouraging some particular attitude with regard to future arising of cittas. If it is the former, although the best is the understanding of it as such, one should not takes this to mean that kusala of all kinds is being disregarded. In other words, kusala is kusala to be encouraged and akusala is not, but the understanding of these as being conditioned and beyond control is the the most valuable of all. And the important thing is that this very understanding is in more than one way, a cause for future good. The thought about future good and 'doing' something now, in order to achieve this is however different. It does not point to understanding the present moment but rather a case of focus on some idea(l). This can't lead anywhere as it is neither Dana, Sila, the development of kusala of the level of Samatha nor is it Right Understanding of a presently arisen dhamma. ==== > > The Buddha urged us to do no evil, do good, and cultivate the mind. > Without > this, we might as well all become entirely secular. > Suk: We know about kusala dhammas because there *are*. We know to distinguish between kusala and akusala seeing the value in one and harm in the other, because they *are*. Each of these accumulate and lead to more of the same because this *is their nature*. So sure the Buddha would point this out to us. However being the Buddha, he also pointed out that which only Buddhas ever can, namely that any and all of these realities are conditioned and have the characteristic of anicca, dukkha and anatta. So I would say to you, if we forget this last part, we might as well be following other teachers. ;-) ==== > My point was that sense of self arises all the time with regard to all > sorts of matters. In particular, 1) coming to understand something IS a > changing of reality, 2) intending to come to understand something, > including > the Dhamma, is trying to change things, 3) intending to attain such > understanding virtually always is tainted by a sense of self, and 4) > studying the > Abhidhamma (and suttas and commentaries and vinaya) has as much sense of > self involved in it as anything else. > Suk: We've all accumulated much wrong view and so we should not expect that this won't arise at one time or the other. However, if we take it that self view arises all the time, then in effect we are saying that there is no way that any development of understanding can ever take place. It of course does not, and indeed right understanding must arise from time to time if any saddha is to grow stronger. In the above I agree with no. 1 if taken to be reference to the accumulations and not something else, although your use of 'reality' here would appear quite odd and out of place. In the case of no. 2, what you are actually saying is that any action through body, speech or mind amounts to an attempt to change reality. But let us consider this: If the objective is to read and understand the concepts expressed in some text, this imo does not necessarily mean trying to change the present reality, unless perhaps if it is accompanied by such thoughts as 'in order to increase understanding' or 'so that ignorance be reduced'. Indeed if it is the Dhamma which is the object of interest and one has some level of right understanding about that which it points to, 'no control' would become apparent and detachment may well be the motivating factor. The act of reading is a conventional activity and can be understood as such, and this be distinguished from the realities involved from moment to moment. One does not make an assumption about any of these realities, knowing that they are known only if and when panna is conditioned to arise. But the Dhamma is the one cure for attachment and we should take care not to suspect the interest in this as also being of this same disease. In the case of no. 3, this is what I was trying to address in my last response, namely that intention arises with all cittas and what needs to be considered is the accompanying cetasikas and roots. In the case of no. 4, the response I've given so far should help answer. ==== > Yes, sometimes the mind state is relatively free of sense of self, but > that is rare. > Suk: So you are saying that self view though latent, does not arise all the time. I'd have no problem with this if only the general sentiment didn't involve an attempt to justify engaging in some purposeful activity, such as meditation or guarding the senses, knowing that self view is there. ==== > > Far more often in fact, that is not the case, and there mind > being tainted by sense of self is the case whether one is sitting down to > read or discuss Abhidhamma no less than when one sits down to meditate. > Study is carried out sue to desire. > Suk: I of course do not see 'meditation' as being at anytime necessitated, unless one is developing Jhana. Hearing, reading and discussing the Dhamma on the other hand is a natural outcome of an interest in the the Dhamma got from any level of right understanding, and in fact can't be done without, especially given that one is only a beginner. Besides even the Arahats listened attentively to the Buddha and the texts talk about listening to the Dhamma as being necessary for lesser Ariyans in order that they might reach higher stages. Desire inevitably arises for all of us. But is it your perception that those of us who speak against the idea of meditation go on to encourage hearing etc. in the same way as meditators do with regard to the idea of meditation? Do you not see a difference between the two, one being associated with the idea of anatta and 'no control' and the other seem to continuously ignore this? ==== > > We are all beset by sense of self more so > rather than less so, and nearly all the time. DSG Abhidhamikas are not > selfless, Sukin. > Suk: Self view will arise as long as it has not been eradicated, more so when there is little or no understanding of the Dhamma. However, when stating with regard to the Dhamma, in particular what the Path / practice is and what is not, let us take care not to allow 'self view' to influence our judgments here. Because otherwise we end up turning the only cure to the disease into the disease itself. ;-) Metta, Sukinder #109423 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:33 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? jonoabb Hi pt (and KenH) (109347) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi Jon and KenH, > ... > > J: For what it's worth my understanding is as follows: > > - A cetasika experiences the same object as the citta it accompanies; thus the object of panna is the dhamma that is the object of the citta > > - What panna knows is the characteristic of the dhamma presently being experienced. > > pt: Hm, you mean panna knows the characteristic of the dhamma (that has just fallen away) by way of navattabba, right? > =============== J: Yes, I suppose that would be a more precise description of what I mean. > =============== > > J: As to whether a dhamma can be regarded as being anything more than it's characteristics, I'm not sure how or why this particular question arises. Do you see it has having any practical significance? > > pt: Perhaps KenH can clarify there - I think he mentioned that dhamma is not exactly the same as its characteristics, and he based that opinion on something you've said some time ago, hence I was curious to know what your opinion exactly was. ... > =============== J: OK, KenH has since clarified. > =============== > But yes, I think for practical purposes, panna knows the characteristics, not something more extra, so in my book "dhamma" is the same as the experience of the characteristic(s). > =============== J: Yes, that's how I see it too. Jon PS The new recording set-up seems to be working well. Many thanks for your input and support. I was able to source a splitter and 2 RCA-to-mini-jack adaptors in HK on the way here. Next step is to try the editing side of things. #109424 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 11:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 8/22/2010 7:41:48 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Sukin - > > In a message dated 8/21/2010 8:54:31 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > sukinder@... writes: > > Suk: I said 'usually' and not 'always'. > The point of the Dhamma is to understand whatever realities that appear > and know that they do so already. It is not about trying to change the > present reality or follow some projected good. A more conventional way > of saying this, is that the Dhamma is for the purpose of coming to > understand "who we are" and not "what we want to be". > ============================= > Coming to understand something is a changing of present reality, and > intending to do so and studying Abhidhamma has as much sense of self > involved in it as anything else. > Hi Howard, I don't know why you would want to dispute Sukin's statement. It was clear, in accordance with the Abhidhamma, and potentially helpful to Alex. So why dispute it? ---------------------------------------------- I said what I said for the reasons I stated. I disputed Sukin's statement, because I disagreed with it. And why would you think I would refrain to disagree because his statement might be helpful to Alex? I'm not interested in taking sides, but in the truth. There is no competition between "camps" that I have any interest in. As an aside, BTW, Alex and I are often taking opposite positions on certain matters, mostly on another list, it happens. But that is also irrelevant. -------------------------------------------- Your concept of "changing reality" may be valid in the conventionally understood world. However, Sukin was referring to the satipatthana-understood world. There is no changing of reality there. ------------------------------------------- I am satisfied with the suttas, and I see plenty of change there. BTW, the commentaries speak of change also: arising, changing while standing, and ceasing. (What's that saying about hanging on one's own petard, Ken? ;-) -------------------------------------------- When the present reality has fallen away, it will be replaced by another one. ----------------------------------------- I don't subscribe to khanavada, Ken. It isn't taught in the suttas, either. ----------------------------------------- But that is a matter of two separate realities at two separate times, not one reality changing into another. ------------------------------------------- I don't subscribe to any realities other than nibbana, either. And neither did the Buddha so far as the suttas are concerned. ------------------------------------------ Ken H =============================== With metta, Howard /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) #109425 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:36 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? jonoabb Hi KenH (and pt) (109349) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Jon and pt, > ... > On previous occasions when we have discussed samatha, you and others have explained that the panna that arises with samatha is the type of panna that knows kusala from akusala. That sounds right to me, but the object of samatha is usually a concept, isn't it? And concepts are neither kusala nor akusala. > > I have my own ideas on how this can be so. I have discussed them with Howard on occasions (and also with pt if I remember correctly). But what is the official explanation? What, if anything, does samatha-panna know about the object of samatha? > =============== J: To my understanding, the panna that knows kusala from akusala would arise not with the citta that has the kammatthana as its object but with a succeeding citta which has that citta as its object. For example: - first, citta with metta (kusala citta), - then, citta with panna that knows the kusala nature of the citta with metta. > =============== > Pt, I presume that KenH's opinion would probably have to do with the navattabba business > ------------------------- > > No, pt, my opinion was based on my own uncertain understanding of the term "characteristic". Does it cover everything that a dhamma is? Is it an all-embracing term, or can a dhamma have characteristics *and* other features as well? > > We know that a dhamma performs its own specific functions, and has its own manifestations etc. Is all of that sort of thing - everything that makes one dhamma different from another - explained by its characteristics? > > (I have asked these questions before and received in-depth explanations. But now I have completely forgotten. Sorry!) > =============== J: To my understanding, a dhamma's function and manifestation are not things that are *borne* by the dhamma. So they are not part of what 'makes up' a dhamma. Jon #109426 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:55 am Subject: Re: Rite and Ritual/KenH jonoabb Hi RobEp Another of your trademark robust retorts ;-)) (109382) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "epsteinrob" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > > Another view might be this: Dhammas are not observable except by panna that accompanies a moment of awareness/insight; awareness/insight occurs when accumulated (i.e., previously developed) awareness/insight is conditioned to (re-)arise; the conditions for such (re-)arising include hearing and appropriately reflecting on the way things are as taught by the Buddha; any (re-)arising of awareness/insight will occur at a time and with an object not of one's choosing. > > One doesn't necessarily choose the object or try to control the arising of insight. > =============== J: The crux of the second view is the assertion that dhammas are not capable of being observed in the manner suggested by the first view, that dhammas are 'invisible' except to panna of the level of satipatthana/insight. If this is correct, then any idea of attending to presently arising dhammas (regardless of any idea of selecting or otherwise controlling) would be misconceived. The correctness or otherwise of this view can only be assessed by reference to the teachings, not by personal experience, since it may well seem to be the case that attending to dhammas brings about an understanding of dhammas and their characteristics. > =============== I have never understood why reading, studying and contemplating dhamma seems immune form self-view, but bhavana as practice seems automatically fraught with self-view. The two views do not accord in my opinion. Either everything is subject to self-view and ruined before you start, or there is possibility of using all these occasions to develop insight. > =============== J: I've never said that reading, studying or contemplating dhamma is immune from self-view. My understanding is that *any* activity undertaken with the idea that it is creating conditions for the arising of awareness/insight, and undertaken for purpose of conditioning awareness/insight to arise, would be wrong practice. > =============== > Well I don't see it as black and white as you do. I don't think that it is one or the other. I think that insight can arise anytime, but it is more likely to accumulate thorugh activities that are Dhamma-related, such as studying sutta, contemplating dhammas, or creating a state that is conducive to clear observation in meditation. I don't see the contradiction as you may. > =============== J: To my understanding, there is no activity of which it can be said that the undertaking of the activity makes the arising of awareness/insight more likely. > =============== > > ...since the object of attention will not be dhammas but will be the practitioner's concept of what dhammas are. > > I don't agree with this and think this is one of the great presuppositions you have present here, without examining it. You assume that somehow the intention to meditate and inquire into the moment with mindful awareness is going to create concepts of dhammas in a way that sutta, Abhidhamma and talking to like-minded Dhamma friends will not. > =============== J: This gets back to the main point of whether dhammas are observable by choice. If they are not, then the object of any practice based on the supposition that they are will be a (mistaken) concept of dhammas. Of course, people who do not follow a set practice but have an interest in gaining a better intellectual understanding of the teachings can also have a wrong concept of dhammas (nobody is immune from wrong view ;-)). But they are not undertaking a practice that reinforces that wrong view. > =============== I don't see the distinction, and no one has ever adequately explained why you may feel that way. It simply doesn't add up. One is just as likely to have concepts as object reading an Abhidhamma commentary as one is when sitting and practicing mindfulness. They are both human activities with the intention to learn, focus, understand, and awaken. > =============== J: It 's not a question of one activity versus another. It's a question of coming to a better intellectual understanding of the teachings versus undertaking a practice based on one's less-than-perfect understanding of the teachings. > =============== The faith one has is that through sincere effort such concepts will eventually be seen through, not that whatever akusala is there will breed more akusala eternally, and that the qualities of sati, vipassasna, and panna have no way to break through, even in such a sincere effort. > =============== J: To paraphrase, the path to continued existence is paved with sincere (but mis-placed) effort ;-)) > =============== > Well I disagree. I think you can do something that has a functional relationship to the path, and it will develop whether you have a few obstacles in the way or not. And I also think that the "set practice" of reading commentaries every day, or exchanging information on this list, can be equally ritualistic to sitting in meditation, in fact I am sure it often is. I ask again: what on earth is the difference? > =============== J: We go through this one every time ;-)). Yes, a set practice of, say, reading (or chanting or memorising) the commentaries every day, to the extent undertaken with the idea that that practice would condition the arising of panna, would also constitute a rite and ritual within the meaning we are now discussing. Jon #109427 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body jonoabb Hi KenO (109372) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Jon > > >J: I do not read the Vism as laying down a practice of recitation in order to > >assist the development of insight. I read it as describing an activity on the > >part of monks who are developing samatha to high degree (that is to say, samatha > > > >as well as insight). > > > > KO: Dhammas arise with any objects. > =============== J: Sorry, but I'm missing your point here. > =============== there is a need for concepts and > conventional activities, without them, one cannot understand dhamma. Are you > telling me those monks in the Buddha can listen the words of dhamma without > listening and understanding the words :-) which are concepts and conventionals > activities. > =============== J: Yes, concepts are a fact of life. No argument from me on this. > =============== > I just find amusing that you cannot get over that it is not the concept that > matters, it is the dhamma that arise with the concepts that matters. > =============== J: I'm not sure what you mean by "dhammas that arise with concepts". This is not an expression that is found in the texts. The Buddha taught about dhammas, not about "dhammas that arise with concepts". As I said at the outset of this thread, in the suttas references to the characteristics of anicca, dukkha, anattaa invariably appear in the context of dhammas (not concepts). > =============== > things and methods that are said in the vism are meant for people who wish to > develop insight. I dont have an issue with this, I think you cannot even > disclaim in any commentaries or any suttas that reciting is wrong or not a > method :-). your claim it is an activity not a method is base on your > preferences and thinking. The suttas, Abhidhamma texts and commentaries are > very clear they are methods and practise. > =============== J: I'd be interested to know what Sutta and Abhidhamma passages you have in mind as supporting the idea that activities such as recitation are "methods and practice". > =============== > Meditation is a practise and not a activity. Wake up in the morning, pay > respects are part of a ritual. any wrong in this :-) Do all ritual are wrong > or only those that arise with aksuala. > =============== J: Kusala can be interspersed with wrong view; the kusala is still kusala, and the wrong view is still akusala. Jon #109428 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 7:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body jonoabb Hi Kevin (109394) > Kevin: The Commentary explains that samattha should be developed in certain > ways. One of those ways is by "going past or beyond the concept". When I read > this I first thought it was talking about satipatthana. But in the section on > Repulsiviness meditation with the body parts, it clearly says that the above > part means going beyond just the concept of whatever body part you are > meditating on and seeing the concept of repulsiveness, instead of just the body > part. =============== J: Many thanks for this. If you have a reference to the passage, I'd be interested to read it. Do you have a view on the recitation question raised by KenO? Jon #109429 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] One question -- Citta, Counsciousness, Nama & Rupa and Dependent Origination sarahprocter... Dear Andrew, Good qus as usual - --- On Mon, 23/8/10, lawstu_uk wrote: >I read in the survey that Cittas have to depend on rupa to arise. Eg, hearing consciousness depends on rupas (ear sense and sound) to arise (with contact bringing these together) (except birth consciousness?) ... S: Birth consciousness is a bhavanga citta, a vipaka citta. All cittas in this sense realm other than the five kinds of sense consciousness (seeing etc), depend on the rupa heart-base for arising. Contact is phassa cetasika and this mental factor arises with all cittas, including birth consciousness and other kinds of bhavanga citta. It's not a rupa. .... >However, I recently read a bit on dependent origination that ignorance -> volitional formations -> consciousness -> nama & rupa -> six senses -> contact and so on.... >Here, it seems to indicate that dependent on consciousness, nama and rupa arise. Dependent on Nama and Rupa, six senses arise. Dependent on six senses, contact arises. >Does the consciousness here in Dependent Origination Birth Consciousness? Or all consciousnesses including hearing consciousness and seeing consciousness? .... S: In the context of D.O., the consciousness refers to birth consciousness and all subsequent vipaka cittas. These included hearing and seeing consciousness. In this context of D.O., the nama refer to the cetasikas which arise with these vipaka cittas and the rupa refer to the rupas of the body conditioned by kamma specifically at the time of birth and subsequently throughout life. Just at the moment of birth, these rupas conditioned by kamma arise at the same instant as the birth consciousness. At all other times, the rupas arise before the cittas which are conditioned by them. .... >And is the volitional formations here in DO the same as that of the five aggregates? (the later as being included as Nama...) .... S: The volitional formations, abhisankhaara, refer here in DO to past kamma, i.e past cetana which conditions birth and vipaka cittas in the present life. Cetana is included in sankhaara khandha only. .... >I am getting confused by these terms -Cittas, Nama and consciousness... .... S: In most contexts, cittas and vi~n~naana are the same, referring to any "mind-moment". However, in the context of DO, the meaning is different. Similarly, usually naama refers to all cittas and cetasikas, but in the context of DO, again it's different. See above. ... >If anyone can explain (Consciousness, nama and cittas) further, in regard to Dependent Origination and also in regard to the Survey 'Cittas depend on rupa to arise', I'd appreciate it. ... S: I hope my explanation so far is clear, pls let me know if not or ask for further elaboration. It is very confusing, I know. ... >My knowledge of Dhamma and Abhidhamma is very limited, so please bear with my ignorance. ... S: Actually, your questions show quite a fine appreciation for both:). .... >I intend to read Nina's Conditions after Survey.. But I am very interested to know these briefly. ... S: Please ask anything further. Metta Sarah p.s I just see that Alex has answered as well, but have not yet read his answers. =========== #109430 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body truth_aerator Hello Jon, all, > J: Many thanks for this. If you have a reference to the passage, >I'd be interested to read it. > > Do you have a view on the recitation question raised by KenO? > > Jon > "5. As to surmounting the concept: this [name-] concept beginning with 'head hairs, body hairs' must be surmounted and consciousness established on [the aspect] "repulsive9. For just as when men find a water hole in a forest in a time of drought, they hang up some kind of signal there such as a palm leaf, and people come to bathe and drink guided by the signal, [245] but when the way has become plain with their continual traffic, there is no further need of the signal and they go to bathe and drink there whenever they want, so too, when repulsiveness becomes evident to him as he is giving his attention to the meditation subject through the means of the [name-] concept 'head hairs, body hairs', he must surmount the concept 'head hairs, body hairs', and establish consciousness on only the actual repulsiveness." -VsM VIII,66 Jon, but one still has to do the preliminary steps and the whole Dhamma is a raft for crossing the ocean of sensuality, views, rites & rituals and clinging to views of Self. While it is possible to go from wrong proposition to right proposition without intermediate steps in between - same cannot be said about path from avijja -> vijja because vijja is a skill and skill has various qualities. One doesn't jump from worldling to arhatship stage without any interval. There are intermediate steps. Same with effort, sati, samadhi and so on. Perfect skill doesn't appear out of nowhere and it isn't perfect from the get-go. Just like you cannot run before you can walk, same is here. To refuse doing "XYZ because one doesn't have proper accumulations for it" will never by itself create the need accumulations for XYZ. So effort must (however imperfect in the beginning) be done, but it must be proper effort. Proper effort is a skill that doesn't become perfect in one moment. That is why there are different levels of it and why there are many intermediate stages. If one avoids putting in kusala effort, then there will not be any accumulations for future kusala effort. I really disagree with Mahayanist teaching of "the path is the goal" or "practicing without any expectations, goals or desire". Nothing could further be from the truth. A simile: Buddha compares Nibbana as far shore while samsara is this shore and the ocean is in between. In order to stand on the other shore one must cross it with a use of a raft. Swimming is different from standing on the other shore, but without swimming one will simply not get there! Furthermore one should NOT abandon the raft until one actually crosses the ocean. This is another wrong teaching found (in Diamond sutra if I am right) that one needs to abandon the raft even prior to crossing the sea. This is a sure recipe for drowning or never making it. One gets to nibbana initially relying on craving (even Anagamis haven't eliminated conceit and all craving as in rupa or aruppa raga) and just prior to attaining the goal one lets go of the craving. This is basic theravada sutta teaching. "Goal less practice, practice without set destination" is a path to nowhere. Without a clear direction one might never make it toward the other shore and instead swim aimlessly in ocean, get lost in middle of nowhere and be eaten by the nearest shark perhaps - or starve to death. Without effort one will not make any movement to swim to the other shore. With metta, Alex #109431 From: Kevin F Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 4:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi farrellkevin80 Dear Alex, Alex: Because they lump all kinds of intention and effort as wrong effort. Kevin: To a degree I think that is true. Kevin ___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor of the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me Kevin's discussion forum = http://www.dhammasnippets.webs.com/ #109432 From: Kevin F Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 4:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body farrellkevin80 Dear Jon, Jon: J: Many thanks for this. If you have a reference to the passage, I'd be interested to read it. Do you have a view on the recitation question raised by KenO? Kevin: Hi Jon. Here is my opinion. When we first hear and learn dhamma there might not be much Right Concentration or wisdom arising. We try to understand the eye only sees color, the ear only hears sound, we try to understand all the different cittas although we may not be understanding them correctly. With time, however, panna can develop and learn. Eventually Right Concentration may arise with wisdom that knows the aramanas. Satipatthana can occur naturally. In my op. it is like this with meditation. At first there may be much wrong concentration and trying. The mind doesn't want to stay with the object and we must endeavor to make it. After a while though, the mind learns, panna develops, it starts to realize the drawbacks in the sense pleasures and contacts and starts to see how much better it is not to engage them naturally, it starts to realize how pleasurable it is as well. It knows that narrowing donw the concepts and becoming concentrated is best, instead of being engaged in millions of random thoughts. Then the mind becomes steady on the object of meditation, and the mind naturally stays with it. The degree of moments of Right Concentration increases the more we do this. So, in the beginning, the recitation helps us get closer to that. More and more Right Concentration begins to arise with practice. Therefore, I think actually engaging in a meditation subject, and doing the recitation first are important things to do. There is the story of the two students who went to learn a meditation object. One was a master of two pitikas, the other a master of three. There teacher told them to meditate on the 32 body parts and told them that they should do only the verbal recitation first. After four months of verbal recitation, they both attained to sotapanna. Here is the passage from the Visuddhimagga, a very important passage in my opinion. Please note that it says that even if one is a master of the Tipitka, the verbal recitation should be done first (in respect to this subject of meditation). The passage is from Visuddhimagga chapter VIII, 49 (Seven fold Skill in Learning) This meditation subject consists in giving attention to repulsiveness. *Even if one is master of the Tipitaka, the verbal recitation should still be done at the time of first giving it attention.* For the meditation subject only becomes evident to some through recitation, as it did to the two elders who learned the meditation subject from the Elder Maha- Deva of the Hill Country (Malaya). On being asked for the meditation subject, it seems, the elder [242] gave the text of the thirty-two aspects, saying 'Do only this recitation for four months'. Although they were familiar respectively with two and three Pitakas, it was only at the end of four months of recitation of the meditation subject that they became stream-enterers, with right apprehension [of the text]. So the teacher who expounds the meditation subject should tell the pupil to do the recitation verbally first. Here is a passage from the very next page in the text that supports what I said above in response to your question about recitation: The recitation should be done verbally in this way a hundred times, a thousand times, even a hundred thousand times. For it is through verbal recitation that the meditation subject becomes familiar, and the mind being thus prevented from running here and there, the parts become evident and seem like [the fingers of] a pair of clasped hands,13 like a row of fence posts. 57. 2. The mental recitation should be done just as it is done verbally. For the verbal recitation is a condition for the mental recitation, and the mental recitation is a condition for the penetration of the characteristic [of foulness].16 The section I spoke about concerning going beyond the concept of the head hair, etc. and going to the concept of repulsiveness is here (ch. VIII, 66). 5. *As to surmounting the concept: this [name-] concept beginning with 'head hairs, body hairs' must be surmounted and consciousness established on [the aspect] "repulsive9. For just as when men find a water hole in a forest in a time of drought, they hang up some kind of signal there such as a palm leaf, and people come to bathe and drink guided by the signal, [245] but when the way has become plain with their continual traffic, there is no further need of the signal and they go to bathe and drink there whenever they want, so too, when repulsiveness becomes evident to him as he is giving his attention to the meditation subject through the means of the [name-] concept 'head hairs, body hairs', he must surmount the concept 'head hairs, body hairs', and establish consciousness on only the actual repulsiveness*. All the best, Kevin ___________ #109433 From: Kevin F Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 4:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi farrellkevin80 Dear Alex, I wanted to expand on what I wrote a little bit. You wrote: Because they lump all kinds of intention and effort as wrong effort. I replied: To a degree I think that is true. Kevin (now): Most people here definitely endeavor to understand the wisdom aspects of the path. They endeavor to learn, study, consider, etc. That is very commendable. They also endeavor in sila to a degree I am sure. Where they don;t endeavor is with meditation. If people think that they usually endeavor to learn more points about dhamma, sense bases and elements, and think they usually endeavor to consider it and discuss it with Rigth Concentration and wisdom they are sadly mistaken. Sure, it is still profitable because even if the mind states are akusala, they learn dhamma which can increase wisdom on a conceptual level. That may condition actual satipatthana later. It is the same with meditation in my opinion, you think of the head hairs, for example; you repeat head hairs, head hairs, etc.; you restrain your mind. There may be Wrong Concentration. The mind however begins to learn that it is better to stay with one object instead of being barraged by sense contacts and objects all the time, that it is better to settle down on one object. Then, Right Concentraition in the technical sense arises more and more often. It leads to nibbana when there is wisdom developed as well. Kevin ___________ With metta Kevin #109434 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 5:09 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi truth_aerator Dear Kevin, all, >Kevin (now): Most people here definitely endeavor to understand >the >wisdom aspects of the path. They endeavor to learn, study, >consider, >etc. That is very commendable. I have nothing against study. In fact I consider study to be irreplaceable and required. I just don't agree with fallacious Mahayana Madhymaka like arguments against practice that some say here. Until one is an Arahant, the fetter of ignorance still exists. Until one is stream enterer the fetter of views still is, so to expect one to be totally and always perfect prior to it is impossible. Also fetter of greed, hatred, delusion and conceit is still present prior to stream and in various degrees at higher stages. This is why the way can take time. One learns from one's mistakes and one has to accumulate skill to weaken and abandon fetters. If insight is cause of insight itself, then it is hopeless. Either we are already awakened and always have (a later delusion found in certain schools) or have no possibility of ever attaining it as there are no other causes other than having it. So either one has insight or not. If not, than nothing ever can be done. I agree with what you've said below. The development of the path is gradual. With metta, Alex #109435 From: Kevin F Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 7:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi farrellkevin80 Dear Alex, Alex: I have nothing against study. In fact I consider study to be irreplaceable and required. I just don't agree with fallacious Mahayana Madhymaka like arguments against practice that some say here. Until one is an Arahant, the fetter of ignorance still exists. Until one is stream enterer the fetter of views still is, so to expect one to be totally and always perfect prior to it is impossible. Also fetter of greed, hatred, delusion and conceit is still present prior to stream and in various degrees at higher stages. This is why the way can take time. One learns from one's mistakes and one has to accumulate skill to weaken and abandon fetters. If insight is cause of insight itself, then it is hopeless. Either we are already awakened and always have (a later delusion found in certain schools) or have no possibility of ever attaining it as there are no other causes other than having it. So either one has insight or not. If not, than nothing ever can be done. Kevin: Alex, good post! With metta, Kevin ___________ #109436 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Aug 23, 2010 11:59 pm Subject: Re: if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana kenhowardau Hi Howard, --------------- <. . .> H: > I am satisfied with the suttas, and I see plenty of change there. BTW, the commentaries speak of change also: arising, changing while standing, and ceasing. --------------- Yes, the commentaries and the suttas talk about anicca. However, they do not talk about trying to change the way things are. That is solely your interpretation of the Dhamma. (And you are welcome to it!) :-) ---------------------- H: > (What's that saying about hanging on one's own petard, Ken? ;-) ---------------------- There was a Shakespearian metaphor along those lines. I think it was about people who rejected the Dhamma that had been preserved in the Pali Tipitaka and chose to go their own ways. Apparently they were hung up on the endlessly turning wheel of samsara. :-) Ken H #109437 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 12:26 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? kenhowardau Hi Jon, ---- <. . .> J: > To my understanding, the panna that knows kusala from akusala would arise not with the citta that has the kammatthana as its object but with a succeeding citta which has that citta as its object. ---- Thanks, that sounds logical to me. I still have to ask, however, which of those two types of citta is jhana-citta? If I am right (which I haven't been very often lately) jhana citta is the one with the kammatthana as its object. And I am pretty sure (from my reading of CMA) that jhana citta does contain panna of some sort. If so, what does that panna know? Ken H #109438 From: "bhikkhu3" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 12:02 am Subject: Today is the full-moon Nikini Poya day! bhikkhu5 Friends: How to be a Real Buddhist through Observance? Nikini Poya day is the full-moon of August. Bhikkhus who did not enter the yearly rains retreat (Vas) early at Esala Poya day (peravas), are allowed to enter the the rains retreat now in august (pasuvas). Nikini Poya day celebrates the first ever Dhammasangayana - The First Buddhist Council where, what the Buddha said, was agreed upon and recited. This took place at the Saptapanni Rock Cave in Rajagaha (now Rajgir , India), under the patronage of Mahakassapa Thera and it went on for seven long months. It established the original authentic Tipitaka: The 3 Baskets of Sacred Text = The Pali Canon spoken by the historical Buddha and his disciples. One of the 7 Sattapanni Caves, where the First Buddhist Council was held ~ 483 BC. On the first Buddhist Council: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Buddhist_Council On such Observance days: Any Lay Buddhist simply joins the Three Refuges and undertakes the Five Precepts like this: Newly bathed, shaved, white-clothed, with clean bare feet, one kneels at a shrine with a Buddha-statue, and bows first three times, so that feet, hands, elbows, knees and head touch the floor. Then, with joined palms in front of the heart, one recite these memorized lines in a loud, calm & steady voice: As long as this life lasts: I hereby take refuge in the Buddha. I hereby take refuge in the Dhamma. I hereby take refuge in the Sangha. I hereby seek shelter in the Buddha for the 2nd time. I hereby seek shelter in the Dhamma for the 2nd time. I hereby seek shelter in the Sangha for the 2nd time. I hereby request protection from the Buddha for the 3rd time. I hereby request protection from the Dhamma for the 3rd time. I hereby request protection from the Sangha for the 3rd time. I will hereby respect these Three Jewels the rest of my life! I accept to respect & undertake these 5 training rules: I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Killing. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Stealing. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Sexual Abuse. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Dishonesty. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Alcohol & Drugs. As long as this life lasts, I am thus protected by these 5 precepts... Then, one keeps and protects these sacred vows better than one's own eyes & children!, since they protect you & all other beings much better than any army! They are the highest offer one can give in & to this world! So is the start towards Nibbana: the Deathless Element! This is the Noble Way to Peace, to Freedom, to Ease, to Happiness, initiated by Morality , developed further by Dhamma-Study and fulfilled by training of Meditation ... <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ * <....> #109439 From: Sukinderpal Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana sukinderpal Hi Alex, > > S: Developing understanding at the level of Pariyatti is not the > >same as > reading and memorizing. A few words understood deeply > >could be a result of Bahusutta, whereas studying and being able to > >recite the full Abhidhamma texts could be the feat of an > >uninstructed worldling. > > So whats the difference between great learning that leads to proper > results and great learning that doesn't? > Suk: One involves study of the present moment which is suttamaya panna or cintamaya panna, whereas the other has as reference point ideas / concepts with no inclination to apply to the present moment. The difference can also be compared with reading a mathematical equation in which one person understands its practical significance whereas the other sees it more or less as another abstract principle. ======= > > > although there is the background understanding of the Dhamma > >as the only useful teaching, there is no thought to 'change the > >present reality' / 'control'. > > Same about proper bhavana. > Suk: Yes indeed, and this would be with even greater confidence and manifests as not moving away from the present moment into some idea about another time, place, posture or object. ;-) ======= > > > > I mean doesn't unlearned person becomes learned as s/he reads the > > > "Abhidhamma in Daily Life", "Survey" and so on? > > > > > > Doesn't one know more after having read and memorized those wonderful > > > books? There you go, changing the reality. > > > > > > > S: Each arising of a citta in a process conditions change in the > > accumulations. And there is a difference in this regard between > >reading with right understanding and reading with wrong >understanding. > > And one can do bhavana with right understanding or with wrong > understanding. The wrong views may attack both of them. > Suk: If panna arises during formal meditation, this would be in spite of the activity. It would also condition the kind of confidence which then sees no need to follow any such practice. At such moments one would in fact likely see the value of continued exposure to the Teachings being that one realizes with greater conviction, the truth of what it teaches about anatta and conditionality. ======= > > >The intention to read thinking that this activity will > > bring about right understanding would be in fact wrong > >understanding, and is different from reading with an interest in >and > desire to understand what the texts say. > > And without intention one will not pick up the book from the shelf and > will not learn about Anatta, no-control, and so on. > Suk: No one is denying the role of intention in each citta. Whether one meditates or not, intention must surely be involved but conditioned by the roots and other cetasikas. What is argued against is the role of intention, particularly those associated with the idea of practice in making rise certain wanted dhammas and avoiding the unwanted ones. The conclusion being that since seeing for example, can't arise by will nor can attachment, and so too it is with any and every wholesome dhamma, such practice must in fact be due to wrong view. Let us take for example anger. If an actor in playing his role arouses anger, he may think that "he made the anger arise by will" or if he were a Buddhist like you, think that the "intention was the cause". But the reality is that the thought itself was conditioned and the intention arose and fell in an instant and what followed were other realities all arisen by natural decisive support condition which lead to the anger being expressed through body or speech. And you'd see that if some of those conditions were not in place, the anger would manifest differently (good acting / bad acting) or not arise at all. So is intention so great as you make it sound? Now this is the case with anger which we have all great accumulations for. But can you see now how futile the kind of exercise is when it comes to kusala dhammas, most particularly panna? Besides, given that we've accumulated attachment and ignorance infinitely more than any other dhamma, is it not then so very likely that lobha would instead arise and in playing the role both as student and teacher, create the illusion of good being developed? ===== > > But reading about no-control and seeing it with wisdom during practice > are of different qualities. > Suk: See how you describe your experience,"seeing it with wisdom *during* practice"? Isn't practice in fact an instance of wisdom arising? But sure, practice or patipatti is a higher level of wisdom as compared to pariyatti and could in fact be considered different in quality. ==== > > > > > Suk: All dhammas arise by causes and conditions. > > > > > > Sure. Swimming is conditioned and one of the conditions is to exert > > > effort with hands and feet according to the way one knows in order to > > > swim. > > > > > > > S: And in the case of swimming one could do so with fear of > >drowning or one could do it out of enjoyment, and in fact there > >could be understanding of these and other realities in between. > > Same about Bhavana. One could do so with fear of Samsara or one could > do it out of enjoyment, and in fact there could be understanding of > these and other realities in between. > Suk: So would the understanding arise in spite of any intention to meditate and going about it, or is it in fact a consequence of it? In the case of swimming, no wrong view is involved which is that very dhamma that not only points in the direction exactly opposite to that of wisdom, but in fact conditions doubt about the correct Path. On the other hand what if it is really true that 'formal meditation' is wrong practice conditioned by wrong view? Would you think the chance of panna arising in between the akusala dhammas be of the same probability as in the case of swimming? ======= > > > S: Where is "deliberate sitting in order to make metta arise" is > >said to be one of the cause? Or in your reasoning, how do you see > >the connection between the intention to make metta arise and its > >actual arising? > > We can read VsM > > First as it comes about a proper surrounding: > ""A meditator who wants to develop firstly lovingkindness among these, > if he is a beginner, should sever the impediments* and learn the > meditation subject. Then, when he has done the work connected with the > meal and got rid of any dizziness due to it, he should seat himself > comfortably on a well-prepared seat in a secluded place." > VsM IX,1 - Just to start. > Suk: The kind of thing is more or less standard for all meditation subjects and aimed at access concentration and Jhana. Leaving aside the argument whether any of this is dependent on 'intention', note that I was talking about an instance of *metta* itself and not the repeated focus and calm developed with metta as meditation subject. ======= > > S: Kusala chanda, adhimokkha, yoniso manasikara, all play their > >part at some time. But the question is, how do you know that in fact > >this is what is involved when one decides to 'meditate'? > > This requires lots of discernment that is dealt induvidially by that > induvidial. > Suk: Would it require discernment / panna to know these or would they arise when there is discernment? And what is the object of discernment at the time, and the question is how do you know that it *is* discernment? ======= > > > S: Because the very idea is a denial of the possibility that such > > understanding can arise now regardless of the conventional activity > > being performed. This is clearly a case of having taken the > >particular conventional activity of sitting in a particular posture > >etc. as being 'cause' when in fact causes and conditions are between > >paramattha dhammas only. This means that you start off with wrong > >understanding expecting right understanding to arise, which is wrong > >cause for the expected result. > > Are some activities more helpful than others? > Suk: For different people different experiences through the five senses and the mind act as natural decisive support condition for both kusala dhammas as well as akusala dhammas. But lets say for me kusala dhammas consistently arises in one spot and in another place akusala arises all the time. If I were to go to that first place thinking that those kusala dhammas will arise, would this not be a case of craving and wrong view and in fact change everything? ====== > There are such things as impediments: > A dwelling, family, and gain, A class, and building too as fifth, > And travel, kin, affliction, books, And supernormal powers: ten." -VsM > III, 29 > > There are unfavorable monasteries: > "Herein, one that is unfavourable has any one of eighteen faults. > These are: largeness, newness, dilapidatedness, a nearby road, a pond, > [edible] leaves, flowers, fruits, famousness, a nearby city, nearby > timber trees, nearby arable fields, presence of incompatible persons, > a nearby port of entry, nearness to the border countries, nearness to > the frontier of a kingdom, unsuitability, lack of good friends. [119] > One with any of these faults is not favourable. He should not live > there. " -VsM - IV,2 > Suk: Access concentration and Jhana for those ready for them, won't happen under these circumstances, but neither will it if lacking the wisdom of the particular level. It is with wisdom that one understands what the impediments are and which corresponds with seeing harm in sense contacts to begin with. To think as you and all so called Jhana meditators of today do, that situating oneself in a particular environment will cause understanding to arise, this is confusing causes and effects. ====== > "4. Herein, as to the profitable triad (see Dhs., p.l): all the > ascetic practices, that is to say, those of trainers, ordinary men, > and men whose cankers have been destroyed, may be either profitable or > [in the Arahant's case] indeterminate. [80] No ascetic practice is > unprofitable." - VsM II, 78 > > NO ASCETIC PRACTICE IS UNPROFITABLE AND ALL ARE PROFITABLE (kusala) > for non-Arahats. > Suk: Only for those with the accumulations for it, otherwise the result will be much unnecessary mental conflict. Metta, Sukinder #109440 From: Kevin F Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana farrellkevin80 Dear Sukinder, Sukinder: If panna arises during formal meditation, this would be in spite of the activity. It would also condition the kind of confidence which then sees no need to follow any such practice. At such moments one would in fact likely see the value of continued exposure to the Teachings being that one realizes with greater conviction, the truth of what it teaches about anatta and conditionality. Is that why it is said in the Visuddhimagga quote: "he must ward off [temptation] to drop the meditation subject and to let his mind get distracted among the variety of external objects. For if not, just as when a man has entered on a one-foot-wide cliff path, if he looks about here and there without watching his step, he may miss his footing and fall down the cliff, which is perhaps as high as a hundred men, so too, when there is outward distraction, the meditation subject gets neglected and deteriorates.* So he should give his attention to it warding off distraction*." Sukin: Access concentration and Jhana for those ready for them, won't happen under these circumstances, but neither will it if lacking the wisdom of the particular level. It is with wisdom that one understands what the impediments are and which corresponds with seeing harm in sense contacts to begin with. To think as you and all so called Jhana meditators of today do, that situating oneself in a particular environment will cause understanding to arise, this is confusing causes and effects. Kevin: Is this in conformity with the simile of pouring oil for one who attains jhana? Kevin #109441 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana truth_aerator Hi Sukinder, all, > Suk: One involves study of the present moment which is suttamaya >panna or cintamaya panna, whereas the other has as reference point >ideas / concepts with no inclination to apply to the present moment. The Buddha did include conceptual contemplations in satipatthana. He did urge even lay followers to reflect on aging, death, illness and so forth. Where is it stated that one can't use concepts (and then if needed, surmount them)? Suttas are filled with conceptual contemplations. Even thinking about ultimate terms found in Abh is conceptual contemplation on ultimate realities. > > > > > although there is the background understanding of the Dhamma > > >as the only useful teaching, there is no thought to 'change the > > >present reality' / 'control'. > > > > Same about proper bhavana. > > > > Suk: Yes indeed, and this would be with even greater confidence and > manifests as not moving away from the present moment into some idea > about another time, place, posture or object. ;-) Which is why VsM talked about helpfulness of Ascetic practices? "4. Herein, as to the profitable triad (see Dhs., p.l): all the > > ascetic practices, that is to say, those of trainers, ordinary men, and men whose cankers have been destroyed, may be either profitable or [in the Arahant's case] indeterminate. [80] No ascetic practice is unprofitable." - VsM II, 78 >NO ASCETIC PRACTICE IS UNPROFITABLE AND ALL ARE PROFITABLE (kusala) >for non-Arahats. - > > Suk: Only for those with the accumulations for it, otherwise the >result will be much unnecessary mental conflict. The VsM states it clear. It is not unprofitable and it is profitable for ORDINARY MEN. It doesn't require one to have super accumulations. Infact the argument is fallacious. One is NEVER going to accumulate needed accumulations if one doesn't practice it. Of course in the beginning there will be mental conflict, which according to VsM IS PROFITABLE. You are adding your comments to disregard the VsM. >S: Because the very idea is a denial of the possibility that such > understanding can arise now regardless of the conventional activity >being performed. So understanding can arise *regardless of conventional activity (such as killing father or mother, wounding a Buddha or creating schism in the Sangha) being performed? >S: The intention to read thinking that this activity will >bring about right understanding would be in fact wrong >understanding, and is different from reading with an interest in >and desire to understand what the texts say. So one can meditate with interest in and desire to understand the present moment rather. >S:This is clearly a case of having taken the >particular >conventional >activity of sitting in a particular posture >etc. as >being 'cause' The activity for understanding is the PATH and PRACTICE to attain it. >when in fact causes and conditions are between paramattha dhammas >only. What about killing father or mother or creating a Schism in the Sangha? These are conventional activities with grave results. If they give results, then why not wholesome activities not count to give wholesome results? If "conventional activities" don't matter, then why conventional activities like killing father or mother matter? Why not stop being a Buddhist and become a Fundamentalist Muslim for example since conventional activities in daily life don't matter? You might say that they don't have right view and don't study Dhamma. So there are conventional activities (not engaging in rites & rituals, picking up a Dhamma book, opening it and reading it to learn). With metta, Alex #109442 From: Sukinderpal Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 2:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana sukinderpal Hi Kevin, > Sukinder: If panna arises during formal meditation, this would be in > spite of > the activity. It would also condition the kind of confidence which then > sees no need to follow any such practice. At such moments one would in > fact likely see the value of continued exposure to the Teachings being > that one realizes with greater conviction, the truth of what it teaches > about anatta and conditionality. > > Kevin: > Is that why it is said in the Visuddhimagga quote: > > "he must ward off [temptation] to > drop the meditation subject and to let his mind get distracted among the > variety of external objects. For if not, just as when a man has entered on > a one-foot-wide cliff path, if he looks about here and there without > watching his step, he may miss his footing and fall down the cliff, which > is perhaps as high as a hundred men, so too, when there is outward > distraction, the meditation subject gets neglected and deteriorates.* > So he > should give his attention to it warding off distraction*." > S: Is the above reference to development of samatha / jhana or of vipassana? If the latter, I'd be very surprised, but if the former, know that I was talking about vipassana development. ====== > > Sukin: Access concentration and Jhana for those ready for them, won't > happen under these circumstances, but neither will it if lacking the > wisdom of the particular level. It is with wisdom that one understands > what the impediments are and which corresponds with seeing harm in sense > contacts to begin with. To think as you and all so called Jhana > meditators of today do, that situating oneself in a particular > environment will cause understanding to arise, this is confusing causes > and effects. > > Kevin: Is this in conformity with the simile of pouring oil for one > who attains > jhana? > S: I don't know this simile, can you elaborate? Metta, Sukinder #109443 From: Kevin F Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana farrellkevin80 Hi Sukinder, Sukinder: Is the above reference to development of samatha / jhana or of vipassana? If the latter, I'd be very surprised, but if the former, know that I was talking about vipassana development. Kevin. The above was about samattha. So do you agree that one must strive for samattha. It does not seem that you would be surprised if it was about samattha. The quote shows that we must strive for samattha. >he must ward off [temptation] to > drop the meditation subject and to let his mind get distracted among the > variety of external objects. For if not, just as when a man has entered on > a one-foot-wide cliff path, if he looks about here and there without > watching his step, he may miss his footing and fall down the cliff, which > is perhaps as high as a hundred men, so too, when there is outward > distraction, the meditation subject gets neglected and deteriorates.* > So he > should give his attention to it warding off distraction*. Kevin: Agree of disagree? Sukin: I don't know this simile, can you elaborate? Kevin: Of course. Vism Ch. IV, 72. "Here is the explanation of the meaning. When a too clever bee learns that a flower on a tree is blooming, it sets out hurriedly, overshoots the mark, turns back, and arrives when the pollen is finished; and another, not clever enough bee, who sets out with too slow a speed, arrives when the pollen is finished too; but a clever bee sets out with balanced speed, arrives with ease at the cluster of flowers, takes as much pollen as it pleases and enjoys the honey-dew. 68. Again, when a surgeon's pupils are being trained in the use of the scalpel on a lotus leaf in a dish of water, one who is too clever applies the scalpel hurriedly and either cuts the lotus leaf in two or pushes it under the water, and another who is not clever enough does not even dare to touch it with the scalpel for fear of cutting it in two or pushing it under, but one who is clever shows the scalpel stroke on it by means of a balanced effort, and being good at his craft he is rewarded on such occasions. 69. Again when the king announces, * Anyone who can draw out a spider's thread four fathoms long shall receive four thousand', one man who is too clever breaks the spider's thread here and there by pulling it hurriedly, and another who is not clever enough does not dare to touch it with his hand for fear of breaking it, but a clever man pulls it out starting from the end with a balanced effort, winds it on a stick, and so wins the prize. 70. Again, a too clever [137] skipper hoists full sails in a high wind and sends his ship adrift, and another, not clever enough skipper, lowers his sails in a light wind and remains where he is, but a clever skipper hoists full sails in a light wind, takes in half his sails in a high wind, and so arrives safely at his desired destination. 71. Again, when a teacher says, * Anyone who fills the oil-tube without spilling any oil will win a prize', one who is too clever fills it hurriedly out of greed for the prize, and he spills the oil, and another who is not clever enough does not dare to pour the oil at all for fear of spilling it, but one who is clever fills it with a balanced effort and wins the prize. 134 The Earth Kasina IV, 75 72.* Just as in these five similes, so too when the sign arises, one bhikkhu forces his energy, thinking 'I shall soon reach absorption'. Then his mind lapses into agitation because of his mind's over-exerted energy and he is prevented from reaching absorption*. *Another who sees the defect in over-exertion slacks off his energy, thinking 'What is absorption to me now?'. Then his mind lapses into idleness because of his mind's too lax energy and he too is prevented from reaching absorption.** Yet another who frees his mind from idleness even when it is only slightly idle and from agitation when only slightly agitated, confronting the sign with balanced effort, reaches absorption. One should be like the last-named.* 73. It was with reference to this meaning that it was said above: 'Well-controlled bees get the pollen; Well-balanced efforts meet to treat Leaves, thread, and ships, and oil-tubes too, Gain thus, not otherwise, the prize. Let him set aside then this lax Also this agitated state, Steering here his mind at the sign As the bee and the rest suggest'. ___________ With metta Kevin #109444 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:44 am Subject: Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi kenhowardau Hi Alex (and Kevin), ---- A: Because they lump all kinds of intention and effort as wrong effort. ---- No one here does that. What people are trying to tell you is that all effort arising with wrong understanding is wrong effort. And, BTW, all conventional understandings of samatha and vipassana are wrong understandings. Ken H #109445 From: Kevin F Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 4:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi farrellkevin80 Hi Ken, Thanks for you post. Ken: What people are trying to tell you is that all effort arising with wrong understanding is wrong effort. And, BTW, all conventional understandings of samatha and vipassana are wrong understandings. Ken H Kevin: Ken, so should we discard them? Kevin ___________ #109446 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi kenhowardau Hi Kevin, ----- KH: > > all conventional understandings of samatha and vipassana are wrong understandings. > > K: > Ken, so should we discard them? ------ Yes, but I think right understanding does all the necessary discarding. Ken H #109447 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body jonoabb Hi Alex (109430) > "5. As to surmounting the concept: this [name-] concept beginning > with 'head hairs, body hairs' must be surmounted and consciousness established on [the aspect] "repulsive9. For just as when men find a water hole in a forest in a time of drought, they hang up some kind of signal there such as a palm leaf, and people come to bathe and drink guided by the signal, [245] but when the way has become plain with their continual traffic, there is no further need of the signal and they go to bathe and drink there whenever they want, so too, when repulsiveness becomes evident to him as he is giving his attention to the meditation subject through the means of the [name-] concept 'head hairs, body hairs', he must surmount the concept 'head hairs, body hairs', and establish consciousness on only the actual repulsiveness." > -VsM VIII,66 > =============== J: Many thanks for providing the text referred to by Kevin. Your ability to come up with quotes never ceases to amaze me! How do you manage it? ;-)) > =============== > Jon, but one still has to do the preliminary steps > =============== J: I couldn't agree more! One starts from the beginning. In the case of samatha, the beginning is any instance of kusala occurring in daily life. Without understanding the difference between kusala and akusala as normally occurring, there cannot be the development of samatha of any level whatsoever. > =============== > Perfect skill doesn't appear out of nowhere and it isn't perfect from the get-go. Just like you cannot run before you can walk, same is here. To refuse doing "XYZ because one doesn't have proper accumulations for it" will never by itself create the need accumulations for XYZ. > =============== J: Not sure what you are alluding to here. Have I ever advocated not developing kusala of any kind? ;-)) Jon #109448 From: Kevin F Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi farrellkevin80 Hi Ken H, >Kevin: K: > Ken, so should we discard them? ------ Ken: Yes, but I think right understanding does all the necessary discarding. ____ Kevin: Thank you for your post. But there appears to be a discrepancy. You said: "No one here does that. What people are trying to tell you is that all effort arising with wrong understanding is wrong effort. And, *BTW, all conventional understandings of samatha and vipassana are wrong understandings.*" Kevin: But then in response to if they should be discarded or not you said "Yes, but I think right understanding does all the necessary discarding." So, am I read to read this as to say that we should discard all conventional understandings of vipassana which are not on the level of penetration because they arise with wrong understanding and wrong effort? With metta, Kevin #109449 From: Kevin F Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 6:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body farrellkevin80 Dear Jon, J: I couldn't agree more! One starts from the beginning. In the case of samatha, the beginning is any instance of kusala occurring in daily life. Without understanding the difference between kusala and akusala as normally occurring, there cannot be the development of samatha of any level whatsoever. Kevin: Hi Jon, so then as long as one knows the difference between Right Concentration and Wrong when one recites "head hairs, head hairs" a hundred, a thousand, or a hundred thousand times before one does the mental recitation, Right Concentration can develop? Is that what we are to understand friend? All the best, Kevin ___________ #109450 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 6:51 am Subject: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 1. sarahprocter... Dear Lukas & Friends, A few brief notes on some of the topics discussed with A.Sujin last Saturday. Pls note that these will likely only be of interest to those who've been reading DSG messages for sometime, as they're very cryptic. ***** 1. Lukas's Qu 1: "....But mostly I have no problems, so I enjoy pleasant feeling without any understanding forgetting dhamma. How can I change this? How can I apply mind more to the present and be less forgetful?" KS: No understanding of dhamma when one reads and has the idea of applying. It's Self 'doing' all the time – (when one thinks in terms of) practice, apply or observe. Panna understands. 2. Lukas's Qu 2: What is siila? I don't understand it. What is it? KS: What about the reality? Citta which conditions bodily deeds or speech usually. Kusala, akusala or abyakatha citta (abyakatha citta - that which is not kusala or akusala). Many different kinds of siila – kusala or akusala. I mentioned different kinds referred to in the Vism, inc samatha and satipa.t.thaana, higher siila and KS stressed it's "not the text or the story about reality". For example, when we think about the Vism, it should only be to understand the nature of reality. 3. Differences in detail concerning the Patimokkha and Vinaya as given by different Buddhas. It depends on the listeners how much detail was needed. The more kilesa (defilements), the more details were/are needed. The Patimokkha and Teachings to keep the monks following the teachings and the rules to be followed according to virtues, to support the wholesome accumulations that we can respect. Those who follow all the rules are those with less defilements. Otherwise they are just the same as we, laypeople. Breaches of precepts or rules are far more serious for monks because they show the form of the monk and represent the Sangha. 4. Other teachings stress metta and philosophies may seem "close to theoretical understanding of non-self". However, metta is one thing, but as long as there isn't an understanding of realities, we cannot say other teachings/philosophies are close at all to an understanding of non-self . Sukin gave an example of encouraging the understanding of kamma and vipaka amongst Sikhs, but they cannot understand kamma and vipaka while it's still "them". It's no use, just "he" or "she" involved in cause and effect. While there is clinging to self, there must be ill deeds. When other beliefs are not correct, the good friend doesn't encourage them at all. 5. 38 versus 40 objects, kammathana. The 38 excludes space and one other (light?). Any object can bring calm now – depends on the understanding, not the object. Only certain objects can be the object for attainment of jhana, by arammanupanissaya (decisive support of object). For that person (mentioned in the texts), the kasina is helpful because of accumulated calm towards such an object. Kasina – "all" as the meaning. 6. Jhana and wrong view (Ken H's discussion). Wrong view has been accumulated by pakatu-upanissaya paccaya. It can arise anytime, as in Devadatta's case. 7. Nimitta – different meanings. As long as there is no understanding of visible object which can be seen it is nimitta appearing. Nimitta as in concepts and dreams, nimitta anubyanjana and nimitta of the reality – even at stages of insight. We need to be clear on the context. 8. Devas, brahamas and Rahu in the texts – for those that can experience them! Ask Sukin! 9. Vicikiccha, doubt, eradicated by the sotapanna. This just refers to doubts about realities. I asked about the Atth quote (which Nina and Mike N were discussing ages ago) which includes doubts about the qualities of the Buddha or characteristic marks of his body. For the sotapanna, there is no thinking about that which cannot be directly experienced, the marks of the Buddha and so on cannot be directly known. No doubt about realities only. Comments, further qus welcome. Tomorrow we're all going on a day's outing to Ayutthaya, the old capital. I don't know if we'll have any discussion or not. In any case, there'll be another discussion with K.Sujin on Saturday, so I'll try to raise a couple more of your qus, Lukas. If there are any that have priority, pls let me know. I had an off-list note from Han before he went into hospital, but haven't heard anything since and don't wish to trouble his family by calling them. We have a brief moment of unpleasant bodily feeling and then have long stories and ideas about "illness", "disease" and "surgery" - just cittas, cetasikas and rupas - different dhammas that can be known at this very moment. Metta Sarah ====== #109451 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:00 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Clinging to names. sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, (Nina & all), You were discussing the Naama sutta (below) and I asked KS to add more: We think of and speak of names all day - cup, dhamma, book, question, answer - all names, a particular kind of pa~n~natti. Indeed, there is no communication without names. Names can reveal dhammas too and even the Buddha thought about and used names, we have to use names, but he mentioned these so that we would know the truths, while using names, know that names which we cling to so much are only names, not the Truths. Even the name 'nibbana" is an object of attachment when there is no understanding. Metta Sarah --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Nina > > names are just names, they are not the clinging, they could condition clinging > to arise but not clinging itself. It is clinging that clings > It is not names that conceal paramatha dhamma, it is moha ,...> > --- 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. ========= #109452 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:11 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Nature of the Present Moment - for Ken O sarahprocter... Hi Sukin, That was a great post about Makkhali Gosala (#109321) - I'll keep it to re-post to Alex whenever he brings up this topic:-). > Makkhali Gosala did not believe in causes and conditions, but that no > matter what one does, in the end samsara will end for everyone > regardless. In other words, he had no idea about the Four Noble Truths. > He does not know what fuels continued existence and what ends it. My > statement about 'no control' refer to the fact of dhammas arising by > conditions and falling away immediately. <....> Metta Sarah p.s Glad to read your continued discussion with Ken O and it's true that both you and Rob Ep are marathon-writers, so I can understand the back-aches that ensue:-) See you tomorrow with Rob K, Azita and others! ====== #109453 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body jonoabb Hi Kevin Thanks for quoting the text from the passage on 'surmounting the object'. Very interesting. (109432) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin F wrote: > > Dear Jon, > > Jon: Do you have a view on the recitation question raised by KenO? > > Kevin: Hi Jon. Here is my opinion. When we first hear and learn dhamma there > might not be much Right Concentration or wisdom arising. We try to understand > the eye only sees color, the ear only hears sound, we try to understand all the > different cittas although we may not be understanding them correctly. With > time, however, panna can develop and learn. Eventually Right Concentration may > arise with wisdom that knows the aramanas. Satipatthana can occur naturally. > =============== J: Regarding your comment 'Satipatthana can occur naturally', I would say that in fact satipatthana *only* occurs naturally. It occurs when previously developed/accumulated panna re-arises, conditioned by appropriate reflection on the teachings properly understood. It cannot in my view be conditioned by, for example, trying to observe dhammas. The development of the path is not a trial-and-error thing in the sense that learning to ride a bicycle is. > =============== > In my op. it is like this with meditation. At first there may be much wrong > concentration and trying. The mind doesn't want to stay with the object and we > must endeavor to make it. > =============== J: To my understanding, the development of samatha is not a matter of 'staying with an object'. It's a matter of developing calm by coming to know kusala consciousness as and when it occurs. If there's wrong concentration and trying, this conditions more of the same. > =============== After a while though, the mind learns, panna > develops, it starts to realize the drawbacks in the sense pleasures and contacts > and starts to see how much better it is not to engage them naturally, it starts > to realize how pleasurable it is as well. It knows that narrowing donw the > concepts and becoming concentrated is best, instead of being engaged in millions > of random thoughts. Then the mind becomes steady on the object of meditation, > and the mind naturally stays with it. The degree of moments of Right > Concentration increases the more we do this. So, in the beginning, the > recitation helps us get closer to that. More and more Right Concentration > begins to arise with practice. Therefore, I think actually engaging in a > meditation subject, and doing the recitation first are important things to do. > =============== J: OK, you see the recitation as a means of getting through the initial wrong concentration and helping the mind settle on its object. To my reading of the texts, recitation is appropriate only for the person who already has a well-developed sense of kusala vs. akusala, and who would know immediately if there was any akusala involved. Jon #109454 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:19 am Subject: Re: Jhana adepts outside of the Buddha sasana do not have belief in control ? sarahprocter... Dear Ken H & Rob K, As you'll have seen we touched on your discussion briefly on Sat. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > That sounds right to me. But what do you think about my suggestion: that the jhana meditator has *no wrong view* with regard to the development of jhana? > > He might not have right view (especially outside a sasana) but he won't have wrong view. .... S: I think the conclusion was that different kinds of cittas arise at different moments and until wrong view has been eradicated, it can pop up anytime. Of course, the one developing samatha and attaining jhana must have right view, samma ditthi, but I think you are referring to the samma ditthi of the eightfold path which he may not have. ... > I still say if a meditator believed he could bring about jhana by 'trying' he would never practise correctly. He would always be miles away from jhana attainment. ... S: Yes, well I tend to agree with this, though as said above, there can be very different cittas at different moments as Devadatta's case exemplifies. We never know about past accumulations. I agree that 'trying' to bring about jhana will never bring it about. There's a difference between naturally following what is suitable for kusala and calm and pursuing certain situations in order to have calm or attain jhana. Anything more on this to raise with KS? Metta Sarah ====== #109455 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:20 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? jonoabb Hi KenH (109437) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Jon, > ---- > <. . .> > J: > To my understanding, the panna that knows kusala from akusala would arise not with the citta that has the kammatthana as its object but with a succeeding citta which has that citta as its object. > ---- > > Thanks, that sounds logical to me. > > I still have to ask, however, which of those two types of citta is jhana-citta? > =============== J: I was attempting to describe the development of samatha generally, rather than jhana consciousness. > =============== > If I am right (which I haven't been very often lately) jhana citta is the one with the kammatthana as its object. And I am pretty sure (from my reading of CMA) that jhana citta does contain panna of some sort. If so, what does that panna know? > =============== J: Regarding the question 'What does panna of samatha bhavana know', my general understanding is as follows. In the development of samatha, it's not the object that is crucial but the way the object is contemplated/regarded/considered. To take as an example maranasati (contemplation on death), it's the proper contemplation of, or reflection on, the subject of death that constitutes the kusala development, rather than the specific word/concept "death". By its nature, such contemplation/reflection is discursive; the word/concept 'death' will not be the object of each and every citta. I note that the Vism text on parts of the body cited by Kevin recently (and copied at the end of this message) talks about something called 'surmounting the object'. It describes how it's the quality of repulsiveness, rather than the actual body-part, that becomes the object of contemplation. So to answer your question, I'd say it's the ideas being contemplated that are the object of panna, rather than the designated kammatthaana. As I say, just my thoughts. Jon Vism. VIII, 66: 5. *As to surmounting the concept: this [name-] concept beginning with 'head hairs, body hairs' must be surmounted and consciousness established on [the aspect] "repulsive9. For just as when men find a water hole in a forest in a time of drought, they hang up some kind of signal there such as a palm leaf, and people come to bathe and drink guided by the signal, [245] but when the way has become plain with their continual traffic, there is no further need of the signal and they go to bathe and drink there whenever they want, so too, when repulsiveness becomes evident to him as he is giving his attention to the meditation subject through the means of the [name-] concept 'head hairs, body hairs', he must surmount the concept 'head hairs, body hairs', and establish consciousness on only the actual repulsiveness*. #109456 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > S: In the case of washing the dishes I'd say just plain lobha is > > involved usually. Unless of course, one is a follower of Thich Nhat > > Hahn. ;-) .... Sarah: You wrote to me, but your quotes (as in the one above) were all by Sukin... too many Ss! ... > > And what is good in deliberately engaging in what is just plain lobha and doesn't help Nibbana? .... S: No one has ever said there's anything good about "plain lobha". Whilst washing dishes, there are many different realities, many different cittas. It can be with metta to help your family, Alex! There can be calm anytime, satipatthana anytime. As for lobha, it can also be our teacher. Awareness anytime... Metta Sarah ======== #109457 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:43 am Subject: Re: q. sarahprocter... Dear Fabian, > S: And can we say that bhavana must refer to kusala cittas (with pa~n~naa) at the present moment? > > FABIAN: Dear Sarah, theoretically your argument is correct, .... S: As I understand, the theory and the bhavana must be in agreement. Pariyatti leads to patipatti. If the theory says that dhammas are anatta and can only be understood at this moment, this is what the pratice, the bhavana, should be about. ... >.. but in order to maintain kusala cittas with panna at the present moment, you need effort, .... S: Right effort arises with right understanding. The more understanding the greater the right effort that arises. Kusala cittas arise and fall away instantly like any other cittas. They can be understood directly, just as rupas can. At such moments there is right effort. No need to think of 'doing' anything. ... >...usually for beginner who is not used to meditate, they can maintain present moment only first few minutes at the beginning, and then the mind start wandering around. Wandering mind is never at the present moment. .... S: On the contrary, whatever arises is at the present moment. If there is a 'wandering mind' now, such thinking can be known as just another conditioned dhamma. I don't think the aim is "to maintain present moment". This is impossible. .... > > To keep the mind always at the present moment is what we need to achieve in meditation. .... S: I think the mind is always at the present moment, but it's not understood. For example, when seeing arises, it's always at the present moment, but there's no awareness of it. We don't need to "keep" anything, just begin to understand what appears. ... > You may try for yourself, sit and meditate for half an hour, how long your mind can be at the present moment uniterruptly? ... S: To my way of thinking, trying to do as you suggest would be a kind of lobha, an attachment to a particular kind of achievement, a desire for a particular result. How about now, is there any awareness or understanding of visible object, attachment or any other dhamma appearing? Metta Sarah ====== #109458 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body jonoabb Hi Kevin (109449) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin F wrote: > > Dear Jon, > > J: I couldn't agree more! One starts from the beginning. In the case of > samatha, the beginning is any instance of kusala occurring in daily life. > Without understanding the difference between kusala and akusala as normally > occurring, there cannot be the development of samatha of any level whatsoever. > > > Kevin: Hi Jon, so then as long as one knows the difference between Right > Concentration and Wrong when one recites "head hairs, head hairs" a hundred, a > thousand, or a hundred thousand times before one does the mental recitation, > Right Concentration can develop? Is that what we are to understand friend? > =============== J: Thanks for coming in here. There are occurrences of kusala in everyone's daily life, regardless of whether they have heard the teachings. It is these occurrences I was referring to, rather than to times of 'practice'. I'm suggesting that unless the quality of kusala is known on the basis of its occurrence in one's 'daily-life', there cannot be the development of samatha as described in the Vism. As regards the recitation of the parts of the body, my understanding is that this can only be the basis for the development of samatha for a person who has a well-developed understanding of what is calm/kusala and what is restlessness/akusala, developed in the manner just mentioned. Hoping this has clarified what I was saying to Alex. Jon #109459 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:50 am Subject: Re: intentional actions. sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > When would akusala arise more often and be more unwholesome, > as one washes the dishes or does bhavana like Metta or Asubha or Anapanasati? ... S: Just as Pt explained - whenever there is more wrong view. Only panna can know that. As he explained, it would be whenever one had an idea that the activity was performed as a kind of ritual with the belief that it would lead one along the path. As he also explained, bhavana refers to the development of right understsanding, whether it be samatha or vipassana. It does not refer to an activity performed at a certain place and time which one calls "metta bhavana", "asubha bhavana" or "anapanasati bhavana". Is there any understanding and development of metta now? If yes, it can develop. If no, then why would it develop at another time? Metta Sarah ======== #109460 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:54 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Rite and Ritual/KenH sarahprocter... Dear Kevin & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin F wrote: >... The Vism does make it very clear ,however, about > how to go about it. It speaks of the imoprtance of both sila and samattha > meditation. Samattha is said to be helpful in developing wisdom. However, > without proper understanding it will not result in wisdom. .... S: Let's be clear that when right understanding develops, so does sila and samatha. When it is the right understanding of the 8fold path, it is adhi-siila and adhi-citta that develop - the highest kinds of siila and samatha. Metta Sarah p.s remember all, to *TRIM* messages. ======= #109461 From: Sukinderpal Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 8:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana sukinderpal Hi Alex, ======== > > > Suk: One involves study of the present moment which is suttamaya > >panna or cintamaya panna, whereas the other has as reference point > >ideas / concepts with no inclination to apply to the present moment. > > The Buddha did include conceptual contemplations in satipatthana. He > did urge even lay followers to reflect on aging, death, illness and so > forth. > S: No, not as an object of satipatthana, although the panna of samatha would have some of these concepts as object. You've been making this assertion for a long time and many here have explained why you are mistaken. Perhaps it is time that you provide your own explanation as to why you think what you do, instead of simply making a reference to what is written in the Texts but taken out of context. ======= > > Where is it stated that one can't use concepts (and then if needed, > surmount them)? Suttas are filled with conceptual contemplations. > S: Please explain to me how concepts are *used* and *surmounted* for the purpose of developing vipassana panna. ======= > > Even thinking about ultimate terms found in Abh is conceptual > contemplation on ultimate realities. > S: You think this because you have yet to begin to understand. 'Seeing' as a concept points directly to what is arising and falling away NOW. There is no *using* this concept nor is there any place for such ideas as *surmounting* anything. It is panna which understand the relevance of this direct pointing to. On the other hand, ignorance and wrong view failing to appreciate this, inclines to unnecessary complications including that which gives rise to ideas such as 'formal meditation'. ====== > > > > > although there is the background understanding of the Dhamma > > > >as the only useful teaching, there is no thought to 'change the > > > >present reality' / 'control'. > > > > > > Same about proper bhavana. > > > > > > > Suk: Yes indeed, and this would be with even greater confidence and > > manifests as not moving away from the present moment into some idea > > about another time, place, posture or object. ;-) > > Which is why VsM talked about helpfulness of Ascetic practices? > > "4. Herein, as to the profitable triad (see Dhs., p.l): all the > > > ascetic practices, that is to say, those of trainers, ordinary > men, and men whose cankers have been destroyed, may be either > profitable or [in the Arahant's case] indeterminate. [80] No ascetic > practice is unprofitable." - VsM II, 78 > S: I don't understand the connection. Please explain. ====== > > >NO ASCETIC PRACTICE IS UNPROFITABLE AND ALL ARE PROFITABLE (kusala) > >for non-Arahats. - > > > > > Suk: Only for those with the accumulations for it, otherwise the > >result will be much unnecessary mental conflict. > > The VsM states it clear. It is not unprofitable and it is profitable > for ORDINARY MEN. It doesn't require one to have super accumulations. > S: You misunderstand here. By accumulations I wasn't referring to that of panna of any high level, but to the inclinations of some people towards the life of an ascetic. Indeed many of the best disciples of the Buddha didn't have such kind of accumulations. ====== > > Infact the argument is fallacious. One is NEVER going to accumulate > needed accumulations if one doesn't practice it. Of course in the > beginning there will be mental conflict, which according to VsM IS > PROFITABLE. You are adding your comments to disregard the VsM. > S: No, you are struggling to find justification in following some "ideal". ====== > > >S: Because the very idea is a denial of the possibility that such > > understanding can arise now regardless of the conventional activity > >being performed. > > So understanding can arise *regardless of conventional activity (such > as killing father or mother, wounding a Buddha or creating schism in > the Sangha) being performed? > S: Assuming that these particular activities must be conditioned by strong wrong views, all I can say is that wrong view is the great obstacle. And isn't this also why I object to 'formal meditation' namely that it is an activity which must necessarily involve wrong view. ;-) ====== > > >S: The intention to read thinking that this activity will > >bring about right understanding would be in fact wrong > >understanding, and is different from reading with an interest in >and > desire to understand what the texts say. > > So one can meditate with interest in and desire to understand the > present moment rather. > S: You apparently don't, but I do see a vast difference between the two positions. What I said is in fact a statement about uncontrolability of dhammas. 'Desire to understand the texts' in no way assumes that panna most definitely will arises. It is saying simply what it is saying, that 'one reads wanting to understand'. And even this is simply about suttamaya panna / pariyatti / 'intellectual' understanding. Your position, namely: "meditate with interest in and desire to understand the present moment" is saying first of all, that one does have the capacity to understand and not only intellectually, but that of the level of direct understanding. And with this as the underlying assumption, one then goes on to actually take seriously all the 'reports' one gives oneself during the whole activity. Don't you after all assume to know for example, when there is attention to a reality and when it is being lost in thought and when the hindrances are there and when it is not? But if indeed one did have the accumulations for such direct understanding, pray tell, why is there not the kind of confidence which sees that realities are arising and falling away right now, all valid objects of understanding? From this perspective, wouldn't your statement not then appear self-contradictory? ====== > > > >S:This is clearly a case of having taken the >particular > >conventional >activity of sitting in a particular posture >etc. as > >being 'cause' > > The activity for understanding is the PATH and PRACTICE to attain it. > S: So you are saying that the several millions of meditators out there, regardless of whether they are following Goenka, Mahasi Sayadaw, Buddhadhasa, Dhammakaya, xyz Rinpoche or abc Roshi, they are all treading the Path. Or are you saying that they would have to wait for your own stamp of approval first? ====== > >when in fact causes and conditions are between paramattha dhammas >only. > > What about killing father or mother or creating a Schism in the > Sangha? These are conventional activities with grave results. If they > give results, then why not wholesome activities not count to give > wholesome results? > S: You mean kamma is not the cetasika which is cetana? You mean the determining factor in which one cetana is akusala citta and another akusala kammapattha is not in the strength of the cetana and that of the citta and rest of the accompanying cetasikas but in the outward conventional activity? ======= > > If "conventional activities" don't matter, then why conventional > activities like killing father or mother matter? Why not stop being a > Buddhist and become a Fundamentalist Muslim for example since > conventional activities in daily life don't matter? > S: I'm sure for a Fundamentalist Muslim, conventional activities does matter. ;-) But you have taken my reference to conventional activity out of context. What I say about the irrelevance of conventional activity is in the context of the development of understanding ultimate realities. It is here, that conventional activities have no direct relationship. In other words, while you consider sitting in a particular posture and so on as being the conventional activity which corresponds with the reality of 'practice', I consider this to be completely wrong. ====== > You might say that they don't have right view and don't study Dhamma. > So there are conventional activities (not engaging in rites & rituals, > picking up a Dhamma book, opening it and reading it to learn). > S: No, I wouldn't need to think along those lines. And as I said, you have taken my reference to conventional activities out of context. And I don't wish to start another topic of discussion coming out from that. Metta, Sukinder #109462 From: "lawstu_uk" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 11:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] One question -- Citta, Counsciousness, Nama & Rupa and Dependent Origination lawstu_uk Dear Alex and Sarah, Many thanks for the replies. Much appreciated. I've just finished chapter 9 of Ajahn Sujin's Survey last night and it also talked about these vipakacitta and other cittas too. Yesterday I also happened to listen to Bhikkhu Bodhi's lecture on 'In the Buddha's Words' where in chapter 8a's recording he explained Sankara -- Sankara occurs in the suttas in three most common contexts: 1) It refers to all conditioned phenonema, made by causes and conditions. Common meaning - Constructed phenomena put together by causes and conditions. Specific meaning -- all phenomena of minds and body. In particular the Five Aggregates. 2) Fourth Aggregate. It also includes all other mental factors except Vedana, Sanna and Vinnana. 3) Sankara in terms of Dependent Origination, is conditioned by Ignorance and it conditions conscientiousness. Sankara here specifically refers to wholesome or unwholesome volitions, volitions that create wholesome or unwholesome kamma. Andrew --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Andrew, > Sarah > > p.s I just see that Alex has answered as well, but have not yet read his answers. #109463 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] One question -- Citta, Counsciousness, Nama & Rupa and Dependent Origination sarahprocter... Dear Andrew, --- On Tue, 24/8/10, lawstu_uk wrote: >I've just finished chapter 9 of Ajahn Sujin's Survey last night and it also talked about these vipakacitta and other cittas too. >Yesterday I also happened to listen to Bhikkhu Bodhi's lecture on 'In the Buddha's Words' where in chapter 8a's recording he explained Sankara -- Sankara occurs in the suttas in three most common contexts: 1) It refers to all conditioned phenonema, made by causes and conditions. Common meaning - Constructed phenomena put together by causes and conditions. Specific meaning -- all phenomena of minds and body. In particular the Five Aggregates. ... S: Good research! All conditioned dhammas, conditioned namas and rupas, i.e the 5 khandhas. Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, asankhara dhamma ... >2) Fourth Aggregate. It also includes all other mental factors except Vedana, Sanna and Vinnana. .... S: Sankhara khandha - 50 cetasikas, not vedana and sanna as you say. These have their own khandha. ... >3) Sankara in terms of Dependent Origination, is conditioned by Ignorance and it conditions conscientiousness. Sankara here specifically refers to wholesome or unwholesome volitions, volitions that create wholesome or unwholesome kamma. .... S: Past volitions, cetana or kamma which conditioned the birth consciousness and subsequent vipaka cittas in this life. There is also a useful section on "sankhara" in Nyantiloka's dictionary which you may like to have handy. Here's a link: http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic3_a.htm Metta Sarah p.s I spoke to my mother who really enjoyed meeting you briefly and speaking on the phone! Do you have a pic of yourself you can add to the member album? (For others, Andrew lives very close to my mother in S.England.) ======== #109464 From: Ken O Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: intentional actions. ashkenn2k Dear Alex > >>I felt the assertation that meditations are conventional actions. > >So is grabbing an Abhidhamma book of the shelf... > >>are not properly understand and miscontrue it is?must have a self.? >Even >>listening are conventional actions, so does meditation.? It is >not the >>conventional action that matters, it is the dhamma that >develop that matters.? > >>Seating to listen to >> >>dhamma is different from seating of having an object as a resort of >>>meditation.? >> > >I agree that it is WISDOM that ultimately finishes the job. However the trick is > >plant the conditions for it. What are things required for it, what are >obstructions for it? While of course "concentration in and of itself" doesn't >increase wisdom I nowhere approve this concentration. Concentration removes the >hindrances and allows wisdom to shine through, it also gives useful skills for >wisdom to use and useful things to reflect on. > KO:? the trick is not to plant concentration, the trick is to comprehend dhammas,? Without comprehending dhamma, concentration would only lead to rebirth rupa and arupa planes.? In suttas, one could see there are many ascetics at Buddha time have attained jhanas, Buddha still said it only lead to rebirth in rupa and arupa planes.? Without comprehending dhamma at the beginging and understand it, concentration is not only to let wisdom to shine through, if that is the case, the teachers of Buddha?before he attain enlightenemnt?would have already attain enlightenment. > >If one doesn't have the perfect environment (and can't yet get to it) it doesn't > >mean that one should wait for better times. "Do the best with what you have" as >the saying goes. KO:? That is not in line with the development of dhamma. >Again: If one cannot suppress hindrances for a short time, what makes you think >you can permanently root them out? > >Which is easier to do? To suppress them for one hour or cut them out >permanently? Before doing the latter, one has to be able to do the former. >Before you can run you need to be able to stand. It is true that Understanding >is more advanced than concentration, but to build the 2nd floor, one needs the >first floor to be built and well set. A quickly built 2nd floor without well >made 1st floor can quickly go up, but it will also quickly go down. Without sila > >and samadhi, "panna" is just book knowledge with 0% usefulness. > >Only if panna has something (sila and samadhi) to show for it, only then it is >not just book knowledge but actual wisdom. > >I consider sila to be a sort of wisdom as well. One needs to know what is kusala > >what is akusala and act in a proper way despite irrational urges. > > >Same with samadhi. Is one wise in regards to the hindrances and really >understand their drawbacks? Does on have enough faith in Buddha's teaching to >counteract them? > >If one is wise, fulfills sila, then one will have no problem setting them aside >and reach at least some "samatha". KO?:? You need book wisdom to develop wisdom just like those who Buddha disciples need to listen to to develop wisdom.? Panna is slowly develop and not lightning rod.? Those like Ven Sariputta all started developing wisdom for many eons.? The suttas always said gradual training Ken O #109465 From: Ken O Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 2:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of the Present Moment - for Ken O ashkenn2k > >? >Hi Ken O, > >This is from my original post: > >== >2a- When anger arises to experience and object now, this is conditioned >already. > KO:? When anger arise at the present moment, it is anger that is the main condition,? if it is already arise, whats there to talk about. >2b- Being conditioned already, this is its nature and nothing can be >done to alter this. KO:?? Since it is condition to arise, whats there to say, does that mean anger going to condition other anger to arise.? >2c- This is what it means to be 'beyond control'. KO:? beyond control is not about this.? Beyond controol means one cannot change the nature of anger as anger when it is present.? One cannot change the nature that is anger citta is anatta.?? ? It does not arise because it is beyond control, it arise because of a cause.? There must be a cause for it to arise for eg unpleasant words.? Does that mean anger would arise because of unpleasant words.? There could be kusala to arise.? If it?is beyond control so every time?when one listen to unplesant words, anger definitely arise since dhamma is beyond control.?? Are you telling me you?go to listen to a dhamma talk it is because of beyond control or your?intent to go.??? > >== >3a- Seeing arises and falls away followed by Receiving consciousness, >Investigating consciousness and the rest of the cittas in the process. >All these do so by conditions beyond control. > >3b- Highlighting Determining consciousness in this process, this too is >conditioned and beyond control. KO:? determining does not determine the nature of your subsequent citta, it is just determining the object of the cittas. > >3c- The Javana cittas that follow is also likewise conditioned and >beyond control. KO:? Javana is definitely condition to arise, but it does not mean javanas is always the anger :-)? same as above the reply > >== >7a- Seeing experiences visible object, and this is present, otherwise it >wouldn't happen. > >7b- Aversion arises to experience an object and this is either nama, >rupa or concept. > >7c- The object here again, is present else it would be meaningless to >say there is aversion towards something. > >7d- When there is aversion to colour at the sense door process, the rupa >has not fallen away. KO:? aversion only happen at the javana stage and not vipaka stage > >7e- If aversion to colour arise at the mind-door process, this rupa >would be a photocopy, so to speak. >7f- If aversion arises towards a nama object, this must necessarily be >one which has just fallen away. KO:? Nope, the nama object still remains.? because the javanas all have the same object and cannot be different thus the object not fallen away.? What you experience at the present is the present, fallen away cittas could condition the present citta but it is consider present.? If there is no present, how could you experience anything at the present.? Satipatthan would not work because it is about the present and not fallen away cittas. > >== >8a- When there is satipatthana, the object is either a nama or a rupa. > KO:? Show mean a text reference please because there is no?text even in Visdu that claim one can only practise satipatthana only if the object is?nama or rupa.? Satipatthana can arise because of understanding the dhamma that arise with an object.? It could be any object.? A set of teeth or a corpse can cause the arisen of enlightement.? Does that mean there is no satipatthana.? This assumption that the object of the citta during satipatthana should only be paramatha dhamma is wrong and inconsistent with the text.? Lets not tell me it is understanding because the text does not support such a basis.? Only when vipassana arise, then it is nama or rupa.?? >== >9a- In making a statement about the present moment, this necessarily is >about what is just past. > KO:? past is still past, there must be a present >9a- If about the object, it has already fallen away beyond control. > KO:? this is the nature of dhamma which I already said to arise, present and fall away >Are not most of the above reference to javana cittas? KO:? Nope Ken O #109466 From: Ken O Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 2:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body ashkenn2k Dear Jon I will just explain that dhamma arise with concepts.?? Concepts arise because of citta that thinks.? that is already a dhamma.? Citta cannot arise without the cetasikas that are already dhammas.? So it could be kusala or aksuala cetasikas that arise with concepts.? Concepts is just an object, it cannot arise without dhammas When craving arise with a pleasant object, it could be any object, not necessary a rupa or nama, it could be a painting, house or car Ken O #109467 From: Ken O Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 2:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Clinging to names. ashkenn2k Dear Sarah without names, how do one know dhamma in the first place.? It is panna that ariise with names that helps to develop.? One understand the words of the Buddha.? Without panna to arise with the names, there cannot be any development.? I always said it is dhamma that matters and the objects of the dhamma can be any until vipassana Now to say that we cling to names then that is not always true, then one cannot attain salvation because those disciples listen to names to understand dhamma.? There could be kusala or akusala dhamma that arise with names. Ken O #109468 From: Kevin F Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 2:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body farrellkevin80 Hi Jon, Jon: Regarding your comment 'Satipatthana can occur naturally', I would say that in fact satipatthana *only* occurs naturally. It occurs when previously developed/accumulated panna re-arises, conditioned by appropriate reflection on the teachings properly understood. It cannot in my view be conditioned by, for example, trying to observe dhammas. The development of the path is not a trial-and-error thing in the sense that learning to ride a bicycle is. Kevin: I agree fully Jon. Jon: OK, you see the recitation as a means of getting through the initial wrong concentration and helping the mind settle on its object. To my reading of the texts, recitation is appropriate only for the person who already has a well-developed sense of kusala vs. akusala, and who would know immediately if there was any akusala involved. Kevin: Dear Jon the purpose of recitation, I believe, is to help the mind settle on the object. If there was always Right Concentration what need for it? Doesn't intentionally reciting "head hair, head hair" and so on, automatically imply some wrong concentration? I mean you do it with an intention to remind your self to focus on that object! No other reason that I can see. Thanks, Kevin ___________ #109469 From: Kevin F Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:14 pm Subject: Kathavatthu Translation need info farrellkevin80 I'm looking for a good translation of the Kathavatthu. Can anybody recommend which one is good to purchase? Does anybody have this translation? How do you feel about it? "This translation of Kathavatthu by S.Z. Aung and Mrs. C.A.F. Rhys Davids, was originally published in 1915. It is a scholarly critical edition that provides notes, indexes, diagrams and other aids to understanding the reasons and order of secessions of the myriad schools of Buddhism. Note: Pariyatti can ship Pali Text Society publications to countries in the Americas only (North, Central and South America, Hawaii and the Caribbean, including Puerto Rico.)" Thanks. With metta, Kevin #109470 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:54 pm Subject: No conventional actions, they don't matter at all? truth_aerator Dear Sukin, Jon, KenH, Sarah, All, Please forgive me if I sound blunt. No offense intended. Some say that conventional actions don't matter at all and nothing that one does helps or hinders insight, maggaphala, reaching Nibbana and so on. Even killing Arhats or giving MahaDana? This assertion would mean that it doesn't matter if one kills his parents, an arahant, creates a Schism in the Sangha, or wounds the Buddha. (All these are conventional actions). This assertion would also mean that it is useless for maggaphala to lets say give Dana to the Buddha, to go to a monastery and listen to the Dhamma, to extend one's arm to grab a Dhamma Book and read it by looking with eyeballs from left to right, by holding the book and changing pages... Are conventional actions outcome of certain beliefs, wisdom, intentions and so on? Sure. An Arahant cannot grab a gun and kill children or kill himself. No amount of "but he didn't intend to" works. Without intention there will not be a conventional action, and conventional action isn't resultless as it comes to helping or hindering the arising of insight or maggaphala. Can one ever acheive wisdom without lets say: going to listen to a Dhamma talk reading a Dhamma book performing certain actions and abstaining from certain ones (killing parents, killing Arhats, wounding Buddha, etc)? I hope that you understand what I am trying to say. With metta, Alex #109471 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 4:07 pm Subject: No control? None at all? truth_aerator Dear Sukin, Jon, KenH, Sarah, all, Does kusala lead to kusalavipaka as opposed to akusalavipaka? Does akusala lead to akusalavipaka as opposed to kusalavipaka? Or are you saying that there is no control and whatever is performed can lead to any kind of result? Doesn't reaching maggaphala control the non-arising of eliminated fetters? Or are fetters so out of control that even an Arahant may have lust, anger, delusion, and perhaps do any kind of conventional action (that doesn't exist) such as shooting people and than hanging himself? With metta, Alex #109472 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 4:13 pm Subject: Satipatthana only occurs naturally? truth_aerator Dear Jon, KenH, Sukin, all, If Satipatthana only occurs naturally than I guess even an observant muslim or an Atheist, is on the same level and likelihood as good Buddhist to have satipatthana arise. I guess it doesn't matter if one doesn't go out of natural way to buy a Dhamma book or to visit a Buddhist (not a mosque) monastery and actively listen to a Dhamma. Someone who has never does this would be on the same level as someone who did. ... I guess a Muslim, an Atheist, anyone whatsoever is as likely to grow in Buddhist wisdom regardless of what they have or haven't conventionally done. With metta, Alex #109473 From: Kevin F Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 4:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] No conventional actions, they don't matter at all? farrellkevin80 Dear Alex, Just one point, not to detract from your message: Alex: An Arahant cannot grab a gun and kill children or kill himself. No amount of "but he didn't intend to" works. Kevin: An Arahant, or any Ariya can kill himself. That is not a problem. I think some Arahants did because they had deadly diseases. Maybe they thought they would just be a burden to others with such disease and that it would be better to eliminate the life and be done with the sense bases that cause dukkha for good? I'm not sure. Kevin ___________ #109474 From: Kevin F Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 4:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana only occurs naturally? farrellkevin80 Dear Alex: Alex: Dear Jon, KenH, Sukin, all, If Satipatthana only occurs naturally than I guess even an observant muslim or an Atheist, is on the same level and likelihood as good Buddhist to have satipatthana arise. I guess it doesn't matter if one doesn't go out of natural way to buy a Dhamma book or to visit a Buddhist (not a mosque) monastery and actively listen to a Dhamma. Someone who has never does this would be on the same level as someone who did. ... I guess a Muslim, an Atheist, anyone whatsoever is as likely to grow in Buddhist wisdom regardless of what they have or haven't conventionally done. With metta, Alex Kevin: Hi Alex. I think the point the others here are making is that there is no method to bring up the vipassana nanas. One can't decide to meditate on vipassana in some certain way until it happens and then go about it. It arises because of conditions. One of those conditions is understanding on the conceptual level, which is borne of hearing the dhamma... studying it, etc. That is true. However, I think they also think that one cannot undertake profitable actions to be a supprot for this. I argue that one can. One can practice restraint and virtue for kusala (they disagree and think it is always wrong effort, as I understand it). They think no one can practice meditation and calm the mind leading to deeper kusala concentration which is a support for wisdom. One can I think. One can also learn about nama and rupa and contemplate it to understand. The bottom line is, however, that without past accumulations, it will not culminate in penetration in this lifetime, though it may be a support for it happening quicker in a future lifetime. There is much one can do: sila, samadhi, and wisdom. But if you get 100 people and they all follow the same instructions on sila, on samadhi, and on wisdom (learning about dhammas) and they all practice exactly the same way, some will attain and some won't, depending on accumulations and practice from past lifetimes. For the Paramis must be completed. Even if one can't attain nibbana in this life, that does not mean there is no hope. For ones endeavors now are not lost. One may attain in another life, perhaps very easily since so much had been developed in the past ones. The VisM is clear about this, very clear. Some attain nibbana after 40 years, some after 400, some after 4 months or 4 minutes. Some have to practice sila for a long time, etc. It is all about accumulations which are not-self. All the best.... I hope you don't mind my post. Thanks, Kevin ___________ #109475 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 12:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana only occurs naturally? upasaka_howard Hi, Kevin (and Alex) - Kevin, I think it is proper to speak up as to agreement or disagreement, equally. More often, folks speak up to disagree. I'd like to take this opportunity to mention, for whatever little it might be worth to you or anyone else, that I agree entirely with what you state in the following. With metta, Howard In a message dated 8/24/2010 12:31:33 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, farrellkevin80@... writes: Kevin: Hi Alex. I think the point the others here are making is that there is no method to bring up the vipassana nanas. One can't decide to meditate on vipassana in some certain way until it happens and then go about it. It arises because of conditions. One of those conditions is understanding on the conceptual level, which is borne of hearing the dhamma... studying it, etc. That is true. However, I think they also think that one cannot undertake profitable actions to be a supprot for this. I argue that one can. One can practice restraint and virtue for kusala (they disagree and think it is always wrong effort, as I understand it). They think no one can practice meditation and calm the mind leading to deeper kusala concentration which is a support for wisdom. One can I think. One can also learn about nama and rupa and contemplate it to understand. The bottom line is, however, that without past accumulations, it will not culminate in penetration in this lifetime, though it may be a support for it happening quicker in a future lifetime. There is much one can do: sila, samadhi, and wisdom. But if you get 100 people and they all follow the same instructions on sila, on samadhi, and on wisdom (learning about dhammas) and they all practice exactly the same way, some will attain and some won't, depending on accumulations and practice from past lifetimes. For the Paramis must be completed. Even if one can't attain nibbana in this life, that does not mean there is no hope. For ones endeavors now are not lost. One may attain in another life, perhaps very easily since so much had been developed in the past ones. The VisM is clear about this, very clear. Some attain nibbana after 40 years, some after 400, some after 4 months or 4 minutes. Some have to practice sila for a long time, etc. It is all about accumulations which are not-self. All the best.... I hope you don't mind my post. Thanks, Kevin ___________ #109476 From: Kevin F Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana only occurs naturally? farrellkevin80 Dear Howard: Howard: Kevin, I think it is proper to speak up as to agreement or disagreement, equally. More often, folks speak up to disagree. I'd like to take this opportunity to mention, for whatever little it might be worth to you or anyone else, that I agree entirely with what you state in the following. With metta, Howard Kevin: Thanks for your message. With metta, Kevin ___________ #109477 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 8:25 pm Subject: Re: awareness of 4 elements within one's body truth_aerator Hi Jon, all, >dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > =============== > > J: Many thanks for providing the text referred to by Kevin. Your >ability to come up with quotes never ceases to amaze me! How do you >manage it? ;-)) I use table of contents in books and use e-search of online files like Visudhimagga. > J: Not sure what you are alluding to here. Have I ever advocated >not developing kusala of any kind? ;-)) I am alluding that effort is better be put in, that there are right and wrong intentions. That as long as one never develops, there will not be accumulations for that skill. Perfect skill doesn't appear out of nowhere and it isn't perfect from the get-go. Just like you cannot run before you can walk, same is here. To refuse doing "XYZ because one doesn't have proper accumulations for it" will never by itself create the needed accumulations for XYZ. Even Arahants can make mistakes, so to expect one "you better be perfect or your samatha, vipassana, whatever, will do more harm than good" to be a dead end proposition. Conceit I AM still exists for Anagamis. Even Anagamis have ruparaga. A worldling still has fetters of Self View. So to expect a good worldling to be always perfect and always act like an Arahant is putting cart before the horse. With metta, Alex #109478 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 8:36 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: intentional actions. truth_aerator Dear KenO, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Alex > KO:? the trick is not to plant concentration, the trick is to >comprehend dhammas,? Without comprehending dhamma, concentration >would only lead to rebirth rupa and arupa planes.? Right, comprehension of the Dhamma is the key. The trick is to HOW to achieve it and which "means to the end" to use? The proper effort is better be put in. There are right and wrong intentions, there are helpful and harmful actions. As long as one never develops kusala, there will not be accumulations of kusala to reach Nibbana. Perfect skill doesn't appear out of nowhere and it isn't perfect from the get-go. Just like you cannot run before you can walk, same is here. To refuse doing "XYZ because one doesn't have proper accumulations for it" will never by itself create the needed accumulations for XYZ. Even Arahants can make mistakes, so to expect one "you better be perfect or your samatha, vipassana, whatever, will do more harm than good" to be a dead end proposition. Conceit I AM still exists for Anagamis. Even Anagamis have ruparaga. A worldling still has fetters of Self View. So to expect a good worldling to be always perfect and always act like an Arahant is putting cart before the horse. If one avoids action because one is not perfect at it, then how will one ever be perfect in it? >In suttas, one could see there are many ascetics at Buddha time >have attained jhanas, Buddha still said it only lead to rebirth in > rupa and arupa planes.? Such as Alara Kalama and Udakka Ramaputta? If they have heard and considered sutta like anattalakkhana, I am sure that they would achieve either stream or maybe even Arhatship right there one the spot while listening to the Buddha. Many of us here have read 1000x the required theory for Arhatship... > Without comprehending dhamma at the beginging and > understand it, concentration is not only to let wisdom to shine >through, if that is the case, the teachers of Buddha?before he >attain enlightenemnt?would have already attain enlightenment. See above. His two teachers didn't hear Him. If they did, they would probably become as high as Arhats on the spot. > KO?:? You need book wisdom to develop wisdom just like those who >Buddha disciples need to listen to to develop wisdom.? Right. And some of us have 1000x the amount it is required for Arhatship. Something else is missing... I am all for learning, but the path doesn't start & end with reading (which I love, btw). > Panna is slowly develop and not lightning rod. If one drives at 5 mph then it will take a long time to reach the destination 100miles away. If one drives at 50mph, then one will reach it 10 times faster. Sure one will probably experience more bumps on the way, but the time will be shortened. With metta, Alex #109479 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 8:43 pm Subject: Re: intentional actions. truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, > S: Just as Pt explained - whenever there is more wrong view. Only >anna can know that. As he explained, it would be whenever one had an >dea that the activity was performed as a kind of ritual with the >belief that it would lead one along the path. Not every meditator believes in a Self or in rites and rituals. The methods are skillful means for wisdom. Wisdom can't arise out of nowhere, it needs development and meditation is a tool for the job, that gets put aside when it completes its function. A tool can be properly or improperly used, the fault is with the user, not with the tool itself. Before one is stream-enterer, it is natural that mistakes can be made and that sometimes Self view can arise. It is up to discernment to separate what works from what doesn't and to properly use the tools. Perfect skill, perfect mindfulnes, perfect wisdom doesn't appear out of nowhere and it isn't perfect from the get-go. Just like you cannot run before you can walk, same is here. To refuse doing "XYZ because one doesn't have proper accumulations for it" will never by itself create the needed accumulations for XYZ. Even Arahants can make mistakes, so to expect one "you better be perfect or your samatha, vipassana or it will do more harm than good" to be a dead end proposition. Conceit I AM still exists for Anagamis. Even Anagamis have ruparaga. A worldling still has fetters of Self View. So to expect a good worldling to be always perfect and always act like an Arahant is putting cart before the horse. One should learn from mistakes that are made, one should develop discernment and all the wholesome qualities that are needed. Meditations are some of the conditions for wisdom to be used merely as tools. With metta, Alex #109480 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 9:20 pm Subject: Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi kenhowardau Hi Kevin, --- <. . .> K: > So, am I read to read this as to say that we should discard all conventional understandings of vipassana which are not on the level of penetration because they arise with wrong understanding and wrong effort? --- I need you to rephrase that. What do you mean by 'conventional levels of understanding that are not at the level of penetration'? A conventional understanding is one that sees persisting things operating in the course of time. That sort of understanding is not at any level of right understanding - theory, practice or penetration - is it? Ken H #109481 From: "bhikkhu3" Date: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:41 pm Subject: 4 links 2 ENTRY! bhikkhu5 Friends: 4 Things Opens the Entrance Streaming right to Nibb?na! The blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus and friends, these four things, when developed and cultivated, lead to the realization of the fruit of Stream-entry . What four? 1: Association with excellent persons, 2: Hearing and learning true Dhamma , 3: Rational and careful attention , 4: Praxis in accordance with this Dhamma . These four things, when developed and cultivated, lead to the realization of the fruit of Stream-entry ... lead to the realization of the fruit of Once-returning ... lead to the realization of the fruit of Non-returning ... lead to the obtaining of understanding ... lead to the growth of understanding ... lead to the expansion of understanding ... lead to great understanding ... lead to extensive understanding ... lead to vast understanding ... lead to deep understanding ... lead to matchless understanding ... lead to wide understanding ... lead to rich understanding ... lead to quick understanding ... lead to buoyant understanding ... lead to joyous understanding ..... lead to swift understanding ... lead to sharp understanding ... lead to penetrative understanding ... lead to transcendent understanding ... lead to great wisdom ...!!! What four? 1: Association with excellent persons, 2: Hearing & learning true Dhamma , 3: Rational and careful attention , 4: Praxis in accordance with this Dhamma . These 4 things, when initiated & trained, lead to penetrative understanding... These 4 things, when completed, lead to the very final fruit of Arahat-ship : Awakening into Enlightenment , the very deathless dimension: Nibb ana ...!!! <...> Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book V [411-2] 55: Stream Entry. Sotapatti. The fruits of Stream Entry. 55-63. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ * <...> #109482 From: Sukinderpal Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 12:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana sukinderpal Hi Kevin, > > Sukinder: Is the above reference to development of samatha / jhana or of > vipassana? If the latter, I'd be very surprised, but if the former, know > that I was talking about vipassana development. > > Kevin. The above was about samattha. So do you agree that one must > strive for > samattha. It does not seem that you would be surprised if it was about > samattha. The quote shows that we must strive for samattha. > S: I don't know what you have in mind exactly. But I'll just say that right effort is needed for both the development of samatha and vipassana, and the more the better. However, like all dhammas, right effort can't be made to arise by will nor in the performance of any ritualistic kind of activity. Do you agree with this? > >he must ward off [temptation] to > > drop the meditation subject and to let his mind get distracted among the > > variety of external objects. For if not, just as when a man has > entered on > > a one-foot-wide cliff path, if he looks about here and there without > > watching his step, he may miss his footing and fall down the cliff, > which > > is perhaps as high as a hundred men, so too, when there is outward > > distraction, the meditation subject gets neglected and deteriorates.* > > So he should give his attention to it warding off distraction*. > > Kevin: Agree of disagree? > Suk: Yes, when understood as being all about causes and conditions between paramattha dhammas each performing their specific functions before falling away completely. > Sukin: I don't know this simile, can you elaborate? > > Kevin: Of course. > > Vism Ch. IV, 72. > > "Here is the explanation of the meaning. > When a too clever bee learns that a flower on a tree is blooming, it > sets out hurriedly, overshoots the mark, turns back, and arrives when the > pollen is finished; and another, not clever enough bee, who sets out with > too slow a speed, arrives when the pollen is finished too; but a > clever bee > sets out with balanced speed, arrives with ease at the cluster of flowers, > takes as much pollen as it pleases and enjoys the honey-dew. > <....> Suk: Thanks for giving me the quote. But I am not sure now what your original question was aimed at. Perhaps you can comment some here. Metta, Sukinder #109483 From: Sukinderpal Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 12:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] No conventional actions, they don't matter at all? sukinderpal Hi Alex, I take it that you are reacting to some of what I said in our exchange. If so, then you must blame this on a pattern of response quite typical of you. In your eagerness to argue you often break up the other person's comment such that the meaning changes, or else it becomes difficult even for you to remember what the argument was all about in a following post. And sometimes later on, like here, you even start a new thread based on the overall misconception. This is from an earlier exchange: >S:This is clearly a case of having taken the >particular >conventional >activity of sitting in a particular posture >etc. as >being 'cause' Alex: The activity for understanding is the PATH and PRACTICE to attain it. >when in fact causes and conditions are between paramattha dhammas >only. Alex: What about killing father or mother or creating a Schism in the Sangha? These are conventional activities with grave results. If they give results, then why not wholesome activities not count to give wholesome results? And in the following response from me: > What about killing father or mother or creating a Schism in the > Sangha? These are conventional activities with grave results. If they > give results, then why not wholesome activities not count to give > wholesome results? > S: You mean kamma is not the cetasika which is cetana? You mean the determining factor in which one cetana is akusala citta and another akusala kammapattha is not in the strength of the cetana and that of the citta and rest of the accompanying cetasikas but in the outward conventional activity? Suk: You can see that from my stating that 'causes and conditions are between paramatha dhammas and not conventional activities', you have made it to mean the following here: > Some say that conventional actions don't matter at all and nothing > that one does helps or hinders insight, maggaphala, reaching Nibbana > and so on. Even killing Arhats or giving MahaDana? > > This assertion would mean that it doesn't matter if one kills his > parents, an arahant, creates a Schism in the Sangha, or wounds the > Buddha. (All these are conventional actions). This assertion would > also mean that it is useless for maggaphala to lets say give Dana to > the Buddha, to go to a monastery and listen to the Dhamma, to extend > one's arm to grab a Dhamma Book and read it by looking with eyeballs > from left to right, by holding the book and changing pages... > Suk: By insisting on paramattha dhammas I am stating and affirming in the best way, the reality of kamma and vipaka. But the cloudiness which necessarily comes with thinking about such things with self view seems to be why you then end up distorting my message. > Are conventional actions outcome of certain beliefs, wisdom, > intentions and so on? Sure. An Arahant cannot grab a gun and kill > children or kill himself. No amount of "but he didn't intend to" > works. Without intention there will not be a conventional action, and > conventional action isn't resultless as it comes to helping or > hindering the arising of insight or maggaphala. > > Can one ever acheive wisdom without lets say: > going to listen to a Dhamma talk > reading a Dhamma book > performing certain actions and abstaining from certain ones (killing > parents, killing Arhats, wounding Buddha, etc)? > Suk: Now you are beginning to sound like Ken O which he and I had discussions about in the past, but I do not wish to start that topic with you here. > I hope that you understand what I am trying to say. > Suk: I don't know. It is possible that I keep misunderstanding you as you do me. ;-) Metta, Sukinder #109484 From: Kevin F Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi farrellkevin80 Dear Ken, Kevin: I appreciate you message very much. I consider myself very fortunate to be able to discuss Dhamma here with people who have knowledge of it. For how many lifetimes have I been born in the lower realms where no such knowledge can be obtained? Due to my strong attachment and lust I can deduce that it has been many, many times. How many times have I been born in other planes where such discussion is not possible? Many. This is a rare occasion which I am grateful for. Just to add to this a little bit: sometimes people may think that we are not as fortunate as the people born under the Buddha, or in the Buddha's time. That is certainly true. We are not in the direct presence of the Blessed One or of the Arahants. But how rare is it to be born during a Buddha's dispensation? Especially one as great as this one! Although the Buddha has passed away, this is a rare Sasana. All the teachings are still preserved, in tact. Many Buddhas did not teach in detail. We have all three Pitikas here, including the Abhidhamma. We have all the Commentaries and Subcommentaries. There have been Great Buddhist Councils which helped preserve these teachings for our benefit. the Great Buddhaghosa, a master of the Tipitika and it's Commentaries and Sub-commentaries has written the Great Work-- the Visuddhimagga to detail the whole path and preserve the dispensation possibly even further. All of this is at our fingertips. Though we are not in front of the Buddha, it is almost as if we are. Enough of that. As to your questions... Ken: A conventional understanding is one that sees persisting things operating in the course of time. That sort of understanding is not at any level of right understanding - theory, practice or penetration - is it? Kevin: My limited point here is that there is often times wrong understanding and wrong effort as we approach wisdom. We so rarely have right understanding when we try to understand anatta and dhammas. Yet, it is still profitable because we give attention. With samattha it is the same way. Although we may have moments of Wrong Conentration, there is still much profit. For those moments can turn into moments of Right Concentration. If one had to have Right Concentration all the time, why the suggestion to repeat out loud "head hairs, head hairs" and so on during meditation on the 32 body parts? Simply having to recite that implies some degree of wrong concentration-- some moments of it. We are trying, with our will, the stay with the object. We are imploring the citta to stay with the object. It is not that we naturally can, or naturally know which moment is right or wrong every time. It can help the right type of panna develop though, such as with learning about the wisdom sections of the path. All the best, Kevin ___________ #109485 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:32 am Subject: Re: q. chandrafabian Dear Sarah, Dear Fabian, <.....> S: As I understand, the theory and the bhavana must be in agreement. Pariyatti leads to patipatti. If the theory says that dhammas are anatta and can only be understood at this moment, this is what the pratice, the bhavana, should be about. FABIAN: Pariyatti wisdom(sutamaya panna) would never becomes patipatti wisdom(bhavanamaya panna) if we don't practice bhavana. It would still pariyatti wisdom till the end of our life. Please tell me Sarah can you see the beginning, the middle, the end of your thought processes? Can you see it clearly? If you don't, how do you have clear understanding of thought processes? your knowledge of thought processes is still conceptual (cintamaya panna) based on reading/learning (sutamaya panna) <....> S: Right effort arises with right understanding. The more understanding the greater the right effort that arises. Kusala cittas arise and fall away instantly like any other cittas. They can be understood directly, just as rupas can. At such moments there is right effort. No need to think of 'doing' anything. FABIAN: not necessarily cintamaya or sutamaya panna bring right effort. It is in connection to bhavanamaya panna right effort arises, in relevance to Noble Eightfold Path. I am sorry to ask you again Sarah, you said kusala citta arise and falls, do you actually see it? How it arises, and how it falls? Or is it just conceptual understanding? <.....> S: On the contrary, whatever arises is at the present moment. If there is a 'wandering mind' now, such thinking can be known as just another conditioned dhamma. I don't think the aim is "to maintain present moment". This is impossible. FABIAN: of course impossible for people without sufficient mindfulness, awareness and concentration to be at present moment. Thinking and wandering mind are always not at the present moment. Meditator able to maintain their "present moment-ness" for hours, even days. <......> S: I think the mind is always at the present moment, but it's not understood. For example, when seeing arises, it's always at the present moment, but there's no awareness of it. We don't need to "keep" anything, just begin to understand what appears. FABIAN: At the present moment means we are aware of mental and physical activity, if you are thinking or imagining, or planning on something, how can you aware of your own mental activity and physical activities at the same moment? IF YOU ARE NOT AWARE OF YOUR MENTAL AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY CURRENTLY PROCESSING, ARE YOU AT THE PRESENT MOMENT? If you are not aware what's going on with your mental and physical activities, are you at the present moment? <.....> S: To my way of thinking, trying to do as you suggest would be a kind of lobha, an attachment to a particular kind of achievement, a desire for a particular result. FABIAN: That is not true, It is Dhammavicayo, it is sampajanna, it is mindfulness, it is concentration. And..... it is a way to test your ability to be at "the present moment" how long you can be at the present moment. The real present moment. Not conceptual present moment. S: How about now, is there any awareness or understanding of visible object, attachment or any other dhamma appearing? Metta Sarah ===== FABIAN: Dear Sarah it seems you don't understand the awareness of Vipassana Bhavana and awareness of ordinary waking state. In ordinary waking state we aware of things happening but attached with defilements, i.e. Lobha, envy...etc. In Vipassana Bhavana the awareness is just purely aware of the mental process and physical process at works, you are (your mindfulness) not part of it, you are not attached to the activity, but fully aware of its process. Most of the time people getting involved in the thinking activity, therefore they are not aware, and therefore they are not at the present moment. but if you aware of the thinking activity, its appearance, how it arises, how it matures and how it passed away, you are at the present moment. Mettacittena, fabian #109486 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 7:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Little selves? ptaus1 Hi Howard, Thanks for your reply. > pt: What do you mean by "single reality"? > ------------------------------------ > H: Only one. pt: Ok, I got that bit, I'm just not sure what that really means? Something like nibbana being the only "reality" because it is unconditioned? Or something more elaborate maybe like nibbana being the only true reality that underlines all our experiences, etc? > H: The quality of the content of experience is constantly changing. Our > parsing of the experiential stream into conceived-of individual entities is > exactly that, a conventional parsing, and, yes, a matter of thought. pt: Ok, in my book this "parsing of the experiential stream" would be thinking. So, I'm guessing the actual "experiential stream" would be dhammas arising and falling. So, not thinking. Perhaps you could define what's meant by the "stream" more precisely, and at which point the "parsing" enters the picture. > H: Everything that we seem to observe is a matter of convention. That is > what I believe and what I believe the Buddha taught. That doesn't make > these alleged things outright fictitious. Warmth and hardness and sights and > sounds all have a basis in experience, but it is a mere convenience to > conceive of them as entities. They are, in fact, ungraspable as such. pt: Hm, so I take it that dhammas as in "warmth and hardness" are still somehow different from the "stream of experience"? What exactly is the difference? I mean, in my book the dhamma and the experience would be the same thing. > H: There are stages of insight. They all involve more and more seeing > *through* phenomena, first gross phenomena and later fine phenomena, as > impermanent, unsatisfactory, without substance or self, and, finally, as mere > convention and lacking in reality. There is no reality beyond convention even > to the so-called paramattha dhammas, mere mirages, a magician's smoke & > mirrors. pt: But I still don't understand - if these stages of insight are still nothing more than being concerned with conventions, mirages, etc, then what exactly is the difference between stages of insight on the one hand, and just thinking about insight on the other hand? > H: The major insight moments are the paths and fruits which are > steppings out from the realm of illusion and convention to reality itself, nibbana. pt: Isn't nibbana also experienced with the help of panna, attention, sati, etc, which, as you say, are illusions? I'm also not sure what you mean by "stepping out"? You mean at the moment when nibbana is experienced, there are no khandas anymore? Wouldn't that be parinibbana already? > H: No, insight isn't thinking. pt: Ok, I hope you'll explain the difference between the two a bit more in detail. I mean, I'm still not clear exactly why can't I think my way to nibbana if insight too is about illusions and conventions, just like thinking. > H: How would you distinguish between thinking about mustard and tasting > mustard? pt: At the moment, I go by what ACMA would probably say on the matter: 1. there's the sense-door process of cittas, which experience a rupa as the object (I think nutritive essence in a kalapa is related to tasting). 2. second there's the first mind door process of cittas where panna (hopefully) knows the characteristics of that rupa by way of navattabba. 3. there follow several mind door processes, with concepts as objects, which recognise the actual taste as being that of a mustard. 4. there follow many, many further mind-door processes of cittas, with concepts as objects, which make up the "thinking about mustard". > H: Useful thinking can set us in the right direction and can plant useful > mental seeds. It is very important. But it is calming body and mind, and > heightening mindfulness and attention, that is transformative, leading to > the wisdom that "sees through" and liberates. pt: Hm, but if wisdom, mindfulness and attention are nothing but illusions and conventions, then how exactly do they help with liberation, as compared to just thinking about liberation? Best wishes pt #109487 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:30 am Subject: Re: intentional actions. ptaus1 Hi Alex, --- > A: Washing dishes may make one a better washer but the skill in washing dishes isn't directly transferable for Nibbana. Metta, asubha, anapanasati on other hand is. pt: I'm not sure it's useful to consider metta bhavana for example as a skill that can be compared to some other mundane skill like dishwashing. Metta bhavana happens in moments when metta arises. Such moments can happen during dishwashing or any other activity. ------ --- > > pt: I think others have pointed out several times that wrong view >(so stronger akusala) is more likely to arise while engaging (with >ignorance) in practices believing they lead to awakening. > > A: But the Buddha himself often stressed the benefit of Metta, asubha, anapanasati. pt: True, but I think you'd agree that when he referred to these, he was basically referring to an equivalent of a citta that arises with sati and other kusala cetasikas, not with wrong view and other akusala cetasikas? So, I can tell you "yeah, I do 2 hours of metta bhavana every day from 6-8 a.m." But, if during those times most of my cittas are really cittas with wrong view and other akusala cetasikas, then I guess you'd agree that my "metta bhavana" has little, or nothing, to do with what the Buddha had in mind when he referred to metta? ------ --- > A: Similar is with development of wholesome qualities. Conditionality doesn't have to reject the possibility effort and intention. Of course all of this is conditioned. pt: I don't think anyone was saying that conditionality rejects effort and intention. What's under discussion is how do we exactly know practically speaking the difference between right and wrong effort, and right and wrong intention? ------ --- > > pt: On the other hand, I think you're asking more in terms of whether >washing the dishes can be a better/worse condition for the arising >of kusala, than asubha practice for example. > > A: Well, don't suttas recommend certain activities? > > Does VsM recomend Dhutanga practices? Doesn't it teach dhutanga practices, and many others (like metta, asubha, anapanasati)? pt: Would you agree that when suttas/Vsm mention "activities", they are basically referring to an equivalent of kusala cittas with kusala cetasikas? So, not to akusala cittas with akusala cetasikas? ------ --- > A: Or does VsM state that any surrounding is equally good? Then why did it talk about faults of monastery and ten impediments? pt: Yes, this is an interesting point I'm not sure about either. As I remember from previous discussions you had with Jon and others - location, surroundings, etc, would be supporting conditions based on concepts (such as location) as objects of cittas, if I'm not mistaken. But, I don't see how this relates to our discussion - regardless of the location, if one engages in an activity with akusala cittas, that's wrong path. ------ --- > A: "4. Herein, as to the profitable triad (see Dhs., p.l): all the ascetic practices, that is to say, those of trainers, ordinary men, and men whose cankers have been destroyed, may be either profitable or [in the Arahant's case] indeterminate. [80] No ascetic practice is unprofitable." - VsM II, 78 pt: Well, I don't think anyone's disputing that ascetic practice is profitable, since what's said above assumes that ascetic practice is undertaken with kusala cittas. What's under dispute is - can you and me engage in ascetic practices with kusala cittas only? How about with majority kusala cittas and a few akusala ones? How about majority akusala ones and just a few kusala ones? Do aksuala cittas count as "ascetic practice"? Is "ascetic practice" profitable if one has majority akusala cittas in it? Do kusala cittas increase as a result or not? Are the few kusala cittas worth the many aksuala cittas with wrong view? Etc. ------ --- > A: And if one is not doing anything to condition more kusala, does this means that it will arise and increase in strength and frequency? pt: Well, how do kusala cittas get conditioned to arise? By previous kusala cittas, no? So, I can't condition them with aksuala cittas. So, if my "meditation" consists of majority akusala cittas, am I really conditioning more kusala cittas? ------ --- > > pt: I would say both, depending on the conditions. Again, it's a >disputable matter whether an activity can be considered as a >condition in the first place, or not. > > A: And what does lets say VsM say for 100s of pages dealing with Ascetic practices, Samadhi, Sila and so on? pt: Well as mentioned, Vsm I think assumes that all these activities are engaged in with kusala cittas. Can you perhaps find a quote that an action which has akusala cittas would still be profitable? That might help the discussion. ------ --- > > pt: Why does it matter? Do you want to get to nibbana quicker? > > A: That is a wholesome wish. pt: Yes, if motivated by chanda, no if motivated by lobha. I usually get the second one. ------ --- > > pt: It's been repeatedly said >that it's not metta, asubha or anapanasati that are under dispute, >but the beginner's ability to actually engage in these practices in >a wholesome way (without wrong view). > > A: It seems to me to be harder to engage in Dhamma while doing such kind of activities. pt: I think it helps if we don't consider metta, anapanasati, etc, as activities at all, but as instances of wholesome cittas. Then the situation is clear and one can be honest with himself. ------ --- > > pt: In my case, such questions are again motivated by lobha that >looks to the future and desires some result in the future. > > So when an Arahant makes a decision to do something it is done through lobha? pt: :) I'm not an Arahat. Usually when I wish for something, be it more money, or more sati, or more panna, it's all to do with lobha. I think there was chanda a few times, but it's possible I was mistaken. Either way, mostly lobha. ------ --- > A: Considering that ordinary people have lots of lobha, one might as well try to use it for kusala things rather than for akusala. > > Craving can be used to eliminate all craving as Ananda told a certain Bhikkhuni. pt: Are you sure? I might be wrong, I think Ananda was implying chanda (wholesome), not lobha. ------ --- > A: Akusala ALSO conditions more akusala. pt: Exactly, which is why people keep saying we have to make sure that when we "meditate", it's not with akusala cittas. So, how do we make sure? What's meditation? ------ --- > A: And when there are 100x as much akusala for 1 moment of kusala it seems to be 1 step forward, 99 steps back. A regress. Only if one either > > a) Makes more kusala than akusala > or > b) The kusala is much greater in strength than lots of weak akusala so forward progress is made. pt: I don't know. I think kusala conditions more kusala, regardless of akusala that happens in between. But, more akusala in between postpones the next kusala. But still kusala accumulates, and eventually will be strong enough to condition magga and phala. But more akusala in between would make the whole thing a lot longer. I don't know. ------ --- > A: Why can't one study and investigate in a state with suppressed hindrances (lets say access concentration with jhana prior to it)? > > There are less hindrances to obstruct wisdom there. pt: I don't think the argument is to say that the above cannot happen. Just that most people nowadays would try to do it, but not succeed, and just generate more akusala in the process. Whether that includes you and me, I don't know. I hope not, but it probably does. ------ --- > A: It appears to me that one can make the same mistakes while studying and reading the Dhamma as meditating. So all critiques about "your doing it with wrong view" can also be said about pariyatti with wrong views. pt: I agree in principle, but from experience, I've met more people who are fanatical about meditation than about the texts. ------ Best wishes pt #109488 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:33 am Subject: Re: intentional actions. ptaus1 Hi Alex, > > pt: It's interesting to note the difference in definitions as to >what "bhavana" actually is. For example, you (and me to a degree) >often think about bhavana as something that's "done". Sort of like >when one does an activity - practices piano, does the work, does the >dishes, or does metta, asubha, etc. > > A: Please don't attack my usage of words. Buddha and Arahants also talked about these things. I don't postulate a Self that can do anything. > > All I am saying is that actions do occur. pt: No attack of course, just discussing the meaning. My thinking is, as mentioned before, that when the Buddha and arahats talk about metta, anapanasati, etc, they're referring to an equivalent of kusala cittas with kusala cetasikas. Not to akusala cittas with wrong view and other akusala cetasikas. So, when you and me use the same words (metta, anapanasati) do we mean just kusala cittas, or a mix of kusala and akusala cittas? > > pt: But I think Jon, Sarah and others here use the term "bhavana" for >every occasion when mental development occurs. For example, every >time understanding arises, that moment itself would be bhavana I >guess. > > A: Not every moment is equal. Kusala of lets say 1st Jhana is not as strong as kusala of 2nd Jhana. Doing dana & sila can make one reborn in kamaloka, but according to orthodox understanding it itself cannot make one be reborn in rupa or arupa loka. > > Moment of panna for a worldling vs a Buddha are different in intensity and quality. pt: Ok, but that wasn't disputed. What was disputed was equating "bhavana" to an activity such as siting down and doing metta meditation for 2 hours, regardless of whether there are kusala or akusala cittas arising. What I was saying, I understand others here to be saying that "bhavana" refers to a moment of mental development - an arising of a kusala citta, regardless of when and where it arises - after jhana, during a walk, during dishwashing, etc. > > pt: I mean, if we have a few moments of metta, with a lot of akusala >moments in between, would the whole thing (the entire sitting >session) count as metta bhavana? > > A: The *Quality* should not be forgotten about. 1 strong moment of metta may be stronger than 100 weak ones. pt: Well, yes that's possible, but how's that related to my question? > A: Again you and many others seem to say that external conditionality (lay life vs bhikkhu state) or (lay life vs retreats) isn't a supportive condition. pt: Hm, as said, I'm not sure here. I think these things (lay life, monastic life) are supportive conditions in general terms. In specific terms it would depend on the citta. E.g. if I think about my monastic status with conceit, then that would condition more akusala cittas. So, it would depend on the specific citta. Either way, I feel none of this is really related to my question. E.g. whether you're a monastic or not, what's "metta bhavana"? > A: Metta bhavana IS recomended to be done in physical seclusion. > ""A meditator who wants to develop firstly lovingkindness among these, if he is a beginner, should sever the impediments* and learn the meditation subject. Then, when he has done the work connected with the meal and got rid of any dizziness due to it, he should seat himself comfortably on a well-prepared seat in a secluded place." > VsM IX,1 pt: I'm not sure what's your point here. I'm not disputing that's what Vsm says. What I'm interested in is what is meant by "metta bhavana" in Vsm? Is it only occurrences of kusala cittas with metta? Or would "metta bhavana" incorporate both kusala and akusala cittas? Best wishes pt #109489 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 11:21 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi kenhowardau Hi Kevin, --- K: > I appreciate you message very much. <. . .> --- Thanks Kevin. BTW, that was very nice prose - about the Buddha's sasana. ------------- K: > Enough of that. As to your questions... Ken: A conventional understanding is one that sees persisting things operating in the course of time. That sort of understanding is not at any level of right understanding - theory, practice or penetration - is it? Kevin: My limited point here is that there is often times wrong understanding and wrong effort as we approach wisdom. -------------- Sorry for being pedantic, but I don't agree with your choice of words. Why speak about someone (ourselves or others') approaching wisdom etc? When we talk that way, how can we avoid giving the impression of a permanent self? That is, how can we avoid giving the impression of an entity that has (as in this case) wrong understanding at some times and right understanding at others? I know the Buddha used conventional language at times, but he was different. :-) -------------- K: > We so rarely have right understanding when we try to understand anatta and dhammas. --------------- I am going to be pedantic again, but there is *never* right understanding at times when there is "trying to have it" is there? -------------------------- K: > Yet, it is still profitable because we give attention. -------------------------- (!) You are not suggesting, are you, that akusala attention can be profitable? ----------------------------------------- K: > With samattha it is the same way. Although we may have moments of Wrong Concentration, there is still much profit. For those moments can turn into moments of Right Concentration. ------------------------------------------ No there isn't, and no they can't! Moments of wrong concentration are purely akusala; there is no profit in them. And no moment can turn into another one. I know you know these things, but my point is, why use such misleading language? Why not use Abhidhamma language? If you had used it here I am sure I would have been able to see the point you were trying to make. But as it is, I can't. ------------------- K: > If one had to have Right Concentration all the time, why the suggestion to repeat out loud "head hairs, head hairs" and so on during meditation on the 32 body parts? -------------------- There is never that suggestion! In satipatthana, the *only* suggestion is to have right understanding of a presently arisen paramattha dhamma. ---------------------------------- K: > Simply having to recite that implies some degree of wrong concentration-- some moments of it. ---------------------------------- So what? At moments of wrong concentration the teaching remains the same as it is at moments of right concentration. ------------------ K: > We are trying, with our will, t stay with the object. We are imploring the citta to stay with the object. ------------------ Well we shouldn't be! The present reality is all that is needed. ------------------------ K: > It is not that we naturally can, or naturally know which moment is right or wrong every time. It can help the right type of panna develop though, such as with learning about the wisdom sections of the path. ------------------------- That kind of talk can be very confusing. "Every time" for example, is an illusory concept. (In reality there is only one time.) So why use it? Sorry for all the nit-picking,:-) Ken H #109490 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 11:29 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? ptaus1 Hi Jon, > PS The new recording set-up seems to be working well. Many thanks for your input and support. I was able to source a splitter and 2 RCA-to-mini-jack adaptors in HK on the way here. Next step is to try the editing side of things. Glad to hear it works. I’m also trying to get that little preamp to work. I got the necessary electrical components out of a fax machine that someone threw out on the street, so I hope by the time you get back I’ll be able to get the preamp to actually amplify a high impedance microphone signal. Or if that fails, perhaps it will be able to convert the recorded discussions into fax messages :) Best wishes pt #109491 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 12:40 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? jonoabb Hi pt --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > ... Or if that fails, perhaps it will be able to convert the recorded discussions into fax messages :) =============== ;-)) Jon #109492 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? upasaka_howard Hi, pt - In a message dated 8/25/2010 3:46:27 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ptaus1@... writes: Hi Howard, Thanks for your reply. > pt: What do you mean by "single reality"? > ------------------------------------ > H: Only one. pt: Ok, I got that bit, I'm just not sure what that really means? Something like nibbana being the only "reality" because it is unconditioned? Or something more elaborate maybe like nibbana being the only true reality that underlines all our experiences, etc? ------------------------------------------------------ My perspective is that in truth and reality, there is nothing but nibbana, and the apparent muliplicity of separate, conditioned phenomena, both macroscopic and microscopic, is illusion with only a conceptual, conventional basis. More succinctly, I would say that samsara is not reality nor does it consist of "realities," but is, in fact, nibbana misperceived. Where the alleged "we" appear to live is actually "story land" rather than reality, with the blinders of the three poisons, especially, avijja, requiring removal. -------------------------------------------------------- > H: The quality of the content of experience is constantly changing. Our > parsing of the experiential stream into conceived-of individual entities is > exactly that, a conventional parsing, and, yes, a matter of thought. pt: Ok, in my book this "parsing of the experiential stream" would be thinking. --------------------------------------------------------- Yes, though it is largely subliminal, and hence insidious. Thinking, however, doesn't touch nibbana itself, and any thinking about nibbana takes us experientially further away from it. Some thinking about nibbana is needed, but just for the purpose of considering it to be real and our ultimate intended "destination". However, it's important, I believe, for us to be aware that a thought-of nibbana is itself a mere fiction. Nibbana is attained not by thinking about it but by a cultivation of the mind that enables seeing through all else that seems to exist, seeing through the entire content of samsara, as anicca, dukkha, and anatta, and ultimately as just a mirage. The resultant uprooting of delusion leaves reality as it is - unconditioned, luminous, and with no adventitious defilements hiding it. -------------------------------------------------------- So, I'm guessing the actual "experiential stream" would be dhammas arising and falling. So, not thinking. Perhaps you could define what's meant by the "stream" more precisely, and at which point the "parsing" enters the picture. ----------------------------------------------------- The river of reality is beyond my vision. All I will say is that, in my belief, it is a mighty, psychophysical river constantly varying in quality and function, surging and subsiding, ebbing and flowing - a continuous, roaring river rather than the sequence of discrete phenomena it appears to be. ------------------------------------------------------ > H: Everything that we seem to observe is a matter of convention. That is > what I believe and what I believe the Buddha taught. That doesn't make > these alleged things outright fictitious. Warmth and hardness and sights and > sounds all have a basis in experience, but it is a mere convenience to > conceive of them as entities. They are, in fact, ungraspable as such. pt: Hm, so I take it that dhammas as in "warmth and hardness" are still somehow different from the "stream of experience"? What exactly is the difference? I mean, in my book the dhamma and the experience would be the same thing. -------------------------------------------------------- I consider them to be thought constructs that reify qualities. At best, they are a step in the right direction. -------------------------------------------------------- > H: There are stages of insight. They all involve more and more seeing > *through* phenomena, first gross phenomena and later fine phenomena, as > impermanent, unsatisfactory, without substance or self, and, finally, as mere > convention and lacking in reality. There is no reality beyond convention even > to the so-called paramattha dhammas, mere mirages, a magician's smoke & > mirrors. pt: But I still don't understand - if these stages of insight are still nothing more than being concerned with conventions, mirages, etc, then what exactly is the difference between stages of insight on the one hand, and just thinking about insight on the other hand? -------------------------------------------------------- There are degrees and stages to dis-illusionment. Not all wisdom is wisdom-in-the-highest. ------------------------------------------------------- > H: The major insight moments are the paths and fruits which are > steppings out from the realm of illusion and convention to reality itself, nibbana. pt: Isn't nibbana also experienced with the help of panna, attention, sati, etc, which, as you say, are illusions? I'm also not sure what you mean by "stepping out"? You mean at the moment when nibbana is experienced, there are no khandas anymore? Wouldn't that be parinibbana already? ------------------------------------------------------- Nibbana is certainly approached as you say, but its realization is a wisdom that "goes beyond," and it could only be properly described as a "stepping out." ----------------------------------------------------- > H: No, insight isn't thinking. pt: Ok, I hope you'll explain the difference between the two a bit more in detail. ---------------------------------------------- Supermundane wisdom bears no resemblance to thinking. Thinking may point in the right direction, but at the same time it unavoidably obscures. --------------------------------------------------- I mean, I'm still not clear exactly why can't I think my way to nibbana if insight too is about illusions and conventions, just like thinking. -------------------------------------------- The "insight" that is the highest wisdom is supermundane, beyond the world and not of the world. It is fully beyond thought and concept. -------------------------------------------- > H: How would you distinguish between thinking about mustard and tasting > mustard? pt: At the moment, I go by what ACMA would probably say on the matter: 1. there's the sense-door process of cittas, which experience a rupa as the object (I think nutritive essence in a kalapa is related to tasting). 2. second there's the first mind door process of cittas where panna (hopefully) knows the characteristics of that rupa by way of navattabba. 3. there follow several mind door processes, with concepts as objects, which recognise the actual taste as being that of a mustard. 4. there follow many, many further mind-door processes of cittas, with concepts as objects, which make up the "thinking about mustard". --------------------------------------------- Well, that's nice! ;-) It hasn't anything to do with the analogy I was giving, of course. When speaking of illusion and reality, one has to rely on analogies and poetic allusions. --------------------------------------------- > H: Useful thinking can set us in the right direction and can plant useful > mental seeds. It is very important. But it is calming body and mind, and > heightening mindfulness and attention, that is transformative, leading to > the wisdom that "sees through" and liberates. pt: Hm, but if wisdom, mindfulness and attention are nothing but illusions and conventions, then how exactly do they help with liberation, as compared to just thinking about liberation? ----------------------------------------------- Have you ever had a lucid dream? Everything in the dream is illusory, but realizing within the dream that one is dreaming enables one to wake up. ----------------------------------------------- Best wishes pt =================================== With metta, Howard Like a Dream /Now suppose a man, when dreaming, were to see delightful parks, delightful forests, delightful stretches of land, & delightful lakes, and on awakening were to see nothing. In the same way, householder, a disciple of the noble ones considers this point: 'The Blessed One has compared sensuality to a dream, of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks.' Seeing this with right discernment, as it actually is, then avoiding the equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity, he develops the equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness, where sustenance/clinging for the baits of the world ceases without trace./ (From the Potaliya Sutta) #109493 From: Ken O Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: intentional actions. ashkenn2k Dear Alex >Perfect skill doesn't appear out of nowhere and it isn't perfect from the >get-go. Just like you cannot run before you can walk, same is here. To refuse >doing "XYZ because one doesn't have proper accumulations for it" will never by >itself create the needed accumulations for XYZ. > >Even Arahants can make mistakes, so to expect one "you better be perfect or your > >samatha, vipassana, whatever, will do more harm than good" to be a dead end >proposition. > >Conceit I AM still exists for Anagamis. Even Anagamis have ruparaga. A worldling > >still has fetters of Self View. > > >So to expect a good worldling to be always perfect and always act like an >Arahant is putting cart before the horse. If one avoids action because one is >not perfect at it, then how will one ever be perfect in it? KO:? everyone starts from ground zero, no one expects you to follow an Arahant.? Action does not mean doing meditation, action can mean understanding dhamma through investigation of dhamma, listening and thinking over it or reflect on our own dhamma.? Action does not mean there is a need to go a selusion.? No point doing it if one is not prepare, even Buddha discourage disciples to go into forest if they are not ready for it.? it is not about practise make perfect. it is about understanding at everyday life.? Panna is develop over time and that is the main dhamma we should concentrate on.?? there is right or wrong actions, even meditation could also be wrong but arisen of panna is never wrong. > >>In suttas, one could see there are many ascetics at Buddha time >have attained >>jhanas, Buddha still said it only lead to rebirth in >> >> rupa and arupa planes.? > >Such as Alara Kalama and Udakka Ramaputta? If they have heard and considered >sutta like anattalakkhana, I am sure that they would achieve either stream or >maybe even Arhatship right there one the spot while listening to the Buddha. > KO:? definitely but honestly, they did not listen to dhamma that is why those with high level of concentration cannot attain Nibbana without panna. >Many of us here have read 1000x the required theory for Arhatship... > >> Without comprehending dhamma at the beginging and >> understand it, concentration is not only to let wisdom to shine >through, if >>that is the case, the teachers of Buddha?before he >attain enlightenemnt?would >>have already attain enlightenment. > >See above. His two teachers didn't hear Him. If they did, they would probably >become as high as Arhats on the spot. > KO:? But you forget, these teachers are of high sila and mindfulness.? They may not have dhamma panna but they have the pre-requsite.? Even those who practise ascetics that have jhanas must have develop sila and mindfulness of the object.??? There are previous birth stories of Buddha where he fell from jhanas because of akusala sila.? So dont think these ascetics have no developed sila and mindfulness.? > >> KO?:? You need book wisdom to develop wisdom just like those who >Buddha >>disciples need to listen to to develop wisdom.? > >Right. And some of us have 1000x the amount it is required for Arhatship. >Something else is missing... > >I am all for learning, but the path doesn't start & end with reading (which I >love, btw). > KO:? the path starts with listening and ends in Nibbana,? but hasty action will result could hamper the path.? Ken O #109494 From: Kevin F Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:04 pm Subject: Pain in tooth today, not self farrellkevin80 Today there is pain in my tooth. The pain started a few days ago but it was minor pain. I knew it would get worse as it must be a cavity. I am only in the process of making the appointment with a dentist today. It will be a couple of weeks before I can see him. The pain had been minor in the past few days. Today it arose much more acutely a number of times. When the pain came and surged through my tooth there was unpleasant feeling. It was at that moment that I realized how unattached "I" really was. There is pain but there is no association with it as me or mine. Pain occurs but not to any being or person. It is experienced but no being or person experiences it. There is a certain degree of detachment which is pronounced at those moments. This understanding and experience arose perfectly naturally, not through reasoning or contemplating it. There is no being or person there. The unpleasant feeling is unpleasant and some akusala is tied up with it. But it belongs to no one. It is just pain. There is detachment. No being belongs to this pain. No pain belongs to any being here. Now everyone has an opportunity to rejoice in the merit I have made. To rejoice in the countless paramis I have developed over the span of countless lifetimes. Now they can make a good home for themselves, having accumulated merit and rejoiced for me. I am a sakadagami, assured to have at most one more life in the sensuous planes. After that, birth as a brahma in the Pure Abodes where final cessation will be attained. But what would be best is if final cessation would happen even before that. That would be best. Arahatta will be great. But what I look forward to is when the body of the Arahant dies and the sense bases never arise again... no contact, no feeling, no perception... no body which is dukkha, which causes others to make [unwholesome] kamma in connection with it.. no body which must be fed, washed, tended to... no body which can inadvertently kill bugs and so on.... final nibbana, final cessation Kevin ___________ With metta Kevin #109495 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:31 pm Subject: Re: intentional actions. truth_aerator Hi Pt, Sukin, all, > pt: My thinking is, as mentioned before, that when the Buddha and >arahats talk about metta, anapanasati, etc, they're referring to an >equivalent of kusala cittas with kusala cetasikas. Not to akusala >cittas with wrong view and other akusala cetasikas. Right. Of course physical/fleshy action in and of itself does NOT produce wisdom and understanding, which is the key. However it can be USED as a tool that wisdom investigates and uses. By activity I don't just mean the physical one. When citta with relevant cetasikas chooses to react in kusala as opposed to akusala way that is an activity and that IS doing something. For natural/unnatural: It is simply unnatural for most people to have spontaneous kusala citta with panna. IMHO it is not a natural practice to grab a Dhamma book and consider the realities. It is not natural to consider things as "Not I, not me, not mine" because since childhood and previous lives we have been taught to grab and possess. So it is unnatural to act in Dhamma way. This is why practice & repetition is needed to replace the old ingrained habits of "I making" into new habits of "anicca, dukkha, anatta, let go, relinquish, etc". What required deliberation and practice before, eventually will become like 2nd nature and become spontaneous. So even if there was a trace of self-view before, during the course of training it will use itself out and be abandoned. IMHO kusala is helpful for kusala vipaka and Awakening. Some states of citta are more powerful than others and those states may require certain physical support. Does that answer your questions? With metta, Alex #109496 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana only occurs naturally? truth_aerator Dear Kevin, all, > Kevin: Hi Alex. I think the point the others here are making is >that there is no method to bring up the vipassana nanas. One can't >decide to meditate on vipassana in some certain way until it >happens and then go about it. It arises because of conditions. Of course. I agree. It is very easy to see that one can't have a sort of control "I want X nana now" and then BOOM it arises the next moment. What I was trying to say, perhaps very un-eloquently (typical for me), is that there are conditions, skills, habits that must be accumulated for certain result to arise. Intention action of the citta is required. So is kusala citta. I like this simile: If a person is dropped into a lake, that person intent on safety better not cross the arms and hope that "if the conditions are right, I'll swim to safety. If the conditions are for me to drown, then I'll drown". The conditions for swimming to safety are among others to actually SWIM. That does require lots of effort, skill and some knowledge how to swim. Dhamma seems to be somewhat similar. The lake is samsara. The effort to swim is kusala effort and N8P and knowledge in knowledge of theory. The more effort there is for kusala, the more kusala habits accumulate. I hope your tooth heals (109494). I am glad that you can deal with the pain in wise way. With metta, Alex #109497 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] No conventional actions, they don't matter at all? truth_aerator Hello Sukinder, all, >A: > > What about killing father or mother or creating a Schism in the > > Sangha? These are conventional activities with grave results. If >they give results, then why not wholesome activities not count to >give wholesome results? > > > > S: You mean kamma is not the cetasika which is cetana? You mean the > determining factor in which one cetana is akusala citta and another > akusala kammapattha is not in the strength of the cetana and that >of the citta and rest of the accompanying cetasikas but in the >outward conventional activity? > > Suk: You can see that from my stating that 'causes and conditions >are between paramatha dhammas and not conventional activities', you >have made it to mean the following here: Ok, so one can say exactly the same about meditating. It can be interpreted in paramattha terms as "such and such". But just like kammapattha has a certain and specific physical action, same is here. If washing the dishes is not obstacle to panna, then neither does sitting in seclusion. BTW sitting in seclusion has advantages of restraining one's bodily and verbal actions until one can resist unwholesome behaviour near other people. Just because kusala or akusala kammapattha can be described in ultimate terms, it cannot happen without corresponding physical activities. Please forgive me If I have misunderstood you. With metta, Alex #109498 From: Kevin F Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 1:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana farrellkevin80 Dear Sukinder, Sukinder: : I don't know what you have in mind exactly. But I'll just say that right effort is needed for both the development of samatha and vipassana, and the more the better. However, like all dhammas, right effort can't be made to arise by will nor in the performance of any ritualistic kind of activity. Do you agree with this? Kevin: Sure. But right effort can arise much more than we think it might. Especially if we stop telling ourselves that we should be on guard about it because it won't. Or that we should not "try" because it is probably not right effort, or even if we try sometimes and we see there is wrong effort. We shouldn't get discouraged. It can most certainly arise. Sukin: Yes, when understood as being all about causes and conditions between paramattha dhammas each performing their specific functions before falling away completely. Kevin: Yes. But the passage implies that we should keep trying to stay with the object no matter what. Sukinder: Thanks for giving me the quote. But I am not sure now what your original question was aimed at. Perhaps you can comment some here. Kevin: The passage shows that one shouldn't be too forceful, nor too slack, but take a middle path. Kevin ___________ #109499 From: Kevin F Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 1:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi farrellkevin80 Hi Ken, all, Ken: Sorry for being pedantic, but I don't agree with your choice of words. Why speak about someone (ourselves or others') approaching wisdom etc? When we talk that way, how can we avoid giving the impression of a permanent self? That is, how can we avoid giving the impression of an entity that has (as in this case) wrong understanding at some times and right understanding at others? I know the Buddha used conventional language at times, but he was different. :-) Kevin: Sorry buddy, all people use that language.. the Buddha, Arahants, anagamis, sadakagamis, sotapannas, and all persons. The reason I used conventional language was because I was making a point that we try to approach wisdom over time. Let's just think of conventional here. Many times, we may have wrong effort but we try to understand dhammas, we try to learn all the cittas in a mind door process, we read a book about dhamma because we think it might help us learn if we understand it all, etc. Many times there is wrong effort. Yet, it can be profitable. Even if someone memorizes all the secondary rupa with strong attachment, the knowledge of what those rupa are may be a cause for right understanding later. We hardly ever have right effort when we learn about vipassana. We have to remind ourselves all the time, wrong understanding arises most of the time that we do. Do you agree or do you deny it? Ken: I am going to be pedantic again, but there is *never* right understanding at times when there is "trying to have it" is there? Kevin: Nope. Ken: (!) You are not suggesting, are you, that akusala attention can be profitable? Kevin? Akulsala is always unwholesome. That is its nature. Yet, even if we learn about dhamma with unwholesome mindstates, what we learn may be a condition for wholesome ones later. Unwholesomeness does not condition wholesomeness *directly*... nothing about *indirectly* in there. Is there? Ken: ___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor of the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me Kevin's discussion forum = http://www.dhammasnippets.webs.com/ #109500 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:59 am Subject: Re: Right Concentration and Samadhi kenhowardau Hi Kevin, -------- <. . .> K: > Sorry buddy, all people use that language.. the Buddha, Arahants, anagamis, sadakagamis, sotapannas, and all persons. --------- Not when they are discussing the Dhamma. Only a Buddha can do that without getting caught out. ----------------- K: > The reason I used conventional language was because I was making a point that we try to approach wisdom over time. Let's just think of conventional here. Many times, we may have wrong effort but we try to understand dhammas, we try to learn all the cittas in a mind door process, we read a book about dhamma because we think it might help us learn if we understand it all, etc. Many times there is wrong effort. Yet, it can be profitable. Even if someone memorizes all the secondary rupa with strong attachment, the knowledge of what those rupa are may be a cause for right understanding later. We hardly ever have right effort when we learn about vipassana. We have to remind ourselves all the time, wrong understanding arises most of the time that we do. Do you agree or do you deny it? ----------------- You began by saying "Let's just think of conventional here," and that's what you did. And so there was no Dhamma involved, just conventional thinking. -------------------------- <. . .> Kevin: > Akulsala is always unwholesome. That is its nature. Yet, even if we learn about dhamma with unwholesome mindstates, what we learn may be a condition for wholesome ones later. -------------------------- More conventional thinking! Anatta changes everything. There can be no conventional philosophy when discussing Dhamma. ------------------------------------- K: > Unwholesomeness does not condition wholesomeness *directly*... nothing about *indirectly* in there. Is there? ------------------------------------- That sounds like, "The end justifies the means," which, again, is just conventional thinking - not Dhamma. "Do not cling to the past which has gone already, nor to the future which has not come yet, but be aware now here, now there, of the present." (Bhaddekaratta Sutta) That's Dhamma! :-) Ken H #109501 From: "bhikkhu3" Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 12:13 am Subject: The Golden Middle Way! bhikkhu5 Friends: Avoiding the Extremes Opens Way to Peace! The blessed Buddha once explained: There are these two extremes, which should not be practiced by any one, who has begun purification: The hunt for sensual pleasures, which is low, vulgar, the common way of ordinary worldlings, ignoble, disadvantageous; and any practice of self-torture, which is painful, ignoble, and also quite disadvantageous! Without veering towards either of these extremes, the well-come-well-gone-beyond Buddha has awakened to this Middle Way, which leads to assured vision, to direct knowledge, which leads to ease, to peace, to certain knowledge, to Enlightenment, to Nibbana... And what is that Middle Way awakened to by the Buddha, which leads to assured vision, to direct knowledge, which leads to ease, to peace, to all certain knowledge, to Enlightenment, to Nibbana? It is this very Noble 8-fold Way: That is Right View Right Motivation Right Speech Right Action Right Livelihood Right Effort Right Awareness Right Concentration That is indeed the very Middle Way awakened to by the Blessed Buddha, which leads to assured vision, to direct knowledge, which leads to ease, to certain knowledge, to Peace, to Bliss, to Enlightenment, to Nibbana... <...> Source: The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book IV [330-1] Section 42: On The 6 Senses. Rasiya: 12. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ * <..> #109502 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:24 am Subject: Re: intentional actions. ptaus1 Hi Alex (Kevin, Sukin, Sarah), > > pt: My thinking is, as mentioned before, that when the Buddha and >arahats talk about metta, anapanasati, etc, they're referring to an >equivalent of kusala cittas with kusala cetasikas. Not to akusala >cittas with wrong view and other akusala cetasikas. > > A: When citta with relevant cetasikas chooses to react in kusala as opposed to akusala way that is an activity and that IS doing something. pt: I agree. So, I think then we have to be very precise - by the above logic, the outward activity/doing will depend on whether citta and cetasikas are kusala or akusala. Which means that pretty much any doing/activity (except probably the very extreme ones like killing etc) can be kusala or akusala, depending on the citta. So, it's not the activity that makes the citta a/kusala, but it's the citta that makes the acitivity a/kusala. And in our case, I think almost every activity is usually a constant fluctuation between kusala and (majority) akusala cittas. So, when you say things like: > A: Of course physical/fleshy action in and of itself does NOT produce wisdom and understanding, which is the key. However it can be USED as a tool that wisdom investigates and uses. pt: To me, the above again confuses me, because again you seem to imply that it's the activity (regardless of whether it's a physical or mental activity) that wisdom uses/investigates. And yet, any activity is in practical terms just a bunch of a/kusala cittas - so activity cannot really occur without (or separate from) the present cittas. If wisdom arises at present, then the activity is also kusala at present, because the citta with wisdom is kusala. So, activity cannot be something separate that can cause or be used to cause the wisdom to arise. Wisdom is either there or it's not there as a cetasika. And accordingly, the citta (and hence the activity) are either kusala or akusala as well. There's no in-between. I hope we agree so far. Now, for the more controversial side of the matter. By the above logic regarding the citta-activity relationship, if one attempts by engaging in some activity to arouse kusala cittas, that means that at that time the cittas are not kusala (otherwise there would be no need to try and arouse kusala if the citta was already kusala) - so the activity itself at the time is also akusala, which means that one is trying to arouse kusala cittas with aksuala cittas. Can that really work? Is that right effort? Can right effort be akusala? Kevin has been saying something similar lately - like wrong concentration being profitable because it can condition (create conditions for) right concentration to arise at some point. So I wonder what exactly is the explanation there? I remember that it was said sometime ago that akusala can be a condition for kusala - like when panna recognises dosa (which has just fallen away) as akusala, but I wonder whether that extends to the possibility that wrong effort or wrong concentration can in fact condition right effort/concentration in the future? I'm not sure, I wonder what Sukin and Sarah think on that matter. Best wishes pt #109503 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:30 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Little selves? ptaus1 Hi Howard, > H: My perspective is... Thanks very much for explaining your position in detail, I think I understand where you are coming from a bit better now. Of course, at the moment, I prefer to keep to the way things are explained in the abhidhamma and commentaries, but it's good to occasionally hear about other people's perspectives. Best wishes pt #109504 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? upasaka_howard Hi, pt - In a message dated 8/26/2010 3:30:47 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ptaus1@... writes: Hi Howard, > H: My perspective is... Thanks very much for explaining your position in detail, I think I understand where you are coming from a bit better now. Of course, at the moment, I prefer to keep to the way things are explained in the abhidhamma and commentaries, but it's good to occasionally hear about other people's perspectives. Best wishes pt =============================== Thank you for your kind reply. I appreciate your using judgement without being judgmental! :-) With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #109505 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 12:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body jonoabb Hi KenO (109466) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Jon > > I will just explain that dhamma arise with concepts. Concepts arise because of > citta that thinks. that is already a dhamma. Citta cannot arise without the > cetasikas that are already dhammas. So it could be kusala or aksuala cetasikas > that arise with concepts. Concepts is just an object, it cannot arise without > dhammas > =============== J: Do concepts *arise*? To my understanding, not; they neither arise nor fall away. In any event, what is the significance of mentioning the arising of concepts in the first place, rather than just the arising of dhammas? > =============== > When craving arise with a pleasant object, it could be any object, not necessary > a rupa or nama, it could be a painting, house or car > =============== J: Yes, but the only matter of significance in this scenario is the occurring of craving, not the precise (conceptual) object of the craving. Jon #109506 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 12:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body jonoabb Hi Kevin (109468) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin F wrote: > ... > Kevin: Dear Jon the purpose of recitation, I believe, is to help the mind > settle on the object. If there was always Right Concentration what need for > it? > =============== J: To my understanding, everything mentioned in the Vism text is to be understood as describing kusala moments only. That's why I say that it's appropriate for the person of already highly developed samatha only. It's also appropriate for the person with strong accumulations for the particular object being described (hence the importance of the 'choice' of object). > =============== Doesn't intentionally reciting "head hair, head hair" and so on, > automatically imply some wrong concentration? I mean you do it with an > intention to remind your self to focus on that object! No other reason that I > can see. > =============== J: The attainment of jhana is far more than an exercise in concentration; it is kusala contemplation on the kammatthaana. The fixing of the mind on the object is more an outcome of the proper development than the immediate aim. Jon #109507 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 12:48 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana only occurs naturally? jonoabb Hi Alex (109472) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > ... > If Satipatthana only occurs naturally than I guess even an observant muslim or an Atheist, is on the same level and likelihood as good Buddhist to have satipatthana arise. > =============== J: That is not what is being suggested. The development of the path requires the fulfilment of the certain prerequisite factors/conditions, namely - the hearing of the teachings, explained in a way that is appropriate to a person's level of (previously developed) understanding - an interest in, and understanding at an intellectual level of, what has been heard, - appropriate reflection on what has been thus understood, and finally - the previous accumulation of understanding sufficient to be conditioned to arise by that appropriate reflection. These factors are independent of any particular activity such as reading a Dhamma book or whatever. They are also independent of being a 'good Buddhist' or a follower of another religion. > =============== > I guess it doesn't matter if one doesn't go out of natural way to buy a Dhamma book or to visit a Buddhist (not a mosque) monastery and actively listen to a Dhamma. Someone who has never does this would be on the same level as someone who did. ... > =============== J: There is nothing 'unnatural' per se in intentional actions. In the context of the development of the Path, however, the term 'practice' as used in the teachings refers to the actual arising of panna rather than to the undertaking of specific intentional activities. Jon #109508 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 12:51 pm Subject: Re: awareness of 4 elements within one's body jonoabb Hi Alex (109477) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > ... > I am alluding that effort is better be put in, that there are right and wrong intentions. That as long as one never develops, there will not be accumulations for that skill. > =============== J: I would certainly agree that without development there can be no progress along the Path. I have not read anybody here suggesting otherwise. (!!) Where you and I differ is in what amounts to that development. Your idea is that 'practice' brings moments of kusala among the many (more numerous?) moments of akusala. To my understanding, development is conditioned by appropriate reflection on the teachings properly understood. Appropriate reflection here is not an activity deliberately undertaken (it's the sort of reflecting that occurs, for example, as you are reading or writing a message on this list). It includes a consideration of how what is being reflected upon applies to the present moment. > =============== > Perfect skill doesn't appear out of nowhere and it isn't perfect from the get-go. Just like you cannot run before you can walk, same is here. To refuse doing "XYZ because one doesn't have proper accumulations for it" will never by itself create the needed accumulations for XYZ. > =============== J: I have not read anybody here suggesting that a particular kind of kusala should not be developed because of a lack of accumulations for that kind of kusala. (!!) > =============== > > Even Arahants can make mistakes, so to expect one "you better be perfect or your samatha, vipassana, whatever, will do more harm than good" to be a dead end proposition. > =============== J: Nor have I read anybody suggesting that if samatha or vipassana is not perfect then its development will do more harm than good. (!!) > =============== > > Conceit I AM still exists for Anagamis. Even Anagamis have ruparaga. A worldling still has fetters of Self View. > > So to expect a good worldling to be always perfect and always act like an Arahant is putting cart before the horse. > =============== J: Yes agreed. This is common ground. May I suggest we discuss points of actual difference, rather than bringing up various 'straw men'. (!!) Jon #109509 From: Kevin F Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: intentional actions. farrellkevin80 Dear Pt, Pt: Kevin has been saying something similar lately - like wrong concentration being profitable because it can condition (create conditions for) right concentration to arise at some point. So I wonder what exactly is the explanation there? I remember that it was said sometime ago that akusala can be a condition for kusala - like when panna recognises dosa (which has just fallen away) as akusala, but I wonder whether that extends to the possibility that wrong effort or wrong concentration can in fact condition right effort/concentration in the future? I'm not sure, I wonder what Sukin and Sarah think on that matter. Kevin: Hi Pt. Taking the subject of 'head hairs' again because I believe it is a good example to demonstrate this, at first the verbal recitation must be done because the mind wanders more. This helps it stay with the object and settle down. There is an effort to do so. The verbal recitation is a condition for the mental recitation (according to Vism). Now the mind is settling down more when just the mental recitation can be done. When this happens, wisdom starts to develop. It starts to see the drawbacks in not being with the subject and in being diffuse all over the place. This is a condition. It conditions Right Understanding of the bran of samattaha, and conditions moments of Right Concentration where the mind naturally stays with the object with kusala cittta. Otherwise, there would be no point in the recitatation. If would be like if we have the Right Cocnetration naturally, if not, don't bother. But that is not how it is done here. Samattha and the wisdom that it needs to be done correctly can develop with the practice. Not because a doer conditions it, but because panna can develop this way, I believe. All the best, Kevin ___________ #109510 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:51 pm Subject: Re: intentional actions. truth_aerator Hello Pt, Sukin, Sarah, all > Hi Alex (Kevin, Sukin, Sarah), > pt: I agree. So, I think then we have to be very precise - by the >above logic, the outward activity/doing will depend on whether citta >and cetasikas are kusala or akusala. Right. It is impossible to do a heinous crime (such as parricide) without corresponding physical activity on conventional level. So even though there is a certain akusala kammapattha on a citta level, it also shows on conventional level as well. In many cases ordinary conventional physical actions may be either due to kusala or akusala citta. It does depend on the citta and ultimately (within certain bounds) it is citta that determines the intention. >Pt: If wisdom arises at present, then the activity is also kusala at >present, because the citta with wisdom is kusala. So, activity >cannot be something separate that can cause or be used to cause the >wisdom to arise. Wisdom is either there or it's not there as a >cetasika. And accordingly, the citta (and hence the activity) are >either kusala or akusala as well. There's no in-between. I hope we >agree so far. Here and below we will get some disagreement. This is my belief: The there are different degrees and frequency of wisdom and unwholesomeness. It is not either you have 100% wisdom or 0% wisdom. In the rapid stream of cittas different qualities can also alternate so IMHO it is not either-or (unless the situation is extreme). > Now, for the more controversial side of the matter. By the above >logic regarding the citta-activity relationship, if one attempts by >engaging in some activity to arouse kusala cittas, that means that >at that time the cittas are not kusala (otherwise there would be no >need to try and arouse kusala if the citta was already kusala) - Going by what I've said above, one can intend to INCREASE the quality or quantity of already arisen kusala cittas. Also wholesome intention to increase the quality and/or quantity of kusala cittas is NOT unwholesome >so the activity itself at the time is also akusala, which means that >one is trying to arouse kusala cittas with aksuala cittas. Can that >really work? Is that right effort? Can right effort be akusala? MN117 answers it. ""One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities ? right view, right effort, & right mindfulness ? run & circle around right view." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html Similar with Upanisa sutta. Liberation starts with Ignorance. If there wasn't any ignorance there wouldn't be a being to Nibbanize. If citta is perfect, then why change it? Before one is perfect, one is imperfect. With metta, Alex #109511 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:01 pm Subject: Metta is skill too truth_aerator Hi Pt, Jon, Sukin, Sarah, all, > > A: Washing dishes may make one a better washer but the skill in >washing dishes isn't directly transferable for Nibbana. Metta, >asubha, anapanasati on other hand is. > >pt: I'm not sure it's useful to consider metta bhavana for example >as a skill that can be compared to some other mundane skill like >dishwashing. Metta bhavana happens in moments when metta arises. >Such moments can happen during dishwashing or any other activity. Metta is a skill. Ex: It may be easy to start sending best wishes to someone you like, but it is much harder to (for a person prone to anger) to send best wishes to an enemy. And the worse the enemy is, the harder it may be to sincerely wish him all the best. Also there is a skill at being able to recognize the presently arisen dosa and counteract with with adosa or any other kind of kusala citta. It takes skill at knowing "what is happening now?" Is there dosa or adosa? Lobha or alobha? Moha or amoha? Similar could be said with regard to other kinds of skill at recognizing the presently arisen akusala citta and countering it with a kusala one. - > > --- > > > pt: I think others have pointed out several times that wrong >view >(so stronger akusala) is more likely to arise while engaging >(with >ignorance) in practices believing they lead to awakening. Everyone below an Arhat has fetters of avijja to greater or less extent. You can't help it but to work through it. > > A: But the Buddha himself often stressed the benefit of Metta, asubha, anapanasati. > > pt: True, but I think you'd agree that when he referred to these, >he was basically referring to an equivalent of a citta that arises >with sati and other kusala cetasikas, not with wrong view and other >akusala cetasikas? And before kusala citta/cetasikas (such as alobha or panna) arose, which citta was there? >So, I can tell you "yeah, I do 2 hours of metta bhavana every day >from 6-8 a.m." But, if during those times most of my cittas are >really cittas with wrong view and other akusala cetasikas, then I >guess you'd agree that my "metta bhavana" has little, or nothing, to >do with what the Buddha had in mind when he referred to metta? If one has gained more understanding from those sessions, than they were good sessions. Furthermore one can improve, and if there is improvement (less akusala more kusala) the better. As for meditating in the morning. After a while it gets as part of routine. One does it without even thinking the word "meditation" or "I am going to meditate". So even if there were initially those kinds of thoughts, after a while they are no longer needed. > pt: I don't think anyone was saying that conditionality rejects effort and intention. What's under discussion is how do we exactly know practically speaking the difference between right and wrong effort, and right and wrong intention? > ------ Examine presently arisen namarupa. Is it kusala or akusala? Are there more or less kusala qualities arising per day? Is the intensity of kusala increasing or decreasing? > pt: Would you agree that when suttas/Vsm mention "activities", they >are basically referring to an equivalent of kusala cittas with >kusala cetasikas? So, not to akusala cittas with akusala cetasikas? Those activities do refer to conventional actions at bodily restraint. At that time there may be initially lots of akusala (to a certain degree) mental states. But eventually the mind will become more kusala, or at least the object-support for akusala will be diminished. > --- > > A: Or does VsM state that any surrounding is equally good? Then >why did it talk about faults of monastery and ten impediments? > > pt: Yes, this is an interesting point I'm not sure about either. As >I remember from previous discussions you had with Jon and others - >location, surroundings, etc, would be supporting conditions based on >concepts (such as location) as objects of cittas, As I remember from CMA, Concepts can be decisive-support-condition for mind. Blunt example: If a young guy who is prone to lust goes to a strip club, or sees a naked supermodel - guess what kind of mental states will be conditioned by that concept? If that same young guy have more sense restraint, the lust would arise less. Sure the tendency to lust would still be there, but with less food for lust, the guy may be able to arose more kusala states, remember Abhidhamma teachings (as opposed to sexual fantasies) and eventually uproot akusala mental qualities. So location DOES matter as long as those concepts are still (decisive) support conditions. This is common sense! You are more likely to study Dhamma when not engaged in seeing irritating things! Of course at Arahatship it doesn't matter. But get there first! > pt: Well, I don't think anyone's disputing that ascetic practice is profitable, since what's said above assumes that ascetic practice is undertaken with kusala cittas. What's under dispute is - can you and me engage in ascetic practices with kusala cittas only? How about with majority kusala cittas and a few akusala ones? How about majority akusala ones and just a few kusala ones? Do aksuala cittas count as "ascetic practice"? Is "ascetic practice" profitable if one has majority akusala cittas in it? Do kusala cittas increase as a result or not? Are the few kusala cittas worth the many aksuala cittas with wrong view? Etc. > ------ Initially there may be plenty of certain akusala cittas arise (such as fear) when one does ascetic practices such as being living in a cemetery. But after a while the ratio of kusala vs akusala will change and so does the quality of kusala and akusala cittas. Another point: Not all akusala is really bad. Desire for awakening, desire to be more skillful in metta/asubha etc may not really be that bad. Without it, one will simply not get started in the first place! Doesn't one come to Buddhism with the desire to end suffering for self, and in the process learn Anatta so eventually the momentum of the development will gain the proper direction. It is not impossible for wrong view to be dropped in a case of practice. So if formerly one did metta/asubha/anapanasati with some degree of Self view, when it becomes a habit the Self View is not needed. Lets say someone sent you to buy a milk. You buy it in a plastic container. That person may complain, "I've asked you to buy milk, why have you bought that plastic container as well"? What are you going to reply? That even though you've bought the milk, you need to be able to carry it to the house and as something to be able to store it in until you drink it without the container. Same is here. In the beginning you can't help to have Self views. So one may as well use them until a point where they are not needed. Same with lobha. BTW, lobha is fully eliminated at Arhatship - so it can be used until that point, if it is used skillfully of course. You can't expect a person to be ALWAYS perfect in order to be perfect. Mistakes are natural. It is just that wise LEARN from the mistakes, so that in this case unintended mistakes could actually help as being something to consider and investigate further. Even reading Nina's wonderful books requires intentional action. Until a certain point it is simply not natural to read Dhamma books. We have been natural for aeons in samsara, and that didn't get us anywhere. Dhamma goes against the flow, and that is why it is so hard- because it is unnatural for our manifold kilesas. With metta, Alex #109512 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:12 pm Subject: Re: awareness of 4 elements within one's body truth_aerator Hi Jon, all, >J: Where you and I differ is in what amounts to that development. >Your idea is that 'practice' brings moments of kusala among the many >(more numerous?) moments of akusala. Right. Before one is perfect, there will be mistakes made. However these very mistakes could be something to consider, investigate, reflect on, study and use them to develop more wisdom. If one could totally act perfectly, one would be an Arahant. But do you see a vicious circle if one would claim that "perfection requires perfection, and nothing less than perfection". Jon, all, do you see the vicious circle in saying that "right views only require right views and no minor akusala"? It would be impossible to reach that which relies totally on itself. If x->x then either we all have it already (we are all awakening! As mistaken Mahayana belief goes) or it is a case of impossibility of attaining it since you can't make a leap to "x" . > To my understanding, development is conditioned by appropriate >reflection on the teachings properly understood. Right. This doesn't contradict meditation. >Appropriate reflection here is not an activity deliberately >undertaken Here we differ. Appropriate reflection IS DELIBERATE ACTIVITY. If one doesn't deliberately do it, then the mind will follow its own deluded course. Ex: One has to deliberately think about Dhamma or the mind will naturally fantasize about its favourite fantasy such as "girls, purses, money, whatever". After the mind was restrained enough times, then spontaneous cittas with dhamma investigations can arise more often and in higher quality. So for there to be spontaneous cittas that arise, one is required to deliberately develop those same qualities. IMHO there is rightness from 0% to 100%. It is not that either one is always right or always wrong, until perhaps Arahatship. But even then one can make certain kinds of mistakes, even Arahant Sariputta did. With metta, Alex #109513 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:45 pm Subject: Intentional development, simplified truth_aerator Hello Pt, Jon, Sukin, all, To simplify what I've said in previous posts: Point #1: The development happens from one end of the spectrum to another From wrong view, eventually to totally right view Or 0% ... -> 50%...-> 100% right view. If 100% right view solely depends on 100% right view (x->x) then it will be impossible to achieve it. Either one has always had it (ala Mahayanist notion of We are all already Enlightened) or one doesn't have it and cannot do anything about it as right view is self-caused. IMHO the case seems to be more of (a+b+c) -> X Where a = ~0.3X, b = ~0.3X, c = ~0.3X and in sum = X ======================================================= Point #2: Spontaneous quality of the mind was once deliberately trained. =============================== With metta, Alex #109514 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 8:21 pm Subject: Part 2 on Intentional development, simplified truth_aerator Hello Jon, Pt, Sukin, all, If causes for right view are listening & considering the Dhamma, then I have a question: ***Does one listen & consider Dhamma with right view or not?*** If yes, then how does one get to that point in the first place? If no, then you've affirmed what I have been saying below and in other recent posts. With metta, Alex #109515 From: "philip" Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 11:00 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: intentional actions. philofillet Hi Kevin, pt and all Kevin, I know I said harsh and critical things about you in the past (mostly conditioned by heat related irritation) but I'd just like to say that I'm really appreciating your posts these days. I think the way you are laying out the way we have no choice but to start meditating with wrong concentration is very lucidly expresssed. Also, the way you say that panna, at the beginning, is of the degree that simply points out to us that it is better to get the mind to settle the mind on one object than it is to allow the mind to leap around like a fish out of water, struggling for air. (Though of course we know it will usually do so no matter what we intend,that is clear from Dhammapada's description of the mind, but that intention to fix the mind on an object, as so clearly expounded in Vism, must be made.) Howard has often said (or I have more often said quoting him) "we begin where we are, not where we want to be." I think it's great to come across someone who appreciates how importance?@of most of the things A. Sujin helps us to understand (for example, the excellent survey of paramattha dhammas) but who can also point out some fundamental flaws in her approach.Of course you are not the only one, but I find there is something very suitable for beginners like me in the way you explain things. I think you'll be an excellent Dhamma teacher someday. Thanks. Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin F wrote: > > Dear Pt, > > Pt: Kevin has been saying something similar lately - like wrong concentration > being profitable because it can condition (create conditions for) right > concentration to arise at some point. #109516 From: "bhikkhu3" Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 10:47 pm Subject: Sensations are only Representations! bhikkhu5 Friends: Sensing is a Representation and not a Reality! The need to control and master the senses is obvious, since it is this ability to sense that enables both all pleasant & painful experiences of this world. However, paradoxically, it is exactly this spontaneous and quite impulsive rush after the immediate, but only short-lived satisfaction induced by any pleasant sense reaction, that is both the seed and root of much suffering. This other side of the coin is created by the delayed side-effects: Thus do the urge after momentary pleasant feeling, create lust and greed. Thus do the urge away from brief painful feeling, create hate and aversion. Thus do the urge for absence of neutral feeling, create neglect & ignorance. These 3 roots of Suffering are always lying hidden and latent within the untrained mind: Ignorance is obscuring the true nature of things making them only appear as lasting, agreeable and ownable. Hate induces hostile aversion and opposition towards even very advantageous phenomena such as learning, morality, meditation, and friendship just because these may once have been associated with a brief unlikable painful feeling! These instantaneous reactions overwhelm the untrained mind and make it act contrary to its own and other's interest: It rushes ahead in the hunt for instant gratification, oblivious of the fact, that the paradoxical fruit of sense delight is this much delayed, yet inevitable misery, in the form of infinitely repeated rebirth, ageing, sickness and death! On a much deeper and more subtle level do the six sense sources create a misapprehended pointing to an illusory reality, by mistaking a sensation for a true reference to a world really existing "out there" independent of mind: 'I see the world therefore do it exist!', which is as absurd as postulating: 'I saw the phenomenon on a film therefore is this phenomena real' insofar as any sensation only is a inner mentally created 'film' or 'representation' of some form of contact between a 'sensor' (eye, ear, nose, tongue, mind) and its 'sensitivity' for the object (form, sound, smell, taste, touch, idea). In a similar way do the 5 clusters of clinging also induce a misunderstood pointing, by mistaken reference to an assumed & constructed entity 'Ego', 'I' or 'me' "In here", while all there really is, is a five-fold flux of changing properties, endlessly arising & ceasing right there, where they momentarily arised! Right there does the untrained mind also create and reinforce the basic root of this abysmal conceit: "I Am" or "I exists"!!! Only the Buddhas explain: Sabbe Sankhara Anicca! All constructions are impermanent! Sabbe Sankhara Dukkha! All constructions are suffering! Sabbe Dhamma Anatta! All states are self and core-less! <...> Do these objects reside outside in the world or inside the mind or both? Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ * <...> #109517 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:01 am Subject: Re: Jhana adepts outside of the Buddha sasana do not have belief in control ? kenhowardau Hi Sarah, ---------- KH: > > He might not have right view (especially outside a sasana) but he won't have wrong view. > > S: > I think the conclusion was that different kinds of cittas arise at different moments and until wrong view has been eradicated, it can pop up anytime. Of course, the one developing samatha and attaining jhana must have right view, samma ditthi, but I think you are referring to the samma ditthi of the eightfold path which he may not have. ----------- Yes, that's what I was referring to - rather clumsily. ----------------- <. . .> S: > There's a difference between naturally following what is suitable for kusala and calm and pursuing certain situations in order to have calm or attain jhana. ----------------- Yes, and I think genuine jhana instructors (such as the ones who taught the Bodhisatta) would know that in theory as well as in practice. So the idea of unqualified people going out into seclusion to practice jhana would have been relatively unheard of in those days (as compared to modern times). That's the sort of wrong [theoretical] view I had in mind when I said jhana meditators wouldn't have them. ------------------------- S: > Anything more on this to raise with KS? ------------------------- Thanks, but Jon has given me more than enough to mull over for a while ("surmounting the object" etc). It's not easy! Ken H #109518 From: Sukinderpal Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 1:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of the Present Moment - for Ken O sukinderpal Hi Ken O, > >2a- When anger arises to experience and object now, this is conditioned > >already. > > KO: When anger arise at the present moment, it is anger that is the main > condition, if it is already arise, whats there to talk about. > S: Then there should be no reason to talk about anything since expressing oneself is always based on memory of past experiences. But of course thinking and expressing oneself does necessarily happen. So what is the point of contention here? You say that if I believed that the present moment has already arisen and fallen away, then I have no basis to make any statement about it. The only valid base for saying anything about reality is if I believed that it has not yet fallen away at the time that I perceive it. As I tried to show you in the previous post, anger as the object of consciousness is the one from a previous citta in which there was the experience of a particular unpleasant object, which means that by then the anger must have fallen away. In other words, the anger was present, but fallen away already at the time that it became known as "anger". More importantly however, when I think and state about "now", wouldn't this be many mind moments away from that which I refer to? ============= > > >2b- Being conditioned already, this is its nature and nothing can be > >done to alter this. > > KO: Since it is condition to arise, whats there to say, does that > mean anger > going to condition other anger to arise. > S: No, it does not mean this. What is the use of talking about these things? It is because this is the way things are, but because of accumulated ignorance we don't know this. The development of understanding must start slowly beginning with pariyatti where no direct understanding of the characteristic of a reality is involved. Indeed when it is patipatti, even here the experience is only of the nimita, which means many similar realities all fallen away. This is however the only way that it can ever be. I realize that you are trying in your own way, to stress on the experience of the present moment which is defined by a characteristic of a nama or rupa being known. This is why you insist that they are 'present' and therefore we should not think that it has fallen away already. I do not have any problem stating about the present moment that it has already fallen away for the reasons stated, and I don't see why you should object to this. Is it because it comes across to you as self-contradictory? ========= > >2c- This is what it means to be 'beyond control'. > > KO: beyond control is not about this. Beyond controol means one > cannot change > the nature of anger as anger when it is present. One cannot change > the nature > that is anger citta is anatta. It does not arise because it is beyond > control, it arise because of a cause. > S: So you are saying that arisen by cause does not mean no-control? Are you suggesting that dhammas do the control and since in reality there are only dhammas, we should not speak of no-control in such a situation? ======== > > There must be a cause for it to arise for > eg unpleasant words. Does that mean anger would arise because of > unpleasant > words. There could be kusala to arise. If it is beyond control so every > time when one listen to unplesant words, anger definitely arise since > dhamma is > beyond control. Are you telling me you go to listen to a dhamma talk > it is > because of beyond control or your intent to go. > S: See again, it comes across that you misunderstand. This idea of being conditioned already and beyond control, is reference to the present moment. This is so with any dosa arisen now as well as any intention when it arises, to go to the Dhamma talk or not to. ======== > > >3a- Seeing arises and falls away followed by Receiving consciousness, > >Investigating consciousness and the rest of the cittas in the process. > >All these do so by conditions beyond control. > > > >3b- Highlighting Determining consciousness in this process, this too is > >conditioned and beyond control. > > KO: determining does not determine the nature of your subsequent > citta, it is > just determining the object of the cittas. > S: I wasn't going that way but just to state that *all* dhammas arise by conditions beyond control. ======== > > >3c- The Javana cittas that follow is also likewise conditioned and > >beyond control. > > KO: Javana is definitely condition to arise, but it does not mean > javanas is > always the anger :-) same as above the reply > S: I wasn't implying such a thing. ======= > > >7a- Seeing experiences visible object, and this is present, otherwise it > >wouldn't happen. > > > >7b- Aversion arises to experience an object and this is either nama, > >rupa or concept. > > > >7c- The object here again, is present else it would be meaningless to > >say there is aversion towards something. > > > >7d- When there is aversion to colour at the sense door process, the rupa > >has not fallen away. > > KO: aversion only happen at the javana stage and not vipaka stage > S: I was referring to sense door javanas, or you forgot about this. ;-) ========= > > >7e- If aversion to colour arise at the mind-door process, this rupa > >would be a photocopy, so to speak. > > >7f- If aversion arises towards a nama object, this must necessarily be > >one which has just fallen away. > > KO: Nope, the nama object still remains. because the javanas all > have the same > object and cannot be different thus the object not fallen away. What you > experience at the present is the present, fallen away cittas could > condition the > present citta but it is consider present. If there is no present, how > could you > experience anything at the present. Satipatthan would not work > because it is > about the present and not fallen away cittas. > S: As an object it is present, I agree. But what about when you "know" this, would it not impress upon you that this object has indeed fallen away? ======== > > >8a- When there is satipatthana, the object is either a nama or a rupa. > > > KO: Show mean a text reference please because there is no text even > in Visdu > that claim one can only practise satipatthana only if the object > is nama or > rupa. Satipatthana can arise because of understanding the dhamma that > arise > with an object. It could be any object. A set of teeth or a corpse > can cause > the arisen of enlightement. Does that mean there is no satipatthana. > This > assumption that the object of the citta during satipatthana should > only be > paramatha dhamma is wrong and inconsistent with the text. Lets not > tell me it > is understanding because the text does not support such a basis. Only > when > vipassana arise, then it is nama or rupa. > S: Quoting texts is not my forte. I'll need someone else to help me with this. What I can say though is that, concepts being a product of thinking, any study, observation, analysis or breaking down into components is just more thinking with concepts as object. And hence any conclusion as to these being impermanent, unsatisfactory and non self is just conceptual, which can at best be an instance of kusala thinking but unrelated to vipassana development. ======== > >9a- In making a statement about the present moment, this necessarily is > >about what is just past. > > KO: past is still past, there must be a present > S: Now you sound like you just want to argue. ;-) ======== > >9a- If about the object, it has already fallen away beyond control. > > KO: this is the nature of dhamma which I already said to arise, > present and > fall away > S: So are we in agreement.......? ======== > > >Are not most of the above reference to javana cittas? > > KO: Nope > S: Never mind about this. Lets not talk about the past. But this moment is also past!!! ;-) Metta, Sukinder #109519 From: Sukinderpal Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 1:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] No conventional actions, they don't matter at all? sukinderpal Hi Alex, > >A: > > > What about killing father or mother or creating a Schism in the > > > Sangha? These are conventional activities with grave results. If > >they give results, then why not wholesome activities not count to > >give wholesome results? > > > > > > > S: You mean kamma is not the cetasika which is cetana? You mean the > > determining factor in which one cetana is akusala citta and another > > akusala kammapattha is not in the strength of the cetana and that > >of the citta and rest of the accompanying cetasikas but in the > >outward conventional activity? > > > > Suk: You can see that from my stating that 'causes and conditions > >are between paramatha dhammas and not conventional activities', you > >have made it to mean the following here: > > Ok, so one can say exactly the same about meditating. It can be > interpreted in paramattha terms as "such and such". But just like > kammapattha has a certain and specific physical action, same is here. > S: You mean as in the case of Jhana when concentration is in need to be developed? You'd agree that just sitting straight with the back erect means nothing. You'd also agree that it is the kusala citta / calm which is being developed and that this is by the arising and accumulation of wisdom of that level. True, that the mental realities involved need to repeatedly have the kammatthana subject as object if there is to be access concentration and then Jhana, especially in the case of the beginner. And that this must require that one not be distracted including by what may come from an unstable bodily posture. But this is about rupas and the likelihood of some of these rupas intruding and experienced with akusala cittas which then acts as hindrance. And of course here we are talking about samatha and not vipassana where wrong view is the only real hindrance. But the hindrance is just hindrance and it's non- arising is not the cause for kusala being developed, rather this is the work of wisdom. And besides, how exactly is the hindrance known for what it is if not by panna? I'm not sure but suspect that this is similar in the case of when one sits with a full stomach. A full stomach may cause imbalance of the elements and this by natural decisive support condition give rise to certain mental states which are hindrances. Would you say in this case that 'just enough food' is a condition for kusala being developed? Besides would it not exactly be due to some level of understanding that one sees the need for the appropriate kind and amount of food? And are we confusing causes and results? ====== > If washing the dishes is not obstacle to panna, then neither does > sitting in seclusion. > S: So why sit for the particular purpose? Would it sound reasonable to you if I suggested a discipline of regular 'washing of dishes' as means to develop wisdom? ======= > > BTW sitting in seclusion has advantages of restraining one's bodily > and verbal actions until one can resist unwholesome behaviour near > other people. > S: Avoidance is not the development of good qualities. Sila of restraint happens with respect to other people. Generosity, kindness, compassion, respect and so on, all have to do with other beings. How are these developed when there are no conditions for them to even arise? ======= > > Just because kusala or akusala kammapattha can be described in > ultimate terms, it cannot happen without corresponding physical > activities. > S: Killing would require some bodily intimation for sure and so would lying. But the actor is not actually killing when he shoots blanks at the other actor does he? And if I had the intention to kill someone and a gun in my pocket, were restraint to arise then, would this not be purely a mental activity not related to any particular bodily intimation. And although some kusala and akusala kammapattha would involve intimation through body and speech, and although other forms of kusala do have concept as object, panna which performs the function of 'understanding' has nama or rupa (in the case of vipassana)or kusala / akusala citta (in the case of samatha) as object. And this has nothing to do with being in any particular posture. ======= > > Please forgive me If I have misunderstood you. > I must confess, that I sometimes feel that I must be misunderstanding and misrepresenting you. So I hope you do not mind too much if that is what has happened here. ;-) Metta, Sukinder #109520 From: Sukinderpal Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 1:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] if one does something, it may as well be for Nibbana sukinderpal Hello Kevin, > Sukinder: : I don't know what you have in mind exactly. But I'll just > say that > right effort is needed for both the development of samatha and > vipassana, and the more the better. However, like all dhammas, right > effort can't be made to arise by will nor in the performance of any > ritualistic kind of activity. Do you agree with this? > > Kevin: Sure. But right effort can arise much more than we think it might. > S: Or it could arise much less than we think it does. ;-) ========= > > Especially if we stop telling ourselves that we should be on guard > about it > because it won't. > S: Is this representing any particular person's position? Is it a sentiment that you keep reading here? ======== > Or that we should not "try" because it is probably not right > effort, or even if we try sometimes and we see there is wrong effort. We > shouldn't get discouraged. It can most certainly arise. > S: Are you saying that one should make an effort to 'do' things which one knows to be kusala? What about one moment at a time? Why overlook this when the fact is that kusala is in reality a citta and the associated cetasikas? ======== > > Sukin: Yes, when understood as being all about causes and conditions > between paramattha dhammas each performing their specific functions > before falling away completely. > > Kevin: Yes. But the passage implies that we should keep trying to stay > with > the object no matter what. > S: No matter what?!! Akusala does not matter and wrong view which could in fact condition wrong practice at that very instant, does not matter?!! This is odd coming from you! ======== > Sukinder: Thanks for giving me the quote. > But I am not sure now what your original question was aimed at. Perhaps > you can comment some here. > > Kevin: The passage shows that one shouldn't be too forceful, nor too > slack, but > take a middle path. > S: Yes, and this is in understanding the present moment, one at a time. ;-) Metta, Sukinder #109521 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 1:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] No conventional actions, they don't matter at all? truth_aerator Hello Sukin, all > S: You'd agree that just sitting straight with the back erect means > nothing. Right. Though we can say if one is fully mindful and doesn't do anything (with greed, anger or delusion) then one would enter Jhana and even as far as nirodha samapatti. Jhanas are progressive states of non-doing (5 sense activities, greed, anger and delusion). > You'd also agree that it is the kusala citta / calm which is > being developed and that this is by the arising and accumulation of > wisdom of that level. Right. > True, that the mental realities involved need to > repeatedly have the kammatthana subject as object if there is to be > access concentration and then Jhana, especially in the case of the > beginner. And that this must require that one not be distracted > including by what may come from an unstable bodily posture. Right. And lets not forget the things about "bodily intimation". Bodily postures CAN represent certain mental states. When there is citta with dosa, one can frown or even do things with one's fists... When one is greedy, there can be a certain bodily intimation as well. >And of course here we are talking about samatha and not vipassana >where wrong view is the only real hindrance. I believe that samatha requires a certain degree of vipassana, an actually these things come together in various proportions. But the hindrance > is just hindrance and it's non- arising is not the cause for kusala > being developed, rather this is the work of wisdom. And besides, how > exactly is the hindrance known for what it is if not by panna? Hindrances are known by panna and sati. Both these qualities are required and are present in Jhana. >Would you say in this case that 'just enough food' is a condition >for kusala being developed? Food can stimulate sense desire which would be obstruction not just for samatha but vipassana as well. This is basic commentarial position. Of course a high level aryan will not be hindered by it. But this doesn't apply to us. > ====== > > > If washing the dishes is not obstacle to panna, then neither does > > sitting in seclusion. > > > > S: So why sit for the particular purpose? It is bodily expression (bodily intimation) of kusala cittas. The body also needs to rest, but at the same time not to fall asleep as it can easily happen if one is lying on the floor/bed. >Would it sound reasonable to you if I suggested a discipline of >regular 'washing of dishes' as means to develop wisdom? As I've said before, what paramis are you accomplishing by washing dishes that you can't by lets say doing (metta, asubha, anapanasati) etc? Can bodily intimation of washing dishes be an expression of MahaKusala Jhana cittas (for example?) > > S: Avoidance is not the development of good qualities. Avoiding harming, stealing, killing is NOT the development of wholesome qualities?!!! >Sila of restraint happens with respect to other people. Generosity, >kindness, compassion, respect and so on, all have to do with other >beings. How are these developed when there are no conditions for >them to even arise? A) In any case it is unlikely that one can completely avoid ALL human contact b) One can develop metta toward people percieved in the past. c) bodily seclusion in this case is an expression of certain wholesome mental states such as alobha toward people. > ======= > > > > Just because kusala or akusala kammapattha can be described in > > ultimate terms, it cannot happen without corresponding physical > > activities. > > > > S: Killing would require some bodily intimation for sure and so >would lying. But the actor is not actually killing when he shoots >blanks at the other actor does he? The actor doesn't have the same kind of desire to kill and PHYSICAL KILLING DOESN'T OCCUR. Another reason why we can't totally disregard the conventional world and what happens in it. Bodily actions can be originated due to citta. So wholesome cittas do produce wholesome physical actions and same with akusala cittas for akusala physical actions. So washing dishes is one type of bodily expression, and sitting in seclusion is another. IMHO. As for right views and causes for them: Does one listen & consider Dhamma with 100% right views in order to have right views, or does one start with less than perfect understanding (and some misunderstanding) and then increases it to the level of right views? Right view cannot be cause of right view because this sort of self causation would be impossible to make arise by any means. I beleive that even though we start with wrong views, gradually these wrong views are replaced with right views. Gradually wrong tendencies are replaces with wholesome ones. This is where intentional development is a must. It is simply not natural to grab a Dhamma book and read it. Not unless you were deliberately doing it for a long time. This is an expression of wholesome state of citta which doesn't arise due to itself. What is spontaneous now was previously deliberately cultivated. With lots of metta, Alex #109522 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 4:48 am Subject: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 2a sarahprocter... Dear Friends, On Wednesday, a group of us, including Rob K, Azita, Jon and myself went in a deluxe van to Ayutthaya (the old capital of Thailand) where we visited K.Sujin, her sister, K.Sujit and our old friend, K.Duangduen at her new house in a quiet spot. We sat outside at a table, next to a little canal, discussing Dhamma, snacking, with the sound of wind-chimes in the background. After a while, we broke up for lunch and were taken to a lovely outdoor seafood restaurant by the river in Ayutthaya (Nina, the same one we were taken to with my mother last time). As usual, we ate delicious Thai food with lots of seafood and then returned to K.Duangduen's house for more discussion in the same lovely outdoor spot with more and more snacks appearing! A lovely day.....perhaps other DSG friends will join us next time! Some notes of topics of relevance to discussions here, (always with the emphasis on the understanding of realities at the present moment, of course!): 1. Breath & jhanas It depends on an individual's accumulations. If one just decides to take it up, bound to be akusala. If we understand the Eightfold Path, there's no need to talk about jhana – less attachment, more understanding. Why does one want to develop jhana? When it's appealing to have breath as object, it's attachment. Did those in the past who had breath as object select it or have such an object by accumulations? We can see what conditions attachment or detachment, by conditions, not by selection. Only if one really sees the danger of sense objects in a day like the wise people in the old days could, enough to have kusala and know how it could grow, so that there was no experience of sense objects. Before the Buddha's time, as much as they could do was to develop samatha. Without the Teachings of the Buddha, no one will escape from the trap of avijja (ignorance) and attachment. Counting breaths, as given in the Vism or anywhere, with pa~n~naa. Will it lead to understanding? Breath and calm, counting so that the minding doesn't wander, so must be breath, conditioned at that moment. They know how pa~n~naa develops, not going astray to sensuous objects. Each has one's own way, not everyone should have breath as object! If we think of "how to", not understanding citta at that moment. Why crave for samatha? Not kusala. It's like people want to go to nibbana with ignorance. Wishing for jhana – wrong view. 2. Reciting body parts With kusala is calm. Without understanding at that moment, nivaranas, hindrances won't go away. 3. Jhana – burning kilesa If there is kusala now, the citta is calm. Jhana is the development of calm from the beginning. When it is highly developed, there cannoot be sensuous objects experienced. 4. Satipatthana jhana Not only one sense of jhana. Any kusala moment is calm. If not developed, only calm. If developed, then samatha development til jhana or satipatthana til enlightenment. 5. Nimitta and the body, disease We cling to the shadows. Inside (the body) there are just realities, mahabuta rupas. We think it's the heart, disease and so on. All Self. People are interested in the arising and falling away, but there has to be the understanding of realities to bring detachment. We find our diseases, our stresses and difficulties important, but it's all just "the dot of life" – a dot that never comes back – just once in samsara. Each moment is a dot. 6. Metta Pa~n~naa can see whether it's calm or not calm. Right understanding understands calm. Today there may be lots of kusala, but no conditions to develop calm, if no understanding of calm. 7. Dhamma and characteristics (Ken H, Pt) Dhammas are known by their characteristics. We cannot know dhammas without characteristics. A dhamma is that which has a characteristic. Each dhamma has its own characteristic, each dhamma is its characteristic! 8. Niyamas (pt) – realities? Such as kamma niyama, citta niyama – the way they are. Utu-niyama – the way of how hardness is conditioned now. 9. Deva palaces and utu (temperature) Kamma conditions utu which conditions the rupas of the palace, ready for the birth of the devas! Rupas outside the body all conditioned by utu. Utu arising with other rupas by sahajata, nissaya and other paccaya (conditions). 10. 4 kinds of ahara paccaya (we all needed to revise!) a) kamma, b) phassa, c) vi~n~naana and d) ahara (food nutriment) to be contd Metta Sarah ======= #109523 From: Kevin F Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 5:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 2a farrellkevin80 Hi Sarah, Kevin: I am very glad that you had the occasion to discuss dhamma in a beautiful environment. Obviously the result of your past wholesome kamma. This makes me very glad, very happy. I am smiling now. Sarah:On Wednesday, a group of us, including Rob K, Azita, Jon and myself went in a deluxe van to Ayutthaya (the old capital of Thailand) where we visited K.Sujin, her sister, K.Sujit and our old friend, K.Duangduen at her new house in a quiet spot. We sat outside at a table, next to a little canal, discussing Dhamma, snacking, with the sound of wind-chimes in the background. After a while, we broke up for lunch and were taken to a lovely outdoor seafood restaurant by the river in Ayutthaya (Nina, the same one we were taken to with my mother last time). As usual, we ate delicious Thai food with lots of seafood and then returned to K.Duangduen's house for more discussion in the same lovely outdoor spot with more and more snacks appearing! Kevin: Snacks? Kevin: A lovely day.....perhaps other DSG friends will join us next time! Kevin: To discuss dhamma with you and my other friends would be quite pleasing. I took a liking to you immediately, the same way I took a liking to Sukinder, Robert Kirkpatrick, and Jon. Good friends are a blessing of one who has made good kamma in the past. Sarah: Some notes of topics of relevance to discussions here, (always with the emphasis on the understanding of realities at the present moment, of course!): Kevin: I love notes! Sarah: 1. Breath & jhanas *It depends on an individual's accumulations. If one just decides to take it up, bound to be akusala.* Kevin: Is this true for all the people that took it up after being advised to by the Buddha, such as Girmananda ( I will attach the sutta below)? Sarah: If we understand the Eightfold Path, there's no need to talk about jhana – less attachment, more understanding Kevin: Is that why the Buddha mentioned it hundreds or thousands (or tens of thousands) of times? Sarah: When it's appealing to have breath as object, it's attachment. Kevin: It appealed to anyone who has had the object as their subject. Are they attached? Sarah: Did those in the past who had breath as object select it or have such an object by accumulations? Kevin: Given that the Buddha always praised it, he was obviously hoping people would select it. Sarah: Only if one really sees the danger of sense objects in a day like the wise people in the old days could, enough to have kusala and know how it could grow, so that there was no experience of sense objects. Kevin: And what do those people do? As per Vism, they first count the in breaths and out breaths so the mind isn't distracted because it is not always naturally with the object, etc. "Like a person counting grains" and *then* "like a cowherd". Kevin: If they had known the teachings of the Buddha, many would have penetrated. Sarah: 2. Reciting body parts With kusala is calm. Without understanding at that moment, nivaranas, hindrances won't go away. Kevin: That is why one first recites them out loud (see Vism section on mindfulness of the body parts). Later this leads to the mental recitation which is a condition for perceiving the foulness (again see Vism). Sarah: 3. Jhana – burning kilesa If there is kusala now, the citta is calm. Jhana is the development of calm from the beginning. When it is highly developed, there cannoot be sensuous objects experienced. Kevin: Right ( not that I think many people now can experience authentic jhana, but many can experience deep concentration). Sarah: 5. Nimitta and the body, disease We cling to the shadows. Inside (the body) there are just realities, mahabuta rupas. We think it's the heart, disease and so on. All Self. People are interested in the arising and falling away, but there has to be the understanding of realities to bring detachment. We find our diseases, our stresses and difficulties important, but it's all just "the dot of life" – a dot that never comes back – just once in samsara. Each moment is a dot. Kevin: Excellent! With true metta, Kevin 57. Approach the good friend, the giver of a meditation subject (§28): meditation subjects are of two kinds, that is, generally useful meditation subjects and special meditation subjects. Herein, lovingkindness towards the Community of Bhikkhus, etc., and also mindfulness of death are what are called generally useful meditation subjects. Some say perception of foulness, too. -- Visuddhimagga. ___________________________________ The Sutta is attached below::: ================================================================================\ ===================== Thus it has been heard by me: Once upon a time the Buddha was sojourning in Savatthi, at Jeta’s grove in Anathapindika’s park. And at that time the venerable Girimanadna was ill, suffering, and grievously sick. Then, indeed, the venerable Ananda approached where the Buddha was. Having approached and paid obeisance to the Buddha, he sat on a side. Having sat on a side, indeed, the venerable Ananda spoke thus to the Buddha: “Sir, the venerable Girimananda is ill, suffering, and grievously sick. It is good, Sir, that the Buddha may approach where the venerable Girimananda is, having compassion on him.” The Buddha spoke: If indeed you Ananda, having approached the monk Girimananda, would speak the ten perceptions to him it would so happen that having heard the ten perceptions that illness of the monk Girimananda would immediately be cured. What are the ten? The perception of impermanence, the perception of absence of soul, the perception of impureness, the perception of danger, the perception of destruction of passions, the perception of dispassion, the perception of cessation, the perception of non-delight in the whole world, the perception of impermanence of all the mental formations, and mindfulness of in-breathing and out-breathing. And O Ananda, what is the perception of impermanence? Herein O Ananda, a monk who has gone to live in the forest or who has gone to live at the foot of a tree or who has gone to live in an empty abode considers thus: Form is impermanent, sensations are impermanent, perception is impermanent, mental formations are impermanent, consciousness is impermanent. Thus he lives reflecting on the impermanence in these five aggregates of grasping. This, O Ananda is said to be perception of impermanence. And O Ananda, what is the perception of absence of soul? Herein O Ananda, a monk who has gone to live in the forest or who has gone to live at the foot of a tree or who has gone to live in an empty abode considers thus: eye is devoid of soul, form is devoid of soul, ear is devoid of soul, sounds are devoid of soul, nose is devoid of soul, smell is devoid of soul, tongue is devoid of soul, tastes are devoid of soul, body is devoid of soul, feelings are devoid of soul, mind is devoid of soul, thoughts are devoid of soul. Thus in these six internal and external spheres, he lives, reflecting on soullessness. This, O Ananda is said to be the perception of absence of soul. Katama cAnanda, asubhasanna? Idh Ananda, bhikkhu imam-eva kayam uddham padatala adho kesamatthaka, tacapariyantam puram nanappakarassa, asucino paccavekkhati: Atthi imasmim kaye, kesa, loma, nakha, danta, taco, mamsam, naharu, ,atthi, attiminja, vakkam, hadayam, yakanam, kilomakam, pihakam, papphasam, antham, antagunam, udariyam, karisam, pittam, semham, pubbo, lohitam, sedo, medo, assu, vasa, khelo, singhanika, lasika, muttam matthake matthalungan’ti. Iti imasmim kaye asubhanupasi viharati. Ayam vuccat Ananda, asubhasanna. Katama cAnanda, adhinavasanna? Idh Ananda, bhikkhu arannagato va rukkhamulagato va, sunnagaragato va, iti patisancikkhati: Bahu dukkho kho ayam kayo; bahu adinavo. Iti imasmim kaye vividha abadha uppajjanti, seyyathidam: cakkhurogo, sotarogo, ghanarogo, jivharogo, kayarogo, sisarogo, kannarogo, mukharogo, dantarogo, kaso, saso, pinaso, daho, jaro, kucchirogo, murccha, pakkhandika, sula, visucika, kuttham, gando, kilaso, soso, apamaro, daddu, kandu, kacchu, rakhasa, vitacchika, lohitapittam, madhumeho, amsa, pilika, bhagandala; pittasamutthana abadha, semhasamutthana abadha, vatasamutthana abadha, sannipatika abadha, utuparinamaja abadha, visamapariharaja abadha, opakkamika abadha, kammavipakaja abadha, sitam, unham, jigaccha pipasa, uccaro, passavo’ti. Iti imasmim kaye adinavanupassi viharati. Ayam vuccat Ananda adinavasanna. Katama cAnanda, pahanasanna? Idh Ananda bhikkhu uppannam, kamavitakkam nadhivaseti, pajahati, vinodeti, byantikaroti, anabhavam gameti. Uppannam vyapadavitakkam, nadhivaseti, pajahati, vinodeti, byantikaroti, anabhavam, gameti. Uppannam vihimsavitakkam nadhivaseti, pajahati, vinodeti, byantikaroti, anabhavam gameti. Uppannuppane papake akusale dhamme nadhivaseti, pajahati, vinodeti, byantikaroti, anabhavam gameti. Ayam vuccat Ananda pahanasanna. And what O Ananda is perception of impurity? Herein O Ananda, a monk considers the impurities of various kinds, filling the body from the feet upwards and from the top of the hair downwards, bounded by the skin, thus: In this body there are: hair of the head, hairs of the body, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, sinews, bones, marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, bowels, small intestine, stomach, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, grease, saliva, mucus of the nose, synovic fluid, urine, and in the head, brain. Thus he lives reflecting on the impurity of this body. This, O Ananda is said to be perception of impurity. And O Ananda, what is the perception of danger? Herein O Ananda a monk who has gone to the forest or who has gone to the foot of a tree or who has gone to an empty abode, considers thus: This body is full of suffering; It has many dangers. Thus, in this body various afflictions arise: illness of the eye, illness of the hear, illness of the nose, illness of the tongue, illness of the body, illness of the head, illness of the ear, illness of the mouth, illness of the teeth, cough, asthma, cataracts, heat, fever, illness of the abdomen, fainting, dysentery, acute pain, cholera, leprosy, abscesses, cutaneous disease, consumption, epilepsy, a kind of skin eruption (probably ring worm), itch, scabs, nail scratch diseased causing wounds, scabies, affection through blood and bile, diabetes, paralysis, cancer, ulcer, afflictions arising from bile, afflictions arising from phlegm, afflictions arising from wind, afflictions arising from the union of the humours of the body, afflictions arising from changes of seasons, afflictions arising from discrepant attention to the body, spasmodic afflictions, afflictions arising from the result of kamma, cold, heat, hunger, thirst, excretion of fecal mater and urine. Thus he lives reflecting on the dangers of the body. This O Ananda is said to be perception of danger. And O Ananda what is perception of destruction of passion? Herein, O Ananda a monk does not endure a thought concerning any sensuous pleasure which has arisen, abandons, dispels, gets rid of the same, and causes it to attain non-exisitence. One does not endure a thought of hatred; which has arisen, abandons, dispels, gets rid of the same, and causes it to attain non-existence. One does not endure a thought of hurting, abandons, dispels, gets rid of the same and causes it to attain non-existence. He does not endure whatever sinful and unskillful thoughts which have arisen, abandons, dispels, gets rid of the same and causes them to attain non-existence. This O Ananda is said to be perception of destruction. Katama cAnada viragasanna? Idh Ananda, bhikkhu arannagato va rukkhamulagato va, sunnagaragato va, iti patisancikkhati: Etam santam etam panitam, yadidam sabbasankarasamatho, sabbupadhi-patinis-saggo, tanhakkhayo, virago, Nibbanan’ti. Ayam vuccat Ananda, viragasanna. Katama cAnanda nirodhasanna? Idh Ananda, bhikkhu arannagato va rukkhamulagato va, sunnagaragato va, iti patisancikkhati: Etam santam, etam panitam, yadidam: sabbasankkharasamtho, sabbupadhipati-nissago, tanhakkhayo, nirodho, Nibbanan’ti. Ayam vuccat Ananda, nirodhasanna. Katama cAnanda sabbaloke anabhiratasanna? Idh Ananda, bhikkhu ye loke upay’upadana-cetaso adhitthana bhinivesanusaya, te pajahanto, viramati na upadiyanto. Ayam vuccat Ananda sabbaloke anabhiratasanna. Katama cAnanda sabbasankharesu aniccasanna? Idh Ananda bhikkhu sabbasankharehi attiyati, harayati, jigucchati. Ayam vuccat Ananda sabbasankharesu aniccasanna. Katama cAnanda anapanasati? Idh Anada, bhikkhu arannagato va rukkhamulagato va, sunnagaragato va nisidati pallankam abhujitva ujum kayam panidhaya, parimukham satim upatthapetva. So sato’va assasati, sato passasati, Digham va assasanto, Digham assasami’ti pajana’ti. Digham va passasanto, Digham passasami’ti pajanati. Rassam va assasanto, Rassam assasami’ti pajanati. Rassam va passanto, Rassam passasami’ti pajanati. Sabbakayapatisamvedi assasissami’ti sikkhati. Sabbakayapatisamvedi passasissami’ti sikkhati. Passambhayam Kayasankharam assasissami’ti sikkhati. Passambhayam Kayasankharam passasissami’ti sikkhati. Pitipatisamvedi assasissami’ti sikkhati. Pitipatisamvedi passasissami’ti sikkhati. Sukkhapatisamvedi assasissami’ti sikkhati. Sukhapatisamvedi passasissami’ti sikkhati. Cittasankhara patisamvedi assasissami’ti sikkhati. Cittasankhara patisamvedi passasissami’ti sikkhati. Passambhayam cittasankharam assasissami’ti sikkhati. What O Ananda is perception of dispassion? Herein O Ananda, a monk who has gone to the forest or who has gone to the foot of a tree or who has gone to any empty abode considers thus: This is calm, this is excellent - calming all mental concomitants, giving up all levels of rebirth, extinction of craving, dispassion, Nibbana. This O Ananda is percpeption of dispassion. What O Ananda, is perception of cessation? Herein O Ananda, a monk who has gone to the forest or to the foot of a tree or to an empty abode, considers thus: This is calm, this is excellent - calming all mental concomitants, giving up all the levels of rebirth, extinction of craving, cessation, Nibbana. This O Ananda is perception of cessation. What O Ananda, is perception of non-delight in the whole world? Herein O Ananda, a monk, whatever in this world there are deceptions and graspings, decisions, adherences, and tendencies of the mind, abandoning them and not clinging to them, not taking delight in them. This O Ananda, is said to be perception of non-delight in the whole world. What O Ananda, is perception of impermanence of all the mental formations? Herein O Ananda, a monk is worried, is ashamed and disgusted, on account of all the mental formations. This, O Ananda, is said to be perception of impermanence in all the mental formations. What O Ananda, is mindfulness of in-breathing and out-breathing? Herein O Ananda, a monk who has gone to the forest, or who has gone to the foot of a tree, or who has gone to an empty abode, sits cross-legged, placing his body erect, procuring his mindfulness in front of him. He inhales mindfully, exhales mindfully. Inhaling a long breath, he knows ‘I am inhaling a long breath’. Exhaling a long breath, he knows ‘I am exhaling a long breath’. Inhaling a short breath he knows ‘I am inhaling a short breath’. Exhaling a short breath he knows ‘I am exhaling a short breath’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am inhaling experiencing the whole body’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am exhaling experiencing the whole body’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am inhaling quietening the constituent of the body’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am exhaling quitening the constituent of the body’. Passambhayam cittasankharam passasissami’ti sikkhati. Cittapatisamvedi assasissami’ti sikkhati. Cittapatisamvedi passasissami’ti sikkhati. Abhippamodayam cittam assasissami’ti sikkhati. Abhippamodayam cittam passasissami’ti sikkhati. Samadaham cittam assasissami’ti sikkhati. Samadaham cittam passasissami’ti sikkhati. Vimocayam cittam assasissami’ti sikkhati. Vimocayam cittam passasissami’ti sikkhati. Aniccanupassi assasissami’ti sikkhati. Aniccanupassi passasissami’ti sikkhati. Viraganupassi assasissami’ti sikkhati. Viraganupassi passasissami’ti sikkhati. Nirodhanupassi assasissami’ti sikkhati. Nirodhanupassi passasissami’ti sikkhati. Patinissagganupassi assasissami’ti sikkhati. Patinissagganupassi passasissami’ti sikkhati. Ayam vuccat Ananda, anapanasati. Sace kho tvam Ananda, Girimandassa bhikkhuno upasankamtiva, imadasasanna bhaseyyasi, thanam kho pan’etam vijjati yam Girimandassa bhikkuno ima dasasanna sutva so abadho thanaso patipphassambhayya’ti. Atha kho ayasma Anando Bhagavato santike ima dasasanna uggahetva yenayasma Girimanando ten’upasankami. Upasankamitva ayasmato Girimanandassa ima dasasanna abhasi. Atha kho ayasmato Girimanandassa ima dasasanna sutva so abadho thanaso patippassambhi. Vutthahi ca yasma Girimanando tamha abadha. Taha pahino ca panayasmato Girimanandassa so abadho ahosi’ti. He trains himself thinking ‘I am inhaling experiencing zest’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am exhaling experiencing zest’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am inhaling experiencing happiness’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am exhaling experiencing happiness’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am inhaling experiencing the constituent of the mind’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am exhaling experiencing the constituent of the mind’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am inhaling quietening the constituent of the mind’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am exhaling quietening the constituent of the mind’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am inhaling experiencing the mind’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am exhaling experiencing the mind’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am inhaling causing the mind to rejoice’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am exhaling causing the mind to rejoice’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am inhaling composing the mind’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am exhaling composing the mind’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am inhaling causing the mind to be released’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am exhaling causing the mind to be released’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am inhaling contemplating on impermanence’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am exhaling contemplating on impermanence’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am inhaling contemplating on dispassion’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am exhaling contemplating on dispassion’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am inhaling contemplating on cessation’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am exhaling contemplating on cessatiton’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am inhaling contemplating on rejection’. He trains himself thinking ‘I am exhaling contemplating on rejection’. This, O Ananda, is said to be mindfulness on in-breathing and out-breathing. If indeed, you Ananda, having approached the monk Girimananda, would utter these ten perceptions to him, it would so happen that having heard these ten perceptions that illness of the monk Girimananda would immediately be cured. Then indeed, the venerable Ananda having learnt these perceptions from the presence of the Buddha approached where the venerable Girimananda was. Having approached he uttered these ten perceptions to the venerable Girimananda. Then indeed having heard these ten perceptions that illness of the venerable Girimananda was immediately cured. And the venerable Girimananda got up from his illness. And thus that illness of the venerable Girimananda was eliminated. This sutta is used to invite the devas to come and protect us from dangers. #109524 From: Kevin F Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: intentional actions. farrellkevin80 Hi Phil, Phil: Hi Kevin, pt and all Kevin, I know I said harsh and critical things about you in the past (mostly conditioned by heat related irritation) but I'd just like to say that I'm really appreciating your posts these days. I think the way you are laying out the way we have no choice but to start meditating with wrong concentration is very lucidly expresssed. Also, the way you say that panna, at the beginning, is of the degree that simply points out to us that it is better to get the mind to settle the mind on one object than it is to allow the mind to leap around like a fish out of water, struggling for air. (Though of course we know it will usually do so no matter what we intend,that is clear from Dhammapada's description of the mind, but that intention to fix the mind on an object, as so clearly expounded in Vism, must be made.) Howard has often said (or I have more often said quoting him) "we begin where we are, not where we want to be." I think it's great to come across someone who appreciates how importance of most of the things A. Sujin helps us to understand (for example, the excellent survey of paramattha dhammas) but who can also point out some fundamental flaws in her approach.Of course you are not the only one, but I find there is something very suitable for beginners like me in the way you explain things. I think you'll be an excellent Dhamma teacher someday. Thanks. Metta, Phil Kevin: Dear Phil. thank you so much for this post. It means a lot to me! In the past, I too have acted in unwholesome ways, not knowing the meaning of restraint! Thank you. With metta, Kevin ___________ #109525 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:03 am Subject: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 2b sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Discussion notes contd - (I forgot to mention DSG's Sukin as also being a very active participant in the van and in Ayutthaya! Rob K has half-promised to add some of his fairly recent wedding pics to the album....!!) No special order for the cryptic notes..... ***** 11. Dibbacakkhu of the Buddha which saw haddaya vatthu (heart base) (#87424 Scott & Nina) "he looked with his divine eye after having increased his clearvoyance, and saw their heartbase (hadaya ruupa)..." What is meant in context by haddaya vatthu? Haddaya vatthu, literally, the rupa of heart-base. 12. #104726: "Morality is the foundation, The initiator and the origin of all, That is fine, good and very beautiful... One must therefore purify true morality!" Siila WITH pa~n~naa, otherwise no purification. 13. Nekkhama and vitakka (Lukas, #109263) Whenever there is kusala, there is nekkhama, "reununciation" of akusala. Vitakka arising with kusala and akusala cittas. Can vitakka be known now? If not, why be concerned about it? In the beginning the understanding has to be of the difference between moment with and without sati, before kusala and akusala can be known. Nekkhama – vitakka and associated factors at moments of kusala. 14. Lukas's Qu no 3. L: "I want to be smarter but I can't make myself smarter......I still practice this Dhamma and I want this I want that. I want to end all this craving and I cant." KS: "So?" (What is asked above) has nothing to do with having less attachment. People don't know how deep and how subtle attachment is. Whenever there's seeing, it's there (immediately following). The Teachings will lead to less attachment. Without them, it's always "me". 15. Lukas's Qu no 4. L: "It seems that thinking goes its own ways. When it appears it cannot be changed. Is it OK to reflect anattaness of thinking? Does it change much?" KS: "OK or not OK is not understanding." It should be one's own understanding from hearing or considering, not the judgment of others. This is why KS likes to help people understand for themselves. 16. Vipaka vs Javana cittas (Ken O) KS: "Doesn't he cling to seeing as well? Otherwise it's always "I see", if (the seeing) is not known. We cannot understand javana kusala or akusala without understanding the vipaka cittas such as seeing. Attached to what now? Seeing, visible object, hearing, sound... We have to understand visible object in order to understand attachment to it. How can he know it's javana? Just calling it javana! 17. Classification of 14 akusala cetasikas into 4 groups (#108980, Han) The last group consisting of thina (sloth), middha (torpor) and vicikicchaa (doubt). For the vicikicchaa, it doesn't arise with lobha or dosa and is the opposite of moha without doubt which is given in the first group under moha-catukka. The thina and middha are always prompted, weak. 18. Viveka, seclusion. The five-fold classification (#99927): a) seclusion through substitution of opposites (tada.ngaviveka), insight. The opposties are the akusala cittas. b) Seclusion through suppression (vikkhambhana), the eight attainments, jhana. c) Seclusion though cutting off (samuccheda), the path, the 4 lokuttara magga cittas. d) Seclusion through tranquillisation ( pa.tipassadhi), the fruition, the phala cittas. "Tranquillisation" because nothing to be done e) Seclusion through renunciation (nissara.na), renunciation of samsara, renunciation of the arising and falling away, of birth. These are the same as the threefold classification of kaya, citta and upadhi viveka. Kaya viveka, alone with kusala citta, in the secluded place by accumulation. In the ultimate sense, living alone at this moment, when we know about the impermanence of dhammas. When kusala is developed to the point that there is no need of any company, no responsibility – the arahat. Leaving the dusty life – unless an arahat, haven't left the dusty life. 19. 3 groups of sankharas (#106919, Han & Nina) a)Kaayakamma – voliton (cetana) leading to kamma through the body Kaayas"nkhaara – breath which maintains the body (Not actions...) Without breath, no body to live in. b) Vaciikamma – volition leading to kamma through speech Vaciisa"nkhaara – vitakka and vicara only. Without vitakka and vicara, cannot be speech. c) Manokamma – volition which leads to good or bad kamma through the mind-door Cittasa"nkhaara – all the cetasikas, also referred to as manosa"nkhaara. All the cittas condition that moment. Without the cetasikas, citta cannot be manokamma. ***** Perhaps other participants will think of other points to add in due course... Thanks to all who went for the good company and to all here for all the points which assisted our discussions. Metta Sarah ====== #109526 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:24 am Subject: Re: awareness of 4 elements within one's body jonoabb Hi Alex (109512) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > ... > Right. Before one is perfect, there will be mistakes made. However these very mistakes could be something to consider, investigate, reflect on, study and use them to develop more wisdom. > =============== J: This is your interpretation of the teachings. You read the Buddha as instructing his followers to undertake a practice that would necessarily involve the development of akusala. > =============== > If one could totally act perfectly, one would be an Arahant. But do you see a vicious circle if one would claim that "perfection requires perfection, and nothing less than perfection". > =============== J: Obviously, I'm not suggesting that perfection requires perfection'. Another of your straw men, Alex. (!!) > =============== > Jon, all, do you see the vicious circle in saying that "right views only require right views and no minor akusala"? > =============== J: That's not what I'm saying. Another straw man. (!!) > =============== > Here we differ. Appropriate reflection IS DELIBERATE ACTIVITY. > > If one doesn't deliberately do it, then the mind will follow its own deluded course. Ex: One has to deliberately think about Dhamma or the mind will naturally fantasize about its favourite fantasy such as "girls, purses, money, whatever". > =============== J: It's true that most of the involuntary reflection that occurs in a day is akusala, but there can also be involuntary reflection that is kusala. For example, reflecting on something one has heard or read regarding the development of the Path. > =============== > After the mind was restrained enough times, then spontaneous cittas with dhamma investigations can arise more often and in higher quality. > =============== J: This again is your particular interpretation of the teachings; there is no such thing actually mentioned in the texts. > =============== > So for there to be spontaneous cittas that arise, one is required to deliberately develop those same qualities. > =============== J: We can safely assume that there has been development of awareness in the past (otherwise there would not be the interest in the teachings in this life). The development of the path is a matter of these previously-accumulated qualities being conditioned to re-arise. Jon #109527 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:26 am Subject: Re: Part 2 on Intentional development, simplified jonoabb Hi Alex (109514) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello Jon, Pt, Sukin, all, > > If causes for right view are listening & considering the Dhamma, then I have a question: > > ***Does one listen & consider Dhamma with right view or not?*** > =============== J: I did not say that the causes for right view are the deliberate activities of listening & considering the Dhamma (another straw man!!). The factors I mentioned were the following: - the hearing of the teachings, appropriately explained; - the understanding at an intellectual level of what has been heard, - appropriate reflection on what has been thus understood, and finally - the previous accumulation of understanding sufficient to be conditioned to arise by that appropriate reflection. None of these factors is a matter of undertaking a deliberate activity. Each will only occur at moments of right understanding of the appropriate level. > =============== > If yes, then how does one get to that point in the first place? > =============== J: It's not a matter of getting to any particular point in the first place. It's a matter of the gradual accumulation of right view over a long period of time. Patience and confidence in the teachings are required. Jon #109528 From: Vince Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 8:21 am Subject: On Time in the Visuddhimagga cerovzt@... Maybe somebody can clarify this: Visuddhimagga says about the Time: "...while of TIME (kala) the Mula Tika says: Though time is determined by the kind of consciousness [e.g. as specified in the first paragraph of the DhammasanganI] and is non-existent (avijjamdna) as to individual essence, yet as the non-entity (abhava) before and after the moment in which those [conascent and co-present] dhammas occur, it is called the "container (adhikarana)"; it is perceived (symbolized) only as the state of a receptacle (adhara-bhava) (DhsAA. 62). ** The Path of Purification, Visuddhimagga. Bhikkhu Nanamoli(5ed). note 68 (Chap VIII) pp.789 it says by order: 1- the Time is non existent 2- despite non-existent we add it to the explanation, and we put a name: the container. 3- this container exists between past and future (forget the three are concepts?) 4- then the container can be perceived as the state of a "receptacle" located between past and future. If we agree the past, future and Time, the three are delusion, when this delusion is not present there is just nama, rupa and citta. If finally there is not Time, How is possible a succession of cittas arising and falling? Vince. #109529 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 8:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kathavatthu Translation need info sarahprocter... Dear Kevin, Thank you for your enthusiastic comments to my notes - more on that later. Just briefly on this thread - I've had this PTS translation for ages and really appreciate this text. I think you will too. I also have the commentary, but the Kathavatthu transl itself gives a summary from the commentary. I'm not aware of any other translations. An interesting intro as well. You'll enjoy it, esp having studied various Mahayana teachings as well. Really, it's just like DSG..... debates about all sorts of wierd and wonderful topics related to the Teachings:-) Highly Recommended! Metta Sarah --- On Tue, 24/8/10, Kevin F wrote: From: Kevin F Subject: [dsg] Kathavatthu Translation need info To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, 24 August, 2010, 23:14 I'm looking for a good translation of the Kathavatthu. Can anybody recommend which one is good to purchase? Does anybody have this translation? How do you feel about it? "This translation of Kathavatthu by S.Z. Aung and Mrs. C.A.F. Rhys Davids, was originally published in 1915. It is a scholarly critical edition that provides notes, indexes, diagrams and other aids to understanding the reasons and order of secessions of the myriad schools of Buddhism. Note: Pariyatti can ship Pali Text Society publications to countries in the Americas only (North, Central and South America, Hawaii and the Caribbean, including Puerto Rico.)" Thanks. With metta, Kevin ___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor of the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me Kevin's discussion forum = http://www.dhammasnippets.webs.com/ #109530 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 2:49 pm Subject: Did You Mean Pa.tivedha? Re: Satipatthana only occurs naturally? abhidhammika Dear Jon, Alex, Kevin, Howard How are you? If you don't mind, may I ask Jon a few brief questions? Jon wrote: "In the context of the development of the Path, however, the term 'practice' as used in the teachings refers to the actual arising of panna rather than to the undertaking of specific intentional activities." Can you be more specific about what you meant by 'the actual arising of panna'? Did you mean the actual arising of magga pa??aa such as sotaapatti magga pa??aa? If you say 'Yes', then it goes beyond the level of pa.tipatti (practice) and reaches the level of pa.tivedha (penetrating). Then, you will have to accept the fact that your statement - "In the context of the development of the Path, however, the term 'practice' as used in the teachings refers to the actual arising of panna rather than to the undertaking of specific intentional activities." - needs revising. For example, you can revise as follows: "In the context of the development of the Path, however, the term 'practice' as used in the (Theravada) teachings refers to the undertaking of specific intentional activities." Or you can revise as follows: "In the context of the development of the Path, however, the term 'penetrating' as used in the (Theravada) teachings refers to the actual arising of panna rather than to the undertaking of specific intentional activities." Or, if you could not accept the above 2 scenarios, you are welcome to provide Pali texual citations or their translations to support your statement. Thanking you in advance. Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: Hi Alex (109472) <> J: There is nothing 'unnatural' per se in intentional actions. In the context of the development of the Path, however, the term 'practice' as used in the teachings refers to the actual arising of panna rather than to the undertaking of specific intentional activities. Jon #109531 From: Kevin F Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 4:41 pm Subject: The Buddha and Ayurvedic Medicine farrellkevin80 The Buddha and Ayurvedic Medicine Hi group, I was just reading through the Girimananda Sutta which I posted the other day and I saw something very interesting. The Buddha said: "..itch, scabs, nail scratch diseased causing wounds, scabies, affection through blood and bile, diabetes, paralysis, cancer, ulcer, *afflictions arising from bile*, *afflictions arising from phlegm*, *afflictions arising from wind*, *afflictions arising from the union of the humours of the body*, *afflictions arising from changes of seasons*, Kevin: It is amazing how the Buddha specifically mentions afflictions arising from all three humours or doshas: bile, phlegm, and wind (Pitta, Kappha, Vatta). It is also amazing how He mentions "afflictions arising from the union of the humours of the body" as most disorders and diseases (not all) are seen as arising from the constant interplay of these three humours in the body. "Change of seasons" is also interesting because different seasons have predominant doshas or humours which can throw certain bodies out of whack. I also remember reading a sutta, though I am not sure which one, where the Buddha spoke to someone about the Brahmins. The Buddha said the Brahmins admit that this kind of disease arise from bile conditions, this kind arises from phlegm conditions, this kind arises from wind, but that they did not see that the disease which they take for their own only arises based only those physical conditions and that they are not self or a person. I found that really interesting. Other places in the Canon too the Buddha mentions afflictions from the humours. I remember in the Visuddhimagga it says that certain people believe that one is of hateful temperment because of predominance of bile humour, attached temperment because of kappha dosha and so on, but that the real reason is because of the roots of the citta one is born with. I think this is in the section about picking meditation subjects. I can't remember. It is amazing that this knowledge was so widespread in India. I am not too interested in it myself any longer because I find it to be a bit of a distraction, but it is something I have studied in the past. I have read a number of good books on the subject and studied it quite a bit, to the degree that I can diagnose and treat many illnesses. Like I said I am not that interested in it anymore but I still take certain foods, do certain things, etc. to keep the balance of the wind element, which tends to go out of balance rather quickly due to certain things. Another thing comes to mind, I remember reading a book by Pa Auk Sayadaw about the Four Elements meditation and he was talking about meditating on all four elements in each session instead of just one, because it would throw the humours out of balance in the body. I am not sure where he got this information, but the work cited heavily from the Visuddhimagga, it's Commentary, and Sub-commentary, so the information may have been contained therein. I know this is a bit off-topic for the list, but I just wanted to muse. Indeed, understanding of wordly things can also be profitable for lay people I suppose. Though we must be careful not to get carried away with things such as this, or things of the world. It is so easy to get carried away with them. All the best, Kevin ___________ #109532 From: Ken O Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body ashkenn2k Dear Jon > >J: Do concepts *arise*? To my understanding, not; they neither arise nor fall >away. > >In any event, what is the significance of mentioning the arising of concepts in >the first place, rather than just the arising of dhammas? KO:? If you felt arise should not be use and lets not used arise,?or appear is a better word?during thinking.? I am wondering, if it does not arise during thinking, how would concepts appear.? ?Objects can condition sanna that associated this object with pleasure feelings or craving.? Ain't that signficant enough.?How would you understanding dhamma without concepts.????As i said, there is nothing wrong with concepts but concepts can be used for development because it can condition the arisen of kusala or panna.? Just like the words in the sutta which are concepts can coondition the arisen of?panna.? So reading a book or reciting a conceptual object can condition kusala arise.? Hence I said again, it is not the objects that matter, it is the dhamma that arise with the object that matters.? the object can be a concept and concept can be used to develop panna.?? Are you saying concepts cannot help one to understand dhamma and all concepts should be held an arms length just because it is not nama and rupa and does not have the three characteristiscs ???? Ken O #109533 From: Ken O Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of the Present Moment - for Ken O ashkenn2k Dear Sukin > >S: Then there should be no reason to talk about anything since >expressing oneself is always based on memory of past experiences. >But of course thinking and expressing oneself does necessarily happen. >So what is the point of contention here? > KO:? because you dont understand the meaning of present moment,? your understanding of present moment is based on past moments.? At that moment of expressing oneself of past experiences, is that a present moment or not. >You say that if I believed that the present moment has already arisen >and fallen away, then I have no basis to make any statement about it. >The only valid base for saying anything about reality is if I believed >that it has not yet fallen away at the time that I perceive it. > >As I tried to show you in the previous post, anger as the object of >consciousness is the one from a previous citta in which there was the >experience of a particular unpleasant object, which means that by then >the anger must have fallen away. In other words, the anger was present, >but fallen away already at the time that it became known as "anger". >More importantly however, when I think and state about "now", wouldn't >this be many mind moments away from that which I refer to? > KO:? If anger has fallen away,?how could?one should have express anger words at others.? So is?anger past or not at the moment of expressing of anger.? Also if it is already past, why should anger be the only condition for the present, ?there could be wise attention and then there is no anger.? >============= >> >> >2b- Being conditioned already, this is its nature and nothing can be >> >done to alter this. >> >> KO: Since it is condition to arise, whats there to say, does that >> mean anger >> going to condition other anger to arise. >> > >S: No, it does not mean this. >What is the use of talking about these things? >It is because this is the way things are, but because of accumulated >ignorance we don't know this. The development of understanding must >start slowly beginning with pariyatti where no direct understanding of >the characteristic of a reality is involved. Indeed when it is >patipatti, even here the experience is only of the nimita, which means >many similar realities all fallen away. This is however the only way >that it can ever be. > KO:? We dont know this does not give us excuses not to understand and investigate further on our accumulations just because it is a nimita.? At the moment of experience even it is nimita, it is still a present moment, it does not change the fact it is dhamma that arise with nimita.? If we based our understanding of dhamma because it is just nimita, how could we further develop.? Since reading suttas are also full of nimitas, does that mean it cannot help in the development of panna.? >I realize that you are trying in your own way, to stress on the >experience of the present moment which is defined by a characteristic of >a nama or rupa being known. This is why you insist that they are >'present' and therefore we should not think that it has fallen away >already. I do not have any problem stating about the present moment that >it has already fallen away for the reasons stated, and I don't see why >you should object to this. Is it because it comes across to you as >self-contradictory? KO:? At any moment of present moment, there must be dhamma.? Even if one said that hearing a sound is already past since rupas have fallen away, at that moment even it is a nimitta of rupas, does not mean it is not the present of what you experience even it is nimita.? At that moment, that is the most impt for satipatthana and not thinking it has already past.? It you think it has already past, then I wonder you ever think, what you think it has already past is really your present moment.?? Also nimitas can condition kusala and akusala, are you going to think whether it is nimita or direct understanding or you should be more concern of what is dhamma that arise where the nimita is the object . > >========= > >> >2c- This is what it means to be 'beyond control'. >> >> KO: beyond control is not about this. Beyond controol means one >> cannot change >> the nature of anger as anger when it is present. One cannot change >> the nature >> that is anger citta is anatta. It does not arise because it is beyond >> control, it arise because of a cause. >> > >S: So you are saying that arisen by cause does not mean no-control? Are >you suggesting that dhammas do the control and since in reality there >are only dhammas, we should not speak of no-control in such a situation? > KO:?? Dhammas are anatta and there are dhammas that directs, or wish to do.? If there are such dhammas to perform such functions, can one claim there is no control.? If there is no control, why bother to go to listen to dhammas.?? Dhamma by nature cannot be control as it will arise and falls away, does not mean dhamma cannot be directed or intent.? So the understanding of anatta or no control is wrongly intepreted.? As long as there is kamma for rebirth to the next plane, there would be a rebirth, that is the meaning of anatta, the nature of dhamma.? it does not we cannot change kamma. if there is no control, then a killer will also be killers for?all eternity?since there is no control.? The killer is condition to think like that and??this is because of accumulations he always be a killer. >> > >> KO: Show mean a text reference please because there is no text even >> in Visdu >> that claim one can only practise satipatthana only if the object >> is nama or >> rupa. Satipatthana can arise because of understanding the dhamma that >> arise >> with an object. It could be any object. A set of teeth or a corpse >> can cause >> the arisen of enlightement. Does that mean there is no satipatthana. >> This >> assumption that the object of the citta during satipatthana should >> only be >> paramatha dhamma is wrong and inconsistent with the text. Lets not >> tell me it >> is understanding because the text does not support such a basis. Only >> when >> vipassana arise, then it is nama or rupa. >> > >S: Quoting texts is not my forte. I'll need someone else to help me with >this. What I can say though is that, concepts being a product of >thinking, any study, observation, analysis or breaking down into >components is just more thinking with concepts as object. And hence any >conclusion as to these being impermanent, unsatisfactory and non self is >just conceptual, which can at best be an instance of kusala thinking but >unrelated to vipassana development. > KO:? Hmm, how do you listen to words then if concepts cannot be used for development of panna.? And I am waiting for the text :-) from anyone > >But this moment is also past!!! >;-) > KO:? if this moment is also past, I wonder how you write the words, basing on past.? I wonder when is your present. cheers #109534 From: Ken O Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Part 2 on Intentional development, simplified ashkenn2k Dear Jon > >J: I did not say that the causes for right view are the deliberate activities of > >listening & considering the Dhamma (another straw man!!). The factors I >mentioned were the following: >- the hearing of the teachings, appropriately explained; >- the understanding at an intellectual level of what has been heard, >- appropriate reflection on what has been thus understood, and finally >- the previous accumulation of understanding sufficient to be conditioned to >arise by that appropriate reflection. > >None of these factors is a matter of undertaking a deliberate activity. KO:? are you saying going to BKK is not a deliberate activity Ken O #109535 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 8:50 pm Subject: intentional development & right views truth_aerator Hi Jon, all, >A: Right. Before one is perfect, there will be mistakes made. >However these very mistakes could be something to consider, >investigate, reflect on, study and use them to develop more wisdom. > > =============== > > J: This is your interpretation of the teachings. You read the >Buddha as instructing his followers to undertake a practice that >would necessarily involve the development of akusala. Akusala should NOT be deliberately attempted. It happens as honest mistakes are made. We can't help it until Arhatship. PastAkusala btw can be used as condition for more kusala (ex: one examines its drawbacks) > > =============== > > If one could totally act perfectly, one would be an Arahant. But do you see a vicious circle if one would claim that "perfection requires perfection, and nothing less than perfection". > > =============== > > J: Obviously, I'm not suggesting that perfection requires >perfection'. Another of your straw men, Alex. (!!) But you seem to say that one shouldn't meditate because there may be akusala (such as an idea of controlling realities) arise at that time. What I've tried to say is that while these mistakes can occur, they don't mean that one shouldn't develop wholesome qualities. Simply the akusala qualities need to be known when they arise and dealt with. > > =============== > > Jon, all, do you see the vicious circle in saying that "right views only require right views and no minor akusala"? > > =============== > > J: That's not what I'm saying. Another straw man. (!!) But you seem to deny intentional development of right views and other skillful qualities. Without intentional development, they will not ever be developed - and intentional development may include mistakes being made as no one is perfect. That is why one doesn't start with perfect right view (or right effort, or right mindfulness, etc) but gradually reaches that point. > J: It's true that most of the involuntary reflection that occurs >in a day is akusala, but there can also be involuntary reflection >that is kusala. For example, reflecting on something one has heard >or read regarding the development of the Path. Right. But what was the cause of those involuntary reflections? Previous (perhaps even in previous lives) intentional development. A person trained to react in certain way can involuntary react in previously trained way to a certain event. Ex: soldiers are trained to fall for cover when loud noise is heard to protect themselves) may involuntary duck for cover (without thinking) when some harmless sudden sound is heard. Past intentional practice. > > =============== > > After the mind was restrained enough times, then spontaneous cittas with dhamma investigations can arise more often and in higher quality. > > =============== > > J: This again is your particular interpretation of the teachings; >there is no such thing actually mentioned in the texts. There is. Ex on taming the 6th senses. ""Suppose, bhikkhus, a man would catch six animals?with different domains and different feeding grounds?and tie them by a strong rope. He would catch a snake ? and a monkey, and each he would tie by a strong rope. Having done so, he would bind them to a strong post or pillar. Then those six animals with different domains and different feeding grounds would each pull in the direction of its own feeding ground and domain. The snake would pull one way ? (as above) ? The monkey would pull another way, thinking, `Let me enter a forest.' "Now when these six animals become worn out and fatigued, they would stand close to that post or pillar, they would sit down there, they would lie down there. So too, bhikkhus, when a bhikkhu has developed and cultivated mindfulness concerning the body, the eye does not pull in the direction of agreeable forms nor are disagreeable forms repulsive the ear does not pull in the direction of agreeable sounds nor are disagreeable sounds repulsive;? the mind does not pull in the direction of agreeable mental phenomena nor are disagreeable mental phenomena repulsive." SN 35.247 (10) The Simile of the Six Animals BB Trans. > > > =============== > > So for there to be spontaneous cittas that arise, one is required to deliberately develop those same qualities. > > =============== > > J: We can safely assume that there has been development of >awareness in the past (otherwise there would not be the interest in >the teachings in this life). The development of the path is a >matter of these previously-accumulated qualities being conditioned >to re-arise. This is what we are talking about. The previous development of awareness, was it deliberate or not? Those previously-accumulated qualities, were they deliberately cultivated or not? Is listening to the Dhamma a deliberate activity or not? Is considering the Dhamma a deliberate activity or not? Is initial listening & considering done with right views, or they views are not yet right? If these two activities are done with right views, then how were those right views ever attained and why are these two conditions required for right view? If these two activities (listening & considering Dhamma) are done with imperfect views than you agree with what I was saying all along. With metta, Alex #109536 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 9:05 pm Subject: Re: Part 2 on Intentional development, simplified truth_aerator Hi Jon, all, >A: Hello Jon, Pt, Sukin, all, > > > > If causes for right view are listening & considering the Dhamma, then I have a question: > > > > ***Does one listen & consider Dhamma with right view or not?*** > > =============== > > J: I did not say that the causes for right view are the deliberate >activities of listening & considering the Dhamma (another straw >man!!). What do you mean these are not deliberate activities? Listening itself is a deliberate activity. There needs to be attention to the sound as opposed to something else. Dhamma isn't being verbally spoken everywhere. One needs to decide to go to a monastery, BKK or some other place, sit and listen to the speaker. It also requires a choice as a certain person may choose to go to a strip mall instead and buy a new pair of leather shoes. Choosing, and physically walking, is a deliberate activity. One may chose X or not-X. Even when sitting in a monastery one can choose to listen to the singing of the birds instead of the Dhamma-Talk. So deliberate choice of listening to the Talk as opposed to listening to the birds is required. Same in meditation. There is deliberate action of developing wholesome qualities including understanding vs developing unwholesome qualities and ignoring the truth. > - the previous accumulation of understanding sufficient to be >conditioned to arise by that appropriate reflection. And how is prior accumulation of understanding is attained? How does one go from 0% understanding to 100%? What does on do to start the development of understanding from 0% onwards? With metta, Alex #109537 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 9:32 pm Subject: Re: Part 2 on Intentional development, simplified truth_aerator Hello Jon, Sukin, all, > J: I did not say that the causes for right view are the deliberate >activities of listening & considering the Dhamma (another straw >man!!). Please define what you mean by deliberate activities. Listening itself is a deliberate activity. There needs to be attention to the certain sound (ex: Dhamma talk) as opposed to something else, like sound of a bird outside of the monastery. One may listen to Dhamma or not-dhamma. Choice is required and so is attention toward what was chosen to be listened to. One may sit in a Dhamma hall and instead of listening to Dhamma lesson think about "what will I have for dinner?". So the choice (of listening) and effort to actually do what was chosen is required. Why isn't choosing to listen to Dhamma as opposed to not-Dhamma, not be a deliberate activity? Why isn't taking in hands Dhamma book, opening it and reading it not be a deliberate activity? What is wrong with deliberate activity anyways? Aren't all kusala states deliberate activities? They include cetana, manasikaro and other factors. >J: the understanding at an intellectual level of what has been >heard,- appropriate reflection on what has been thus understood, One can choose to think about women, leather shoes, or whatever vs thinking about Dhamma. Why isn't thinking about Dhamma a deliberate and intentional choice that is done contrary to ones natural inclinations to think about worldly matters? Why isn't thinking & reflection on Dhamma not be DOING something wholesome? It is action that is being done, thinking & reflecting on Dhamma. With metta, Alex #109538 From: "bhikkhu3" Date: Fri Aug 27, 2010 10:45 pm Subject: Moderate Eating... bhikkhu5 Friends: Control starts with Guarding the 6 Doors of the Senses!! The Buddha once explained Bhikkhus by possessing three qualities, one lives in this very life full of ease, pleasure & joy! Furthermore, one has thereby prepared the elimination of the mental fermentations... What are these three advantageous qualities? I: One guards the doors of the senses, II: One is moderate in eating, and III: One is devoted to wakefulness... How is a Bhikkhu moderate in eating? While reflecting rationally, he eats food neither for the sake of entertainment, nor of infatuation, nor wishing for bodily beauty, but exclusively for the support and maintenance of this body, for ending discomfort, and for assisting this Noble life, considering: Thus will I now end this old feeling, yet without arousing any new feeling! Thus will I remain healthy, blameless & in comfort... Exactly as one treats an open wound, only for the purpose healing it, or just as one greases an axle only for the sake of easy transport of a heavy load, so does a Bhikkhu, who is moderated in eating, while always reflecting rationally, eat food ... <...> Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book IV [176-7] Section 35: The 6 Senses. Salayatana. The Horse-Wagon. Rato 239. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ * .... #109539 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:35 am Subject: Whats wrong with deliberate and intentional action? truth_aerator Hello KenH, Sukin, all, What is wrong with deliberate and intentional action? Doesn't even the Buddha does it? Doesn't cetana, manasikara and so forth happen with every citta? With metta, Alex #109540 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 2:49 am Subject: Re: intentional actions. ptaus1 Hi Kevin, Alex, (Phil, Sarah) Thanks for your reply. I think I understand some things a bit differently, will try to explain: > Kevin: Taking the subject of 'head hairs' again because I believe it is > a good example to demonstrate this, at first the verbal recitation must be done > because the mind wanders more. This helps it stay with the object and settle > down. pt: I think more precision is needed here - concentration can be right or wrong. The fact that the recitation helps the mind to stay with the object would probably mean that stronger concentration is there, but it does not guarantee that concentration is necessarily kusala. Akusala concentration can likewise enable the mind to stay with the same object. > Kevin: There is an effort to do so. pt: Yes, I think intention is always there as a universal cetasika, and effort is also there as a particular cetasika, which in essence makes any "action/doing" (whether physicial or mental) "deliberate/intentional" in a sense. But the real question is whether the intention and effort are kusala or akusala effort at a particular instance, thus making the action kusala or akusala. And how are they differentiated in practice? I think there's a lot more to developing samatha than just putting in any sort of concentration, effort and intention). > Kevin: The verbal recitation is a condition for > the mental recitation (according to Vism). pt: Same deal, how does one know whether mental recitation is kusala or akusala now? Because I think Vsm implies that recitation is done with kusala citta, and hence kusala concentration, effort, calm, etc. It may be a weak kusala initially, but it is onle kusala that can lead to more kusala. Unless you have an explanation how akusala can lead to kusala. So Vsm recitation is not just any recitation imo, so if it's akusala, that's just not samatha at those moments. Sure, there may be strong concentration, effot, maybe even piti that accompanies these, but all these would still be akusala. > Kevin: Now the mind is settling down more > when just the mental recitation can be done. pt: I think mind settles down thanks to calm that accompanies kusala citta, not the recitation as such. I think a samatha object ideally is the object that the mind finds naturally calm to contemplate/settle on in kusala moments. "Naturally" meaning as per accumulations. And "calm" meaning kusala calm cetasika. So, I don't think it's the purposeful recitation itself that leads to more kusala concentration, calm, etc, but rather, it's the kusala citta that contemplates the object with calm. An illustration might be if you decide to take the breath as object, and then attempt to breathe purposefully in a similar manner that you try to recite purposefully. Usually, attempting to purposefully manipulate the breath for some time can cause hyperventilation and other problems, so it has very little to do with kusala calm. So, I think the mind, depending on accumulations, naturally settles down with calm on a certain object in moments of kusala, because calm accompanies kusala cittas. But, if you attempt to contemplate an object purposefully, well, that's probably not natural settling down anymore. > Kevin: When this happens, wisdom starts > to develop. It starts to see the drawbacks in not being with the subject and in > being diffuse all over the place. pt: This is a tricky bit for meditators, which I think requires great precision in expression. And I'm also struggling to express it, so here's an attempt: As far as I can interpret the whole issue, there are three rare "occasions" that can strictly be called "development" of samatha: 1. An instant when panna recognises the drawbacks of clinging to sense-objects, which then results in settling on a certain samatha object with kusala calm. 2. The following instant when the mind is settled on a samatha object with kusala calm - could be metta, breath, recitation, etc. I'm not sure what role panna plays here? But I think this the instance that at some point develops into a jhana citta (Vsm style). 3. The instance when panna recognises such moment of calm as kusala. In addition, I think all these would classify as development of samatha even in the sense that Sarah likes to point out - every kusala citta basically being a moment of samatha since there's kusala calm. And, I think these 3 instances, if they happen during a "meditation session" would still be development of samatha despite the meditation so to speak. So, imo, these are the kusala moments in or out of meditation session, so everything else by that logic would be akusala (not considering the vipaka nad kiriya here). So, only in those kusala instances there's right concentration, effort, calm, etc, regardless of how strong/weak they are. So ideally, this is when Vsm recitation actually happens in kusala manner. Everything else according to my understanding is really aksuala that we meditators tend to lump together with kusala moments and then draw the possibly erroneous conclusion that a "2 hour meditation session" is useful because it provides those kusala moments. It might be that these kusala moments actually arise despite the meditation session, as some here say. I don't know really at the moment. But I don't yet see any grounds for believing that akusala counting, recitation, etc, could bring about those kusala instances. A case can be made that my instance 1. can be brought about by purposefully engaging in akusala, but I don't think that's right, beacuse if kusala arises, it's because of previous kusala accumulations, not because of current akusla. > Kevin: This is a condition. It conditions Right > Understanding of the bran of samattaha, and conditions moments of Right > Concentration where the mind naturally stays with the object with kusala > cittta. pt: Hm - the mind staying with the object - why do you think it's necessarily kusala? What distinguishes kusala from akusala moments, relating to samatha? My thinking is that kusala necessarily has calm as accompanying cetasika, while akusala has restlessness. But then again, how does one tell the difference? I think restlessness can still arise as long as one is not an arahat, meaning it can get very, very subtle. So how can one tell the difference between true kusala calm and a very subtle akusala restlessness that accompanies a subtle pleasant craving for something like fine piti (which can also be akusala and accompany akusala concentration) and other things in meditation that feel really, really great, because they are accompanied with a pleasant or neutral feeling? > Kevin: Otherwise, there would be no point in the recitatation. If would be > like if we have the Right Cocnetration naturally, if not, don't bother. pt: As mentioned, my understanding is a bit the other way around. Kusala recitation is already an object of - or basically an expression of - a kusala citta. It's not something that's used to get to kusala citta in the future. Kusala moments (even weak ones) will condition more kusala moments. Akusala moments will condition more akusala moments. But I haven't yet seen a plausible explanation that akusala can condition kusala. Of course, the whole deal practically speaking is how can one know the difference between kusala moments, and akusala ones? I guess it's the same old drill - listen, contemplate, discuss, etc. Anyway, that's my understanding at the moment. Best wishes pt #109541 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 3:15 am Subject: Re: Intentional development, simplified ptaus1 Hi Alex, Thanks for your replies. I think I answered some of the issues you raised (deliberate action, samatha, etc) in the post to Kevin. A few more things I didn't yet address: > Alex: > Point #1: > The development happens from one end of the spectrum to another > > From wrong view, eventually to totally right view > Or > 0% ... -> 50%...-> 100% right view. > > If 100% right view solely depends on 100% right view (x->x) then it will be impossible to achieve it. Either one has always had it (ala Mahayanist notion of We are all already Enlightened) or one doesn't have it and cannot do anything about it as right view is self-caused. pt: Yes, I think this is the crucial difference in how we interpret the a/kusala issue. Generally speaking, I agree that it can be said that a person slowly progresses from wrong view to right view. But, in abhidhamma terms, we need to be more precise. As I understand, only kusala accumulations can cause more kusala in the future. Which would mean that progress is made from weak kusala to stronger kusala. My reasoning for this in brief is that there is no discernible beginning and so we all have some kusala and some akusala accumulations. So, when a Buddha appears, through hearing the Dhamma, contemplating it, and understanding it, there's progress from weak kusala to stronger kusala. That is why I think that we also differ on your point #2: > Alex: > Point #2: > > Spontaneous quality of the mind was once deliberately trained. pt: I wouldn't say that it was deliberately trained, but I'd rather say that a Buddha appeared and thought Dhamma, and through hearing it and understnading it, one's kusala accumulations increased, which will at some point condition magga and phala. So, I think it's hearing the Dhamma and understanding it that makes all the difference, not the deliberate training. Ideally, I think the the "training" would in fact be equivalent to moments of understanding the Dhamma. In other words, imo it's a Buddha that brings that extra spark to the situation, so to speak, which then conditions one's progress from weak kusala (like citta arising with two roots of alobha and adose only) to stronger kusala like insight (like citta arising with 3 roots - alobha adosa and amoha). Also, if I understood you correctly, you mentioned the desire for awakening being a good thing even if it's akusala (basically rooted in lobha as I understood you). I tend to disagree here. I think the desire for awakening can actually lead to awakening (i.e. increase kusala) only when the desire itself is kusala (chanda). Now, I agree that the a/kusala desires would probably interchange very often in the mind of an average person, but I think it's only the kusala moments (with chanda) that would equate to that one more extra step closer to awakening. Likewise, I guess the akusala moments would tend to postpone the awakening, especially if there's wrong view arising together with the unwholesome desire. Best wishes pt #109542 From: Kevin F Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 3:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: intentional actions. farrellkevin80 Hi Pt, Pt: Thanks for your reply. I think I understand some things a bit differently, will try to explain: ... Kevin: An interesting post Pt. Thank you. Some of what you say, I have some qualms with. Some of what you say, I do not. But let me sum it all up here with a question. Given what you have said, do you think a "meditation session" with some moments of Right Concentration, with kusala cittas and calm, and some moments of wrong conentration, with akusala, would be "profitable"? Thanks, Kevin ___________ #109543 From: Kevin F Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 3:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Intentional development, simplified farrellkevin80 Hi Pt, Pt: (to Alex) Yes, I think this is the crucial difference in how we interpret the a/kusala issue. Generally speaking, I agree that it can be said that a person slowly progresses from wrong view to right view. *But, in abhidhamma terms, we need to be more precise.* Kevin: Hi Pt, intentionally more precise with wrong concentration or with right? Kevin ___________ #109544 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 3:32 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Intentional development, simplified ptaus1 Hi Kevin, > > Pt: (to Alex) Yes, I think this is the crucial difference in how we interpret > the a/kusala issue. Generally speaking, I agree that it can be said that a > person slowly progresses from wrong view to right view. *But, in abhidhamma > terms, we need to be more precise.* > > Kevin: Hi Pt, intentionally more precise with wrong concentration or with > right? pt: More *precise* in expressing, discussing and understanding the issue. So, we can speak in general terms of a person who develops from ignorance to wisdom, from wrong view to right view, from wrong concentration to right concentration, etc. But, when speaking in abhidhamma terms, it's kusala that causes more kusala. So, I think progress, or development (bhavana), in abhidhamma terms happens from weak kusala to strong kusala. I don't think that moments of akusala (like wrong view, wrong concetration, etc) can be counted as development in abhidhamma term, although they undoubtedly happen. Best wishes pt #109545 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 3:50 am Subject: [dsg] Re: intentional actions. ptaus1 Hi Kevin, > Kevin: Given what you have said, do you think a "meditation session" > with some moments of Right Concentration, with kusala cittas and calm, and some > moments of wrong conentration, with akusala, would be "profitable"? pt: Well, as said, I don't really know. I guess it would depend on the kusala and akusala that happen. If there's akusala with wrong view that happens during the "session", I guess that would be the worst possibility and it wouldn't nearly justify a few kusala moments of right concentration that happen during the session. I mean, right concentration can arise at any time when there's a kusala citta, like in daily life, so I don't really see why risk wrong view, which I think is said to be the biggest impediment on the path. If there's no wrong view arising during the session, but just moments of akusala like sloth, dosa, etc, than I guess the session could be justified. But then none of this relates to insight yet which is what actually matters... So I don't know. That's why I find it's beneficial to keep returning to this issue of what's really kusala and what's akusala, and though it's sometimes disconcerting, I still appreciate it when Sarah, Sukin and others here keep alerting us to the possibility (or rather, probability) of wrong view lurking somewhere behind our good meditative intentions. Best wishes pt #109546 From: Kevin F Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 4:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Intentional development, simplified farrellkevin80 Hi Pt, Pt: pt: More *precise* in expressing, discussing and understanding the issue. So, we can speak in general terms of a person who develops from ignorance to wisdom, from wrong view to right view, from wrong concentration to right concentration, etc. But, when speaking in abhidhamma terms, it's kusala that causes more kusala. So, I think progress, or development (bhavana), in abhidhamma terms happens from weak kusala to strong kusala. I don't think that moments of akusala (like wrong view, wrong concetration, etc) can be counted as development in abhidhamma term, although they undoubtedly happen. Kevin: hi Pt, but the question is, when we have the urge to speak in more precise abhiddhamma terminology is it always with kusala right understanding or sometimes because akusala citta? Are both profitable? Do you engage in both anyway. Not that you could control it of course. Best, Kevin ___________ #109547 From: Kevin F Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 4:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: intentional actions. farrellkevin80 Hi Pt: pt: Well, as said, I don't really know. I guess it would depend on the kusala and akusala that happen. If there's akusala with wrong view that happens during the "session", I guess that would be the worst possibility and it wouldn't nearly justify a few kusala moments of right concentration that happen during the session. I mean, right concentration can arise at any time when there's a kusala citta, like in daily life, so I don't really see why risk wrong view, which I think is said to be the biggest impediment on the path. Kevin: What if those kusala moments were of deep concentration with lots of calm? You don't see why "risk wrong view". You have wrong view anyway (not just you of course but all people including me) during daily life. Can you intentionallu cause less wrong view by not engaging in meditation of samattha? Pt: With metta, Just something to ponder.. Kevin ___________ #109548 From: Kevin F Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 4:34 am Subject: Can we intentionally cause less wrong view to arise??? Especially by not meditating??? farrellkevin80 When we decide to _not_ meditate samattha because we think it will just be with wrong view or develop more wrong view, do we intentionally then cause less wrong view to arise? Can we control it? Can we decide to cause less wrong view to arise by not meditation? To think so, is actually laughable in my opinion. No offense to any one here (just metta). Whether Right View or wrong view arises it will arise, so be it. If the meditation has some right and wrong that is OK. The moments of Right View can be of deeper calm because it is samattha. That is profitable according to Visddhimag. Everything is anatta no matter what. This goes for whether we think the actions are "intentional" or not. Even those actions we think are intentional are anatta and can be known as such when panna arises. I should know. As a person "beyond the world" I assure you of this truth. Go ahead, "take faith" in it. LOL. Whether you do or do not intentionally, it is all anatta. Friends: no thing is atta. So... "Can we intentionally cause less wrong view to arise??? Especially by not meditating???" The answer is no, of course. That may raise the question: can we intentionally cause right view to arise by meditating? The answer is no. But meditation can be a cause for deeper concentration, which can be a cause for wisdom. All of it, none the less, is anatta. That is to say, meditation should be engaged in. Kevin ___________ #109549 From: Kevin F Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 4:55 am Subject: Studnets of Ajahn Sujin think there is a subtle self farrellkevin80 Hi all, Students of Ajahn Sujin (who and whom I have so much respect and love for-- both Ajahn and her students) think there is a subtle self. Now I know all the followers of Ajahn laughed as soon as they read that sentence, thinking it was ridiculous. For those students feel they are the ones who know best, know best that there is not self, and have the most right view out of all the "camps". So, allow me to explain. Thinking that by engaging in meditation, of the brand of samattha, one only has wrong view and conditions more wrong view, is a view that there is a *Subtle*, ever so subtle, self that can cause less wrong view to arise by *not* engaging in meditation. I will leave it at that for now. I will speak more about this wrong view of self later. Well, maybe I will explain a little bit more at this time. There is no self anywhere to be found, anywhere. In fact nothing (as in no concept) can be found at all to actually exist. Therefore, meditation is just as non self as any other dhamma. Thinking that one can prevent more wrong view by not engaging in meditation is a wrong view itself, because it shows that there is a person that can stop this wrong view from arising by not engaging. The fact, however, is that deeper concentration (borne of samaattha) is more kusala and can be a support, therefore, for wisdom. "Intentional and "unintentional" actions are *all* not self. Kevin. ___________ #109550 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 7:01 am Subject: Re: Intentional development, simplified ptaus1 Hi Kevin, > K: hi Pt, but the question is, when we have the urge to speak in more > precise abhiddhamma terminology is it always with kusala right understanding or > sometimes because akusala citta? Are both profitable? Do you engage in both > anyway. Not that you could control it of course. pt: Ah, I see what you meant. Sure, I'd like to think there's a bit of kusala somewhere there. Either way, I do appreciate the abhidhamma terminology precision because it cleared up a lot of confusion for me at least. In addition, I often get the feeling that arguments here become needlessly overheated because of the differences in the finer points of particular terminology (conventional and ultimate). > Kevin: What if those kusala moments were of deep concentration with lots of calm? pt: Well, I still think that wrong view is far more detrimental. I mean, deep concentration and calm are great kusala, but they are not insight yet. And if we're speaking in terms of awakening, then insight and wrong view take center stage, while deep conentration and calm take the back seat so to speak (basically accompanying a kusala citta), unless the interest is specifically in developing jhana I guess. > Kevin: You don't see why "risk wrong view". You have wrong view anyway (not just you of course but all people including me) during daily life. Can you intentionallu cause less wrong view by not engaging in meditation of samattha? pt: If I understand Sarah, Sukin and others here correctly, if one engages in an activity believing that it will bring up a kusala citta in the future, that means there's akusala at present, so no understanding in the present moment. Which means there's wrong view at the present moment regarding what's kusala, what's bhavana, etc. So, the issue is not really about "intentionally causing less wrong view" but about understanding what's kusala and what's akusala. I mean, if there's understanding, there's automatically no wrong view at the time. So, I think it's not so much about trying to have more or less of one thing or another (like more right/wrong view, concentration, etc) but about understanding what kusala and what's akusala first. Best wishes pt #109551 From: Ken O Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 7:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Intentional development, simplified ashkenn2k Dear Kevin and Pt >> Kevin: You don't see why "risk wrong view". You have wrong view anyway (not >just you of course but all people including me) during daily life. Can you >intentionallu cause less wrong view by not engaging in meditation of samattha? KO:? that depends.? if the pre-requsite is met as describe in Visud, the servering of the ten immpediments that it is not wrong view.? If it is not met, the probability of it being wrong is highly probable.? Some might argue it is a?skill to learn like learning to swim, in fact there is no need because one could do it later if the pre-requsites are met. ?? It is far much easier to conconcetrate when mindfulness, sila and panna are developed.? What is the level, I do not know as it is not describe clearly in the Visud. > >pt: If I understand Sarah, Sukin and others here correctly, if one engages in an > >activity believing that it will bring up a kusala citta in the future, that >means there's akusala at present, so no understanding in the present moment. >Which means there's wrong view at the present moment regarding what's kusala, >what's bhavana, etc. > KO:? Interestingly, even reading sutta? is already an activity that believing?it will help to develop panna.? There is no difference between one who goes to listen?to a dhamma or one goes to a?retreat mediation because they all believe it?would develop panna.???But it is not about engaging an activity for developing dhamma, it is the dhammas that arise with the activity and how much?these are?in line with the texts.?? Just like going to a temple to prostate over a Buddha image could be kusala at the moment of respect and akusala to believe in Buddha is a god.? Panna is the crux is these activities and how much it is in line with the teachings.? Everyone?must have an intent or wish to learn dhamma, if there is no wish, we will not have wanted to learn in the first place. Intent or wish may not be necessary good or bad, it depends on the?kusala or akusala that arise.? Similarily if there is no willing, how is it possible to go into the internet and discuss. :-) Ken O? #109552 From: "gazita2002" Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 12:00 pm Subject: Re: Studnets of Ajahn Sujin think there is a subtle self gazita2002 hallo Kevin, quote: students of Ajahn Sujin think there is a subtle self. I wonder if you realise Kevin, jst how many students there are of A.S. Are you including all her Thai listeners, which there are many plus the Thais who listen to her radio broadcasts? Not only are you sakadakami but presumably you have developed maagical powers as well to enable you to see all of these peoples wrong view. Amazing! Patience, courage and good cheer asita #109553 From: "gazita2002" Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 12:16 pm Subject: Re: Intentional development, simplified gazita2002 hallo Kevin, just wnat to clear up something you have said here: snip..... > > Kevin: You don't see why "risk wrong view". You have wrong view anyway (not > just you of course but all people including me) during daily life. Can you > intentionallu cause less wrong view by not engaging in meditation of samattha? asita: I understood that sotapannas no longer have wrong view, so I'm wondering why you are stating here that you have wrong view. Mayb you mean something different here? patience, courage and good cheer asita #109554 From: "lawstu_uk" Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 12:26 pm Subject: Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 2b lawstu_uk Dear Sarah, Many and many thanks for posting these note from Bangkok with K. Sujin. It just makes me so so happy to read these notes, to contemplate Dhamma and to rejoice your discussions. I've saved these notes, together with Nina's 'What I heard' in a folder so that I can read again and again. Andrew #109555 From: Sukinderpal Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Studnets of Ajahn Sujin think there is a subtle self sukinderpal Hi Kevin, I should wait for you to respond to my last post. But Sarah brought this to my attention just before today's discussions and I was hoping that when I got back, Ken H or Pt would have responded to it. But since neither of them have, I'll comment some. ======== > > Students of Ajahn Sujin (who and whom I have so much respect and love > for-- both > Ajahn and her students) think there is a subtle self. > Suk: Sometimes not so subtle and what appears subtle to me, must appear quite clear and obvious to someone with more developed understanding. ======= > > Now I know all the > followers of Ajahn laughed as soon as they read that sentence, > thinking it was > ridiculous. For those students feel they are the ones who know best, > know best > that there is not self, and have the most right view out of all the > "camps". > So, allow me to explain. > Suk: You can explain and should, but there is no reason for speculating how other people react and what they think. As one who studied under A. Sujin at one time, did you go around thinking that "you" knew best and reacted in the way characterized above? ======= > Thinking that by engaging in meditation, of the brand of samattha, one > only has > wrong view and conditions more wrong view, is a view that there is a > *Subtle*, > ever so subtle, self that can cause less wrong view to arise by *not* > engaging > in meditation. > Suk: You seem to take it as a given that 'meditation' is an essential component in the development of the Path for any Dhamma student. This is why you reason that A. Sujin's students are involved in "avoidance" and that this can only be with self view. You forget that the development of Right View is about the understanding of present moment realities which have arisen *already* by conditions. This is exactly how one's accumulations come to be understood and why the development of the Path must necessarily be *natural*. If one follows the kind of thinking that you have, the practice will never be about coming to understand what *naturally* arises by conditions now, in other words the present moment will never be known and one will be going further away from the correct Path. Conventionally speaking, in trying to actualize what you think must be done, you'd never come to understand who you really are. Man, I thought this was the point you were making when you first announced becoming an Ariyan! ========== > I will leave it at that for now. I will speak more about this wrong > view of > self later. > S: I eagerly look forward to your further statements. ;-) ========= > > Well, maybe I will explain a little bit more at this time. There is no > self > anywhere to be found, anywhere. In fact nothing (as in no concept) can > be found > at all to actually exist. Therefore, meditation is just as non self as > any > other dhamma. > S: So whatever arises by conditions from moment to moment, the understanding of this is to be developed. No place for any prescribed practice. Do you not appear to forget this at the moment when you decide to sit and meditate?! ========= > Thinking that one can prevent more wrong view by not engaging in > meditation is a wrong view itself, because it shows that there is a > person that > can stop this wrong view from arising by not engaging. > S: First you'd have to explain how 'meditation' as you see it or any other 'prescribed activity' can be a product of Right View. In the meantime you should know that the idea of 'avoiding meditation' is your own perspective. It is not something any of A. Sujin's students are involved in. There are ultimately only namas and rupas, from this perspective ideas about meditation or not, have no relevance. In giving life to the idea of 'meditation' you begin to argue along the same lines as some people do, about the need to be engaged in a particular ritualistic activity and justifying this with the idea of there being ultimately only nama and rupa. This is *not* right understanding, but using the Dhamma to justify wrong practice. ======== > > The fact, however, is that deeper concentration (borne of samaattha) > is more kusala and can be a support, therefore, for wisdom. > S: How exactly? ======== > > "Intentional and "unintentional" actions are *all* not self. Kevin. > S: What is "unintentional" action? If intention arises with all citta, why make such a comment? But I think I know what you are referring to, namely the intention associated with thoughts about "doing meditation". But given what you say above, about *all* being anatta, isn't the kind of thinking a case of not following what you preach. ;-) Metta, Sukinder ps: I see Azita got to it before me, but I'll post this anyway. #109556 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 2:33 pm Subject: Re: Intentional development, simplified truth_aerator Hello Pt, all, > pt: I wouldn't say that it was deliberately trained, Why isn't listening to the Dhamma not be a deliberate activity? I mean one may just as likely or even more likely to listen to something else or to do something else. Why isn't considering the Dhamma a deliberate activity? One can just as likely (or even more so) consider the new leather shows, or think about hockey or something? I agree that "training is moment of understanding", but this doesn't occur without deliberate activities. As for "how akusala desire can lead to Nibbana"? Remember the Ven. Nanda's story? A good example. Of course akusala desire will have to be dropped at some point, I do not dismiss that. But to get started it may be needed for *some* people. With metta, Alex #109557 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 2:39 pm Subject: Re: Can we intentionally cause less wrong view to arise??? Especially by not meditating??? truth_aerator Dear Kevin, all, >When we decide to _not_ meditate samattha because we think it will >just be with wrong view or develop more wrong view, do we >intentionally then cause less wrong view to arise? Can we control >it? Can we decide to cause less wrong view to > arise by not meditation? Exactly. I'd also like to add that choosing not to do X (such as choosing not to meditate, and lets say go and wash dishes) is as deliberate activity as meditation. Citta cannot be without cetana, manasikara and other relevant cetasikas. So to remove any kind of choice (or result of it) is impossible. With metta, Alex #109558 From: Ken O Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 2:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] On Time in the Visuddhimagga ashkenn2k Dear Vince time is only in existence?through relatively comparision by the thinking process of the cittas.? Time itself has no unique characteristics like hardness, temp etc.? A lifetime for a fruitfly is just weeks, but to the fruitfly it is the whole life while we think it is very short, our life is comparable longer.?? But to a fly hardness could be experience just like us experiencing it, they are of?the same characteristics. Time is not a delusion, it is just mind made.?? to be precise, delusion is just another mental factor.? The process of cittas got nothing to do with time, it is rather?due to the nature of dhamma.? All dhamma must?arise, present and?cease and condition another to arise as?long as kamma is not being eradicated. Ken O >? > > >Maybe somebody can clarify this: > >Visuddhimagga says about the Time: > >"...while of TIME (kala) the Mula Tika says: Though time is determined by the >kind of consciousness [e.g. as specified in the first paragraph of the >DhammasanganI] and is non-existent (avijjamdna) as to individual essence, yet as >the non-entity (abhava) before and after the moment in which those [conascent >and co-present] dhammas occur, it is called the "container (adhikarana)"; it is >perceived (symbolized) only as the state of a receptacle (adhara-bhava) (DhsAA. >62). >** The Path of Purification, Visuddhimagga. Bhikkhu Nanamoli(5ed). note 68 (Chap >VIII) pp.789 > >it says by order: > >1- the Time is non existent >2- despite non-existent we add it to the explanation, and we put a name: the >container. >3- this container exists between past and future (forget the three are >concepts?) >4- then the container can be perceived as the state of a "receptacle" located >between past and future. > >If we agree the past, future and Time, the three are delusion, when this >delusion is not present there is just nama, rupa and citta. > >If finally there is not Time, How is possible a succession of cittas arising and >falling? > >Vince. > #109559 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 2:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Studnets of Ajahn Sujin think there is a subtle self truth_aerator Hello Sukin, Kevin all, > > Suk: You [Kevin] seem to take it as a given that 'meditation' is an >essential component in the development of the Path for any Dhamma >student. Right. N8P has samma-sati and samma-samadhi, not to mention right-effort. >You forget that the development of Right View is about the >understanding of present moment realities which have arisen >*already* by conditions. N8P has 8 factors, not 1. >This is exactly how one's accumulations come to be understood and >why the development of the Path must necessarily be *natural*. Please define what you EXACTLY mean by natural development of the path? Not trying to do anything Buddhist? What about Muslims, Xtians, Atheists and others? They haven't engaged in Buddhist practice (which would be un-natural for them). Are they awakened? >Sukin: if one follows the kind of thinking that you have, the >practice >will never be about coming to understand what *naturally* >arises by conditions now, in other words the present moment will >never be >known Meditation is all about learning and understanding the present moment. Even heavy samatha teachings of Ajahn Brahm (for example) emphasis the awareness of present moment, awareness of no-control and so forth. >Sukin: So whatever arises by conditions from moment to moment, the >understanding of this is to be developed. "to be" implies a deliberate practice, even if the practice is of understanding the present moment. > No place for any prescribed practice. So what about all the Muslims, Xtians, and others? They don't do any Buddhist prescribed practice. Whats the difference in what they do vs what Ajahn Sujin's students do? If there is no difference, then any muslim could naturally be Awakened. If there is a difference, then there IS a certain prescribed action. Even if it requires simply to listen to AS and read Dhamma books. Reading Dhamma books is a form of practice. So is listening to AS. With metta, Alex #109560 From: Kevin F Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 5:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kathavatthu Translation need info farrellkevin80 Hi Sarah: Sarah: Thank you for your enthusiastic comments to my notes - more on that later. Kevin: Thank you. Sarah: I've had this PTS translation for ages and really appreciate this text. I think you will too. I also have the commentary, but the Kathavatthu transl itself gives a summary from the commentary. I'm not aware of any other translations. An interesting intro as well. You'll enjoy it, esp having studied various Mahayana teachings as well. Really, it's just like DSG..... debates about all sorts of wierd and wonderful topics related to the Teachings:-) Highly Recommended! Metta Sarah Kevin: Great. I am looking forward to reading it! Kevin __________ #109561 From: Kevin F Date: Sat Aug 28, 2010 6:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Studnets of Ajahn Sujin think there is a subtle self farrellkevin80 Hi Sukin, Asita, Limted time now so I will just respond to this. I will try to respond with more detail to this and some other posts later. Sukinder:If one follows the kind of thinking that you have, the practice will never be about coming to understand what *naturally* arises by conditions now, in other words the present moment will never be known and one will be going further away from the correct Path. Conventionally speaking, in trying to actualize what you think must be done, you'd never come to understand who you really are. Man, I thought this was the point you were making when you first announced becoming an Ariyan! Kevin: There is this deluded interplay of arising nama and rupa here at the moment that we take for a being with a soul. We can never make wisdom or vipassana arise. That is not possible because there is no doer, but just nama and rupa arising. When this deluded interplay of nama and rupa, however, decides with it's anatta will (cetana, and so on) to go against the unwholesome actions by engaging in sila intentionally and deliberately, it goes against the constant attachment, aversion, and delusion that arises. It doesn't allow it to engage in unwholesome actions which are all based in delusion as attachment and aversion are based in delusion. It starts to see that these things never were a person, because "we" are still here, but haven't pampered these unwholesome tendencies and actions which contantly reaffirm to us again and again that there is a being or person or soul. It sees that although we don't look in the mirror, don't watch pornography even though we may be tempted to etc, that things are still arising and that they are not a being or person. When this not-self interplay of arising nama and rupa intentionally engages in meditation, the concentration can be deep. No being makes this happen, but it is conditioned by the anatta person engaging in the activity of meditation. Concentration becomes deep and deeper concentration is the proximate cause of wisdom arising according to Vism. This will only occur (the wisdom) if their has been contact with the Dhamma through the senses and reflection on it by the mental aggregate. None of it is a doer or a person, just causes and conditions. Sujinists are scared that there will be a being or a person there if they engage in an acitivity on purpose. There never is, and sila and samadhi are the two roots of wisdom. There may be some unwholesome tied up with doing them, but they go against unwholesome tendencies in a powerful way which reveals that there is not a person there, a person that the lay person normally constantly reaffirms through unwholesome actions. I'll respond more later. I have a bit of a busy day right now. Take care. ___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor of the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me Kevin's discussion forum = http://www.dhammasnippets.webs.com/ #109562 From: "bhikkhu3" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:45 am Subject: No Panic! bhikkhu5 Friends: Heroes die without Identification or Agitation! On this occasion Ven. Sariputta & Ven. Upasena were staying at Rajagaha in the Cool Grove, in the Snake's Hood Grotto. There a young viper fell on the Venerable Upasena's back & bite him badly. Then Ven. Upasena calmly said to the bhikkhus: Come, friends, lift this body of mine up on a bed and carry it outside before it is scattered right here like a handful of chaff... Venerable Sariputta then said to Ven. Upasena: We do not see agitation in Ven. Upasena's body nor any change in his abilities! Yet Ven. Upasena says: Come, friends, lift this body of mine up on a bed & carry it outside before it is scattered right here like a handful of chaff... Friend Sariputta, for one who thinks: 'I am this eye', or 'This eye is mine', or 'I am this ear', or 'This ear is mine', or 'I am this nose', or 'This nose is mine', or 'I am this tongue', or 'This tongue is mine', or 'I am this body', or 'This body is mine', or 'I am this mind', or finally 'This mind is mine,' there might very well be an agitated change of the body or a change of the abilities. But, friend Sariputta, it does neither occur to me: 'I am this eye', nor 'This eye is mine', nor 'I am this ear', nor 'This ear is mine', nor 'I am this nose', nor 'This nose is mine', nor 'I am this tongue', nor 'This tongue is mine', nor 'I am this body', nor 'This body is mine', nor 'I am this mind', nor 'This mind is mine', so why should there be any variation or agitation in my body or any sudden change in my abilities? It must indeed be because all I-making, and all mine-making, & any latent tendency to the conceit: 'I Am...' have been all uprooted in the Venerable Upasena for a very long time, that it does not occur to him: 'I am this eye', or 'This eye is mine', or 'I am this ear', or 'This ear is mine', or 'I am this nose', or 'This nose is mine', or 'I am this tongue', or 'This tongue is mine', or 'I am this body', or 'This body is mine', or 'I am this mind', or 'This mind is mine'... Then those bhikkhus lifted Ven. Upasena's body up on a bed and carried it outside. Then Ven. Upasena's body was scattered right there, just like a handful of chaff! Upasena was the younger brother of Ven. Sariputta. For his 'personal' details see: Upasena Vangantaputta: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/u/upasena.htm <...> Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book IV 40-1 The 6 senses section 35. Thread on Upasena: Upasena Sutta (69) http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ * <...> #109563 From: Vince Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 1:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On Time in the Visuddhimagga cerovzt@... Dear Ken O, you wrote: > time is only in existence through relatively comparision by the thinking process > of the cittas. Time itself has no unique characteristics like hardness, temp > etc. A lifetime for a fruitfly is just weeks, but to the fruitfly it is the > whole life while we think it is very short, our life is comparable longer. But > to a fly hardness could be experience just like us experiencing it, they are > of the same characteristics. but the duration of time is not an explanation of its nature. We experience anguish when we think "I'm waiting two hours", despite nobody can perceive "one second", "two minutes" or "two hours". However, the flyfruit is free of that dukkha. Duration of Time is not an explanation of Time in itself. A fruitfly cannot perform the comparative thinking you wrote. A fruitfly lacks of a representation of the relation between dhammas. She lives in a state of a pure experience, and in fact what she knows is motion, not Time. This is a related knowledge although another one. If she would have capacity to know the Time, then she would be able to perform calculations, predictions, expectatives and anticipations. And this is not the case. What you says here: > "time is only in existence through relatively comparision by the thinking > process of the cittas" I think you are right and I agree. However, I think that's in contradiction with this: > Time is not a delusion, it is just mind made. to be precise, delusion is just > another mental factor. The process of cittas got nothing to do with time, it is > rather due to the nature of dhamma. All dhamma must arise, present and cease > and condition another to arise as long as kamma is not being eradicated. if time is just mind-made it means delusion. When we awake after sleeping for a while, we don't know if we have been sleeping 1 hour or 4 hours. This ignorance and dukkha is delusion. The cause of time cannot be in the nature of dhammas because the time is not inside the objects. When you says "must arise" this is an expectative, beyond the fact it would be accomplished. This expectative is not in the object. It will means delusion, except if we talk of the same moment of experiencing the arising or cease. However, if we are positioned in that continuous moment of experience, here there is not possibility for a succesion of cittas: here there is just citta, consciousness. Succession of cittas only can belongs to a conventional explanation because it needs of a self, a past and a future. In short and by order: - plurality of cittas needs the succession - succession needs the Time. - Time needs the self So, How can somebody overcome dukkha while there is a need of a self to sustain that explanation? best, Vince. #109564 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:54 am Subject: [dsg] Re: intentional actions. kenhowardau Hi pt and Kevin, ------------ > Kevin: Given what you have said, do you think a "meditation session" with some moments of Right Concentration, with kusala cittas and calm, and some moments of wrong conentration, with akusala, would be "profitable"? > pt: Well, as said, I don't really know. I guess it would depend on the kusala and akusala that happen. If there's akusala with wrong view that happens during the "session", I guess that would be the worst possibility and it wouldn't nearly justify a few kusala moments of right concentration that happen during the session. ------------- I agree, but I would leave out the "if". When there is belief in the efficacy of a "session" (which is a concept) there is definitely wrong view in the form of atta-ditthi. (No "ifs" about that!) I suppose, in amongst the akusla moments of atta-ditthi there could be some kusala moments of dana or sila. (Although unlikely if the meditator has removed himself from sentient company.) But I doubt there could be any possibility of satipatthana. The meditator in this case has wrong theoretical understanding. He thinks the Dhamma is about concepts. Therefore, any satipatthana that occurred (even at a theoretical level) would come as a complete philosophical turnaround. And turnarounds don't happen very often. Ken H #109565 From: Kevin F Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: intentional actions. farrellkevin80 Dear Ken, Ken: I agree, but I would leave out the "if". When there is belief in the efficacy of a "session" (which is a concept) there is definitely wrong view in the form of atta-ditthi. (No "ifs" about that!) I suppose, in amongst the akusla moments of atta-ditthi there could be some kusala moments of dana or sila. (Although unlikely if the meditator has removed himself from sentient company.) But I doubt there could be any possibility of satipatthana. The meditator in this case has wrong theoretical understanding. He thinks the Dhamma is about concepts. Therefore, any satipatthana that occurred (even at a theoretical level) would come as a complete philosophical turnaround. And turnarounds don't happen very often. Ken H Kevin: That is a nice hypothesis Ken. May I ask you what expereince do you have with samattha? Thank you. With respect, Kevin F. ___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor of the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me Kevin's discussion forum = http://www.dhammasnippets.webs.com/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5vuTToYN8M&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVpYcc7BCj8 #109566 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:27 am Subject: Re: Intentional development, simplified ptaus1 Hi Alex, Kevin, KenO, > > pt: I wouldn't say that it was deliberately trained, > > Why isn't listening to the Dhamma not be a deliberate activity? I mean one may just as likely or even more likely to listen to something else or to do something else. > > Why isn't considering the Dhamma a deliberate activity? One can just as likely (or even more so) consider the new leather shows, or think about hockey or something? > > > I agree that "training is moment of understanding", but this doesn't occur without deliberate activities. pt: I'm not sure anymore whether there's any argument since we all seem to agree on the fundamentals - there's intention with every citta, there's also concentration and effort, etc, so every citta and the activity associated with it can be called "deliberate, intentional, etc" on that basis. And I think we also all agree that all these can be either kusala or akusala depending on the citta. So, it seems we are only arguing about semantics regarding the meaning of the word "deliberate": - should it be taken to mean that there's any sort of intention, effort, etc, arising with the citta and the associated activity (which is what I understand Alex, KenO and Kevin to want), or, - should it be taken to mean that there's an akusala citta arising with akusala intention, effort, etc (which is how Jon, Sarah, and others here use the word) Regardless, it'd be nice to see the discussion go in the direction of learning the difference between kusala and akusala, the signs of confusing the two, etc, since that's what actually interests me in practical terms. > Alex: As for "how akusala desire can lead to Nibbana"? Remember the Ven. Nanda's story? A good example. Of course akusala desire will have to be dropped at some point, I do not dismiss that. But to get started it may be needed for *some* people. pt: I'm not sure about Ven.Nanda's story, because it can also be interpreted that it was his consequent shame when questioned by the great disciples that actually lead to proper practice, not the actual decision to live a monastic life based on akusala desire for a nymph. I.e.: "Once inside the viha-ra, however, the Buddha asked Nanda to become a monk, and he, unable to refuse the request, agreed with reluctance. But as the days passed he was tormented with thoughts of his beloved, and became very downcast and despondent, and his health suffered. The Buddha suggested that they should visit the Hima-laya. On the way there, he showed Nanda the charred remains of a female monkey and asked him whether Janapadakalya-ni- were more beautiful than that. The answer was in the affirmative. The Buddha then took him to Ta-vatimsa where Sakka, with his most beautiful nymphs, waited on them. In answer to a question by the Buddha, Nanda admitted that these nymphs were far more attractive than Janapadakalya-ni-, and the Buddha promised him one as wife if he would live the monastic life. Nanda was all eagerness and readily agreed. On their return to Jetavana the Buddha related this story to the eighty chief disciples, and when they questioned Nanda, he felt greatly ashamed of his lustfulness. Summoning all his courage, he strove hard and, in no long time, attained arahantship. He thereupon came to the Buddha and absolved him from his promise." http://palikanon.com/english/pali_names/n/nanda.htm pt: But even if we assume that your interpretation is right, can it be said in abhidhamma terms that it was the repeated akusala desire that caused kusala that eventually resulted awakening? I don't know. Complicated issue. Best wishes pt #109567 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:54 am Subject: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3a sarahprocter... Dear Friends, ? Yesterday, Saturday afternoon, we had another discussion with A.Sujin at the Foundation in Bangkok for a couple of hours. Thx to all contributors on DSG who provide us with so much food for further discussion! ? Here are some of my cryptic notes, in no special order: ? 1.? Selecting an object - wrong view Also, jhana as miccha patipada ? Instead of thinking of developing samatha without any understanding, how about having metta more and more in daily life? If you don't have metta, but want to develop samatha, what's the use? There are many, many opportunities for metta now. ? Discussion on reflection on death. All kusala cittas are useful. If one wishes to have more or sets out to have it, it's akusala. ? If one knows the citta at this moment, one knows what samatha is. If one doesn't know, samatha cannot ?develop. Only panna knows, not "I" who tries to develop it without knowing anatta, without understanding the citta now. ? Is there attachment now? If we're not sure, it shows that we're not like those who really knew and saw the danger of sensuous objects. "Probably" - not the moment of developing samatha. ? So now there are moments of calm. Having such moments is not enough, there must be development. Why does one want more and more kusala without knowing the akusala? Samatha development means knowing the citta. It's very, very difficult. That's why Sariputta praised Moggallana for his skills. There has to be understanding of both samatha and vipassana - kusala from the beginning. Just wanting and wanting to focus on an object is not samatha. ? 2. Some of ?Kevin's recent points discussed : ? Wishing to be calm is not samatha at all, it's wanting to gain something, not seeing the danger of anatta. Calm through understanding leads to more calm. Not understanding the meaning of samatha - all kusala is calm. Calm or not calm, a reality that can be known. ? Parts of the body - while trying, not understanding. Dhammas have arisen already. We don't have to do anything. There is no self to try. It depends whether understanding arises. ? He doesn't know that panna can arise and know any reality at anytime. All realities can be the object of right understanding. Who can stop the moment of samatha? Who can plan to sit or select an object? The dhammas involved are already conditioned. For example, who is thinking about seeing while seeing has arisen and fallen away? Many moments like this all day, no self that can select an object. ? (Btw, Kevin, a discussion the other day about whether arahats and pacceka buddhas can kill themselves - impossible. Rob K had the example he'd seen in a commentary about pacceka buddhas killing themselves before the birth of the bodhisatta, but KS said this was all impossible and they wouldn't know when the bodhisatta would be born. Is it a Mahayana commentary, we wondered?) ? 3. Connie's message # 103118, Beings in lower realms ? " 'Some beings in the lower realms': such beings as the female spirits.....etc, and other spirits who live in places outside the four planes of misery." KS said must be in the four planes of misery - maybe at the edge, like on the border between two planes, like on the border between NSW and Victoria (in Aus)! Perhaps you can check the Pali for "outside". ? 4. Vinaya - Culavagga, understanding lunar mansions and directions in the forest? Essential knowledge for a bhikkhu in the forest, knowing when Patimokkha will take place, how to find his way and so on. (Azita may like to add from her quotes and notes on this and other points). ? 5.Alex's "anything goes, anatta". ? Not just words, but there has to be deep understanding of a reality at a time. When right understanding of dhammas as no self, should there be killing? No. By understanding, gradually eliminated. ? Shoulds -donot mean "select to be" Listen to the Truth, not to an Ajahn! ? Alex #108098, the "Don't try to change or pick and choose the object..." vs KS saying: "The beginner is not keen enought to be aware of all objects which appear. The beginner should begin with one doorway at a time...." As I said at the time, it just means only one object through one doorway can be known at a time. We can say that understanding begins by knowing one object through one doorway. The "expert" knows realities through all doorways. One doorway at a time. ? to be contd ? Metta ? Sarah ====== #109568 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:56 am Subject: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3b sarahprocter... Dear Friends, ? contd: ? 6. Concentration and wisdom, Connie quoting CMA guide # 99164: ? "Finally, whereas the role of wisdom in the mundane jhaanas is subordinate to that of concentration, in the supramundane jhaanas wisdom and concentration are well balanced...." Not correct - in both jhaana and vipassana, concentration and pa~n~naa are balanced. Without pa~n~naa, concentration cannot reach that level and without concentration, pa~n~naa cannot either. ? Now, right concentration doesn't appear - only when pa~n~naa grows and the reality appears. If concentration seems strong now, it's akusala. ? 7. Ekaggata and Passaddhi manifestations in Vism, Pt #97243 Can you check the Pali for "peace" as given as the manifestation of ekaggata and"coolness" as the manifestation of passaddhi? In any case, peace is the opposite of restlessnes. There's no "coolness" in the Pali or Thai! ? Also, Pt #100082 on degrees of alobha and adosa - more obvious in metta, dana etc, more subtle at other times. Yes, different levels. Without metta, cannot be karuna or mudita. ? 8. Sankhara dukkha, Chew #97745 Lokuttara cittas included in sankhara dukkha, but not in dukkha ariya sacca. (Pls give me the Yamaka ref again if it says something different. Thx). ? 9. Sila and Phil's issues - is it not better to just emphasise what is harmful? An example was given of a person in prison who becomes a Christian, becomes a better person, stops taking drugs, harming others and so on. Should we just say "don't kill", without any understanding of what is right and waht is wrong, of different moments, so that they can see by themselves. Help others to have more understanding of the Truth. ? 10. Sanna accompanying different cittas at different times. When there's wrong view, it's atta sanna. ? 11. Lukas's Qus - ? Lukas's Qu 5: "How to investigate this present moment?" KS: "Not uderstand this present moment?" ? Lukas's Qu 6: "Maybe I should observe feelings in the body?" KS: Should? ? Lukas's Qu 7" "Why there's no somanassa and domanassa vedana included in vedanupassana in satipatthana sutta?" KS: They are. Impossible if not. S's note after checking the text: Lukas, I think you don't realise that in the 3-fold classification of vedana, sukha, dukkha and upekkha, that here, sukha includes somanassa and dukkha includes domanassa. For example, from the text (Soma transl): ? "There, the meaning of "pleasant feeling" = sukham vedanam, is as follows: The bhikkhu when experiencing a bodily or mental pleasant feeling knows, "I experience a pleasant feeling." " Later:"Pleasant worldly feeling refers to the six joyful feelings connected with the six sense-doors, and dependent on that which is tainted by defilements." ? In other words, bodily and mental feelings are included, feelings arising trhough six doorways. ****** On Tuesday, we go to Kaeng Krajan in the countryside for two nights. Any further contributions to the discussions will be most welcome! ? Metta ? Sarah ======= #109569 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 6:10 am Subject: [dsg] Re: intentional actions. ptaus1 Hi KenH, > > pt: If there's akusala with wrong view that happens during the "session", I guess that would be the worst possibility and it wouldn't nearly justify a few kusala moments of right concentration that happen during the session. > ------------- > KenH: I agree, but I would leave out the "if". When there is belief in the efficacy of a "session" (which is a concept) there is definitely wrong view in the form of atta-ditthi. (No "ifs" about that!) pt: Ok, I think I agree, but if I can't get an "if", can we please consider one "but" then :) Suppose Maha Moggallana or Anuruddha are developing samatha, so probably exactly as it's meant in Vsm. And then there are several suttas (can't remember the numbers) that describe how the hindrances assail them. My question, would there be any wrong view arising for them together with the hindrances? E.g. when there arises kaamacchanda for them, it's never with wrong view? Or if they cling to pleasant feeling related to piti, or maybe want more mindfulness, more concentration, less sloth (I assume all these desires would be classified as kammacchanda?) there would still be no wrong view for them? So, I'm wondering in what way can one wish for more mindfulness (as an akusala desire) without wrong view? Because usually, when one wants to have mindfulness for example, one would then immediately try to somehow bring about the mindfulness, either by reproaching oneself, or trying harder to stick to the object, etc. I assume all these attempts would likewise be akusala and quite possibly with wrong view. So, perhaps the difference is that when a hindrance arises, if it's simply recognised as a drawback/akusala with panna, there's no wrong view. But if one instead tries somehow to get rid of the hindrance by resisting it, etc, perhaps that would indicate the actual wrong view? And then there's the advice the Buddha gave to those Venerables in the suttas such as looking at bright light to dispel sloth, etc, so I'm wondering how would they engage in doing this stuff without wrong view? Best wishes pt #109570 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 6:13 am Subject: Did You Mean Pa.tivedha? Re: Satipatthana only occurs naturally? jonoabb Hi Suan (109530) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: > ... > Jon wrote: > > "In the context of the development of the Path, however, the term 'practice' as used in the teachings refers to the actual arising of panna rather than to the undertaking of specific intentional activities." > > Can you be more specific about what you meant by 'the actual arising of panna'? > > Did you mean the actual arising of magga pa??aa such as sotaapatti magga pa??aa? > =============== J: I had in mind the mundane panna that accompanies awareness/insight (i.e., mundane path moments). Hoping this clarifies. Jon #109571 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 6:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 2a sarahprocter... Hi Kevin, Thank you very much for all your comments and appreciation: --- On Fri, 27/8/10, Kevin F wrote: >Kevin: I am very glad that you had the occasion to discuss dhamma in a beautiful environment. Obviously the result of your past wholesome kamma. This makes me very glad, very happy. I am smiling now. ... S: And I rejoice in your mudita (sympathetic joy)! It makes it easy to share our good fortune when friends rejoice, doesn't it? I also really appreciated the way you carefully went through all my notes for this installment. I read out some of them in the discussion yesterday to Ajahn and will share her responses. You're most welcome to add further comments. (Apologies for the formatting problems when I sent my last notes - hopefully I've corrected it now). >Sarah: 1. Breath & jhanas *It depends on an individual's accumulations. If one just decides to take it up, bound to be akusala.* >Kevin: Is this true for all the people that took it up after being advised to by the Buddha, such as Girmananda ( I will attach the sutta below)? *** KS: Who was he? (S: Implication: do we have the same wisdom as Girimananda and do we have a Buddha who knows all the accumulations?) *** >Sarah: If we understand the Eightfold Path, there's no need to talk about jhana – less attachment, more understanding >Kevin: Is that why the Buddha mentioned it hundreds or thousands (or tens of thousands) of times? *** KS: Samatha and vipassana. No need for extra samatha. What's better? *** >Sarah: When it's appealing to have breath as object, it's attachment. >Kevin: It appealed to anyone who has had the object as their subject. Are they attached? **** KS: Wishing! *** >Sarah: Did those in the past who had breath as object select it or have such an object by accumulations? >Kevin: Given that the Buddha always praised it, he was obviously hoping people would select it. *** KS: Without the accumulations, can anyone have selected an object? Only accumulations conditions that moment of calm or satipatthana, not selection. (Rob added: mahapurisa, sons of Buddhas only.) *** >Sarah: Only if one really sees the danger of sense objects in a day like the wise people in the old days could, enough to have kusala and know how it could grow, so that there was no experience of sense objects. >Kevin: And what do those people do? As per Vism, they first count the in breaths and out breaths so the mind isn't distracted because it is not always naturally with the object, etc. "Like a person counting grains" and *then* "like a cowherd". *** KS: With or without kusala cittas? Do we know our carita (characters at this moment)? For example, the one without pa~n~naa cannot know. We have all kinds of carita, carita for samatha and vipassana? Who knows? Only pa~n~naa knows. All objects have to be known to decrease the idea of self. One cannot tell for oneself. *** >Sarah: 2. Reciting body parts With kusala is calm. Without understanding at that moment, nivaranas, hindrances won't go away. >Kevin: That is why one first recites them out loud (see Vism section on mindfulness of the body parts). Later this leads to the mental recitation which is a condition for perceiving the foulness (again see Vism). *** KS: System again! S: yes, selection, method.... *** >Sarah: 5. Nimitta and the body, disease We cling to the shadows. Inside (the body) there are just realities, mahabuta rupas. We think it's the heart, disease and so on. All Self. People are interested in the arising and falling away, but there has to be the understanding of realities to bring detachment. We find our diseases, our stresses and difficulties important, but it's all just "the dot of life" – a dot that never comes back – just once in samsara. Each moment is a dot. >Kevin: Excellent! S: yes, we all appreciated the reminders about the "dot of life". Perhaps we'll encourage her to say more. Thx again, Kevin, for all your keen interest and contributions. Metta Sarah ====== #109572 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 6:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 2b sarahprocter... Dear Andrew, --- On Sat, 28/8/10, lawstu_uk wrote: >Many and many thanks for posting these note from Bangkok with K. Sujin. It just makes me so so happy to read these notes, to contemplate Dhamma and to rejoice your discussions. >I've saved these notes, together with Nina's 'What I heard' in a folder so that I can read again and again. ... S: Thank you for your kind encouragement. Yes, I'm also glad when Nina or anyone transcribes from KS's talks/discussions. Perhaps others may like to do the same. As I mentioned, I think you'd appreciate the edited English discussions. Can you download them onto an ipod or something? Btw, a great pic in the album! Thx for that and hope others may follow your example! Metta Sarah ===== #109573 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 6:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body jonoabb Hi KenO (109532) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Jon > > > > >J: Do concepts *arise*? To my understanding, not; they neither arise nor fall > >away. > > > >In any event, what is the significance of mentioning the arising of concepts in > > >the first place, rather than just the arising of dhammas? > > KO: If you felt arise should not be use and lets not used arise, or appear is a > better word during thinking. I am wondering, if it does not arise during > thinking, how would concepts appear. > =============== J: I'd rather talk about simply the object of consciousness being a concept. To say that something arises or that it appears to consciousness is to infer that it *is* something. The term 'concepts' is used to refer to a purely mind-created object, i.e., an object that neither arises nor appears. > =============== Objects can condition sanna that > associated this object with pleasure feelings or craving. Ain't that signficant > enough. > =============== J: It would help if you could give an example of what you have in mind here. Thanks. > =============== How would you understanding dhamma without concepts. > =============== J: Agreed. Concepts are essential to an understanding of dhammas, in that the teachings are both heard and reflected upon via concepts. Is this what you mean here? > =============== As i said, there > is nothing wrong with concepts but concepts can be used for development because > it can condition the arisen of kusala or panna. > =============== J: Not sure about this. Would you mind giving an example of 'concepts being used for development'. That may help the discussion. > =============== Just like the words in the > sutta which are concepts can coondition the arisen of panna. So reading a book > or reciting a conceptual object can condition kusala arise. Hence I said again, > it is not the objects that matter, it is the dhamma that arise with the object > that matters. > =============== J: I'm still not with you. Would you mind giving an example of 'dhammas that arise with concepts' (as opposed to 'dhammas' only)? Thanks. > =============== the object can be a concept and concept can be used to develop > panna. Are you saying concepts cannot help one to understand dhamma and all > concepts should be held an arms length just because it is not nama and rupa and > does not have the three characteristiscs ? > =============== J: Concepts are not to be taken for dhammas as the object of insight development. That's all. Jon #109574 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 6:21 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Part 2 on Intentional development, simplified jonoabb Hi KenO (109534) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Jon > ... > KO: are you saying going to BKK is not a deliberate activity > =============== J: Of course, going to Bangkok is a deliberate activity. But I haven't said that going to Bangkok is one of the factors. The factor in question is hearing the teachings properly explained. Whether or not this happens depends on multiple conditions, most notably past kamma. It cannot be made to happen by undertaking a particular intentional activity ('going to Bangkok'). Jon #109575 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 6:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of the Present Moment - for Ken O jonoabb Hi Alex (109535) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hi Jon, all, > ... > > J: This is your interpretation of the teachings. You read the >Buddha as instructing his followers to undertake a practice that >would necessarily involve the development of akusala. > > Akusala should NOT be deliberately attempted. > =============== J: I was not suggesting that akusala should be deliberately attempted (another straw man!!). > =============== It happens as honest mistakes are made. We can't help it until Arhatship. > =============== J: I agree there is bound to be akusala in our lives. However, the question we're discussing is whether the Buddha was recommending the undertaking of a 'practice' that necessarily involves (a majority of) akusala. This is not a situation of 'honest mistake'. It's a case of ignoring the obvious ;-)). > =============== > But you seem to say that one shouldn't meditate because there may be akusala (such as an idea of controlling realities) arise at that time. What I've tried to say is that while these mistakes can occur, they don't mean that one shouldn't develop wholesome qualities. Simply the akusala qualities need to be known when they arise and dealt with. > =============== J: I agree it would be wrong to think one should avoid, for example, an everyday act of helping others or giving something to another (any kind of dana or sila) just because one knew there would be akusala in amongst the kusala. But the case of undertaking a set practice (whether of dana, sila or bhavana) is different. The practice is undertaken in the belief that, although there will be some akusala involved, the fact of undertaking the practice will lead to less and less akusala, more and more kusala. There is no basis in the texts for such an idea. It implies the idea/belief that kusala can be made to arise by choice, which in turn implies an idea of control of dhammas. > =============== > But you seem to deny intentional development of right views and other skillful qualities. Without intentional development, they will not ever be developed > =============== J: Right view is the seeing of dhammas as they truly are. This is not something that can be done 'intentionally', in the sense of by choosing to do so. To my understanding, dhammas can be 'seen' only by panna; they cannot be observed by directing attention to their observance. > =============== > > J: It's true that most of the involuntary reflection that occurs >in a day is akusala, but there can also be involuntary reflection >that is kusala. For example, reflecting on something one has heard >or read regarding the development of the Path. > > Right. But what was the cause of those involuntary reflections? Previous (perhaps even in previous lives) intentional development. > =============== J: I would say that the main condition for that involuntary reflection was previous involuntary reflection, supported by hearing the dhamma, appropriately explained, again in this lifetime. > =============== > A person trained to react in certain way can involuntary react in previously trained way to a certain event. Ex: soldiers are trained to fall for cover when loud noise is heard to protect themselves) may involuntary duck for cover (without thinking) when some harmless sudden sound is heard. Past intentional practice. > =============== J: I understand the example you give, but the analogy is not appropriate to the development of the path. Kusala cannot be made to occur by a training that consists of mostly akusala moments. > =============== > > J: This again is your particular interpretation of the teachings; >there is no such thing actually mentioned in the texts. > > There is. Ex on taming the 6th senses. > > ""Suppose, bhikkhus, a man would catch six animals?with different domains and different feeding grounds?and tie them by a strong rope. ... > > "Now when these six animals become worn out and fatigued, they would stand close to that post or pillar, they would sit down there, they would lie down there. So too, bhikkhus, when a bhikkhu has developed and cultivated mindfulness concerning the body, the eye does not pull in the direction of agreeable forms nor are disagreeable forms repulsive the ear does not pull in the direction of agreeable sounds nor are disagreeable sounds repulsive;? the mind does not pull in the direction of agreeable mental phenomena nor are disagreeable mental phenomena repulsive." SN 35.247 (10) The Simile of the Six Animals > BB Trans. > =============== J: This passage does not support the proposition that 'deliberate restraint from akusala leads to spontaneous awareness'. What it describes is how the mind of a person who has developed mindfulness sufficiently is less swayed by the [pleasant or unpleasant] nature of the object of consciousness. (Note the key phrase "when a bhikkhu has developed and cultivated mindfulness concerning the body".) > =============== > > J: We can safely assume that there has been development of >awareness in the past (otherwise there would not be the interest in >the teachings in this life). The development of the path is a >matter of these previously-accumulated qualities being conditioned >to re-arise. > > This is what we are talking about. The previous development of awareness, was it deliberate or not? > > Those previously-accumulated qualities, were they deliberately cultivated or not? > =============== J: To my understanding, kusala cannot be developed by 'deliberate cultivation' of the kind you are referring to. Jon #109576 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 6:36 am Subject: Re: Part 2 on Intentional development, simplified jonoabb Hi Alex (109536) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hi Jon, all, > ... > What do you mean these are not deliberate activities? Listening itself is a deliberate activity. There needs to be attention to the sound as opposed to something else. Dhamma isn't being verbally spoken everywhere. One needs to decide to go to a monastery, BKK or some other place, sit and listen to the speaker. It also requires a choice as a certain person may choose to go to a strip mall instead and buy a new pair of leather shoes. > > Choosing, and physically walking, is a deliberate activity. One may chose X or not-X. > > Even when sitting in a monastery one can choose to listen to the singing of the birds instead of the Dhamma-Talk. So deliberate choice of listening to the Talk as opposed to listening to the birds is required. > =============== J: The factors are not specific deliberate activities. Take for example: - hearing the teachings, appropriately explained; This can only happen if (a) an appreciation of the teachings has been developed in previous lifetimes and (b) there are appropriate conditions pertaining in this lifetime. Even going to a temple cannot ensure that the factor will be fulfilled (for example, one's mind is too distracted). > =============== Same in meditation. There is deliberate action of developing wholesome qualities including understanding vs developing unwholesome qualities and ignoring the truth. > =============== J: Yes, the aim of the meditator is to develop wholesome qualities, but is that what is actually happening? Is the meditator able to distinguish kusala moments from (subtle) akusala ones? If not, then he's developing akusala in the belief that it's kusala. (This is different from the person who merely takes akusala to be kusala, with no idea that kusala is being developed.) > =============== > > - the previous accumulation of understanding sufficient to be >conditioned to arise by that appropriate reflection. > > And how is prior accumulation of understanding is attained? How does one go from 0% understanding to 100%? What does on do to start the development of understanding from 0% onwards? > =============== J: This question is hypothetical. The fact is there has been the development of kusala in previous lifetimes. Jon #109577 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 6:39 am Subject: Re: Part 2 on Intentional development, simplified jonoabb Hi Alex (109537) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello Jon, Sukin, all, > ... > Listening itself is a deliberate activity. There needs to be attention to the certain sound (ex: Dhamma talk) as opposed to something else, like sound of a bird outside of the monastery. > =============== J: Yes, listening is a deliberate activity. However, listening to a dhamma talk is not the same as hearing the teachings properly explained. The latter is something that does not require any one particular intentional activity, and which can occur only if there are the conditions for it. > =============== > One may listen to Dhamma or not-dhamma. Choice is required and so is attention toward what was chosen to be listened to. > =============== J: One may certainly make a choice that is intended to result in hearing the Dhamma. But there is no knowing in advance whether or not, and to what extent, that will happen. It will depend very much on kamma previously performed. > =============== One may sit in a Dhamma hall and instead of listening to Dhamma lesson think about "what will I have for dinner?". > =============== J: Right. One's kilesa may prevent the hearing of the Dhamma when the time comes. This again shows that undertaking an activity cannot guarantee a specific outcome. > =============== > Why isn't taking in hands Dhamma book, opening it and reading it not be a deliberate activity? > =============== J: Yes, picking up a Dhamma book and reading it is a deliberate activity. But this does not equate to 'hearing the teachings appropriately explained' (for example, a sutta may be read with wrong view). > =============== > What is wrong with deliberate activity anyways? Aren't all kusala states deliberate activities? They include cetana, manasikaro and other factors. > =============== J: Kusala mind states are not 'deliberate activities'. Kusala mind states are dhammas; deliberate activities are not (they're a concept). The distinction here is an important one. If we equate the deliberate activity with the kusala mind-state, there will inevitably be the development of akusala. > =============== > One can choose to think about women, leather shoes, or whatever vs thinking about Dhamma. Why isn't thinking about Dhamma a deliberate and intentional choice that is done contrary to ones natural inclinations to think about worldly matters? > =============== J: Please consider whether it's correct to say that we can think about whatever we choose to. There is so much thinking occurring all the time, and at so many levels, that only a small proportion of it is capable of being 'directed'. In any event, choosing to think about a particular "wholesome" subject does not mean that the mind-state will be kusala. > =============== > Why isn't thinking & reflection on Dhamma not be DOING something wholesome? It is action that is being done, thinking & reflecting on Dhamma. > =============== J: To my understanding, there's a difference between thinking and reflecting that occurs because of one's interest in the Dhamma, and thinking and reflecting that is done as a 'practice', i.e., done with the motivation of conditioning kusala to arise. Jon #109578 From: "tadaomiyamoto@..." Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 7:30 am Subject: The Address of Khun Sujin's Foundation of? tadaomiyamot... Dear DSG members: I'm posting this message to obtain the address of the Foundation (Muniti). I've been staying in Bangkok (until September 2), and would like to visit the Foundation to make a (small amount of) donation. (As far as I can recall, it is not too far away from Wat Vipassana.) I would be very appreciative if I somebody can help me obtain the above piece of information. Thank you in advance, tadao Professor Tadao Miyamoto, Ph.D. Director of the Research Center for Language, Brain, and Cognition Graduate School of International Cultural Studies, Tohoku University Kawauchi 41, Aobaku, Sendai 980-9576 Japan #109579 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Address of Khun Sujin's Foundation of? nilovg Hi Tadao, how wonderful to hear from you after a long time. I never forget our Pali lessons with Jim. The suffix -to, you remember? Just contact Sukin to help you find the Foundation. < sukinder@...> Meanwhile you will meet Sarah and Jon too. How have you been? Nina. Op 29-aug-2010, om 9:30 heeft tadaomiyamoto@... het volgende geschreven: > I'm posting this message to obtain the address of the Foundation > (Muniti). #109580 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:45 am Subject: Re: The Address of Khun Sujin's Foundation of? jonoabb Hi Tadao Great to hear from you! Sarah and I are in Bangkok at the moment. Any chance of meeting up? My local mobile phone number is 0802 595 036. There's also a trip to Kaeng Krachaan with A. Sujin beginning on Tuesday, if you'd be interested to join. Foundation address is below. Jon DSSF CharoenNakorn Soi 78 Bukkalo Bangkok The Foundation is about 50 metres inside the Soi, on the right-hand side (look for the blue sign with F name) #109581 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 10:09 am Subject: [dsg] Re: intentional actions. kenhowardau Hi pt, ---------- pt: > Suppose Maha Moggallana or Anuruddha are developing samatha, so probably exactly as it's meant in Vsm. And then there are several suttas (can't remember the numbers) that describe how the hindrances assail them. My question, would there be any wrong view arising for them together with the hindrances? E.g. when there arises kaamacchanda for them, it's never with wrong view? ---------- Being eminent disciples, Moggallana or Anuruddha might not be the best examples to take: I doubt they *ever* had wrong view after hearing the Dhamma, did they? Let alone chief disciples, I think *anyone and everyone* who has ever given wise consideration to the Dhamma would know that formal meditation was out of the question. They would know that a true monk would not concern himself with the past which "no longer exists" or the future which "has never existed." They would know the teaching is to understand the "presently arisen" reality. Therefore, formal meditation is out of the question from the very beginning of the path. It is a non-starter! ----------------------- pt: > Or if they cling to pleasant feeling related to piti, or maybe want more mindfulness, more concentration, less sloth (I assume all these desires would be classified as kammacchanda?) there would still be no wrong view for them? So, I'm wondering in what way can one wish for more mindfulness (as an akusala desire) without wrong view? ------------------------ As you know, most of our desires and aversions are for concepts, and they mostly arise without wrong view. Wrong view arises only when we believe that (for example) a desired object can be obtained 'by effort of will' as distinct from 'by conditions.' We would rarely consider such dichotomies when only concepts are involved. But I think you are talking here about desires for realities, as distinct from concepts. Could a person, who understood what a dhamma was, ever desire to have, or not to have, any particular dhamma? I can't see how. Dhammas are by definition things that have already arisen. Desire for their arising or non-arising simply wouldn't make sense. ------------------------------------- pt: > Because usually, when one wants to have mindfulness for example, one would then immediately try to somehow bring about the mindfulness, either by reproaching oneself, or trying harder to stick to the object, etc. I assume all these attempts would likewise be akusala and quite possibly with wrong view. So, perhaps the difference is that when a hindrance arises, if it's simply recognised as a drawback/akusala with panna, there's no wrong view. But if one instead tries somehow to get rid of the hindrance by resisting it, etc, perhaps that would indicate the actual wrong view? --------------------------------------- Yes, desire for a dhamma (as distinct from a concept) would indicate wrong understanding of what a dhamma was. -------------------------------------------------- pt: > And then there's the advice the Buddha gave to those Venerables in the suttas such as looking at bright light to dispel sloth, etc, so I'm wondering how would they engage in doing this stuff without wrong view? --------------------------------------------------- It all begins with right understanding of conditionality. With that right understanding, people can go about their normal daily lives - washing dishes or sitting cross-legged at the base of trees or whatever that might entail. They understand that in reality everything is conditioned, and there is no control over anything. Ken H #109582 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 10:30 am Subject: Re: intentional actions. kenhowardau Hi Kevin, --------- <. . .> Kevin: > That is a nice hypothesis Ken. May I ask you what experience do you have with samattha? --------- No you may not ask! :-) I have already told you I don't like talking personally about experiences of the "ultimate reality" variety. Personal identity and conditioned dhammas don't go well together. Ken H #109583 From: Tadao Miyamoto Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 10:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Address of Khun Sujin's Foundation of? tadaomiyamot... Hi Nina: How have you been? Thank you very much for your prompt response. tadao #109584 From: Tadao Miyamoto Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 10:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Address of Khun Sujin's Foundation of? tadaomiyamot... Hi Jonathan: How have you been? Thank you for your prompt reply. I've just finished attending a conference at Cula, and I have a few free days. Tomorrow (Monday), I am going to visit Wat Bown and the Foundation. I'm staying at NOVOHOTEL (at Siam Square) until Sept. 3 afternoon. It would be wonderful if I am able to see you guys. tadao ________________________________ From: jonoabb To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, August 29, 2010 3:45:55 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: The Address of Khun Sujin's Foundation of? Hi Tadao Great to hear from you! Sarah and I are in Bangkok at the moment. Any chance of meeting up? <...> #109585 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 11:18 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Address of Khun Sujin's Foundation of? jonoabb Hi Tadao --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Tadao Miyamoto wrote: > > Hi Jonathan: > > How have you been? > Thank you for your prompt reply. > > I've just finished attending a conference at Cula, and I have a few free days. > > Tomorrow (Monday), I am going to visit Wat Bown and the Foundation. > > I'm staying at NOVOHOTEL (at Siam Square) until Sept. 3 afternoon. > > It would be wonderful if I am able to see you guys. Yes, that would be great. I'll email you directly to discuss further. By the way, Vince will be in Bangkok tomorrow for a few days. I'm sure he'd like to catch up with you also. Jon #109586 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha and Ayurvedic Medicine sarahprocter... Hi Kevin, Actually, I enjoyed your post. You made it very on-topic with your helpful references and reflections. --- On Sat, 28/8/10, Kevin F wrote: >I also remember reading a sutta, though I am not sure which one, where the Buddha spoke to someone about the Brahmins. The Buddha said the Brahmins admit that this kind of disease arise from bile conditions, this kind arises from phlegm conditions, this kind arises from wind, but that they did not see that the disease which they take for their own only arises based only those physical conditions and that they are not self or a person. I found that really interesting. ... S: Let us know if you remember the sutta (or Alex may know it). I thought of these two, but I don't think they're the ones you have in mind: (Thanissaro translations): a)"Sivaka, some feelings arise on account of irregularities in the bile ... some on account of irregularities in the phlegm ... some on account of wind ... some on account of the confluence of numerous factors ... some on account of changes in the weather ... some on account of irregular exercise ... some on account of external dangers ... some on account of kamma results. That feelings arise dependent on these different causes is something you can see for yourself and that people everywhere acknowledge. On this account, any recluse or holy man who claims that 'All feelings that arise, be they pleasant or unpleasant, are entirely the result of previous kamma,' can be rightly said to have spoken in excess of what is obvious to people everywhere, and I say that such views are wrong." [S.IV.230] **** b) ?5. "Monks, doctors give a purgative for warding off diseases caused by bile, diseases caused by phlegm, diseases caused by the internal wind property. There is a purging there; I don't say that there's not, but it sometimes succeeds and sometimes fails. So I will teach you the noble purgative that always succeeds and never fails, a purgative whereby beings subject to birth are freed from birth; beings subject to aging are freed from aging; beings subject to death are freed from death; beings subject to sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress & despair are freed from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress & despair. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak." "As you say, lord," the monks responded. The Blessed One said: "Now, what is the noble purgative that always succeeds and never fails, a purgative whereby beings subject to birth are freed from birth; beings subject to aging are freed from aging; beings subject to death are freed from death; beings subject to sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress & despair are freed from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress & despair? "In one who has right view, wrong view is purged away, and the many evil, unskillful mental qualities that come into play in dependence on wrong view are purged away as well, while the many skillful mental qualities that depend on right view go to the culmination of their development. "In one who has right resolve, wrong resolve is purged away... "In one who has right speech, wrong speech is purged away... "In one who has right action, wrong action is purged away... "In one who has right livelihood, wrong livelihood is purged away... "In one who has right effort, wrong effort is purged away... "In one who has right mindfulness, wrong mindfulness is purged away... "In one who has right concentration, wrong concentration is purged away... "In one who has right knowledge, wrong knowledge is purged away... "In one who has right release, wrong release is purged away, and the many evil, unskillful mental qualities that come into play in dependence on wrong release are purged away as well, while the many skillful mental qualities that depend on right release go to the culmination of their development. "This, monks, is the noble purgative that always succeeds and never fails, a purgative whereby beings subject to birth are freed from birth; beings subject to aging are freed from aging; beings subject to death are freed from death; beings subject to sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress & despair are freed from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress & despair." [AN X.108] *** S: As I recall, Jivaka, the Buddha's physician, was an ayurvedic expert. We forget what an old science it is. ... >Other places in the Canon too the Buddha mentions afflictions from the humours. I remember in the Visuddhimagga it says that certain people believe that one is of hateful temperment because of predominance of bile humour, attached temperment because of kappha dosha and so on, but that the real reason is because of the roots of the citta one is born with. I think this is in the section about picking meditation subjects. I can't remember. ... S: Yes, the Buddha used common knowledge and then gave the Dhamma explanation. Don't we commonly use our ailments as excuses for our bad moods and so on? Perhaps you can give the quote for further discussion sometime. ... >Another thing comes to mind, I remember reading a book by Pa Auk Sayadaw about the Four Elements meditation and he was talking about meditating on all four elements in each session instead of just one, because it would throw the humours out of balance in the body. I am not sure where he got this information, but the work cited heavily from the Visuddhimagga, it's Commentary, and Sub-commentary, so the information may have been contained therein. .... S: Whatever we read, it has to be about the arising of conditioned cittas experiencing their various objects according to conditions, according to citta and other niyama. Thx for sharing, Kevin. Metta Sarah ======== #109587 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:25 pm Subject: Re: q. sarahprocter... Dear Fabian, Thank you for sharing your understanding of the Teachings. We have a different understanding of bhavana and many other aspects. Also, I like to put the emphasis on pa~n~naa which develops, which gradually "sees clearly". Never a Self to do any of this. Rather than be concerned about the understanding of thought processes and fine detail, I see more value in learning to understand realities at this moment such as seeing and visible object. If there is no understanding of them now, there will never be an understanding of their impermanence, let alone of thought processes. Metta Sarah --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "chandrafabian" wrote: > S: As I understand, the theory and the bhavana must be in agreement. Pariyatti leads to patipatti. If the theory says that dhammas are anatta and can only be understood at this moment, this is what the pratice, the bhavana, should be about. > > FABIAN: Pariyatti wisdom(sutamaya panna) would never becomes patipatti wisdom(bhavanamaya panna) if we don't practice bhavana. It would still pariyatti wisdom till the end of our life. Please tell me Sarah can you see the beginning, the middle, the end of your thought processes? Can you see it clearly? If you don't, how do you have clear understanding of thought processes? your knowledge of thought processes is still conceptual (cintamaya panna) based on reading/learning (sutamaya panna) <..> #109588 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:29 pm Subject: Re: intentional actions. sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > Perfect skill, perfect mindfulnes, perfect wisdom doesn't appear out of nowhere and it isn't perfect from the get-go. Just like you cannot run before you can walk, same is here. To refuse doing "XYZ because one doesn't have proper accumulations for it" will never by itself create the needed accumulations for XYZ. ... S: I don't see how this relates to anything I've written. ... > > Even Arahants can make mistakes, so to expect one "you better be perfect or your samatha, vipassana or it will do more harm than good" to be a dead end proposition. ... S: What you write contains a number of errors: a) An arahat certainly makes no mistake out of lobha, dosa or moha. b) No one has mentioned anything about "perfect" c) samatha or vipassana can never do any harm. They are always kusala. d) There has not been any suggestion of any of this by anyone here I know of. Metta Sarah ====== #109589 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] No conventional actions, they don't matter at all? sarahprocter... Dear Kevin, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin F wrote: > Kevin: An Arahant, or any Ariya can kill himself. That is not a problem. I > think some Arahants did because they had deadly diseases. ... S: Show us the text! ... Maybe they thought > they would just be a burden to others with such disease and that it would be > better to eliminate the life and be done with the sense bases that cause dukkha > for good? I'm not sure. ... S: Cannot be... Metta Sarah ====== #109590 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Clinging to names. sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Now to say that we cling to names then that is not always true, then one cannot > attain salvation because those disciples listen to names to understand dhamma.? ... S: You've missed the point of what I wrote. I said we have to use names and usually cling to them but that the Buddha showed how right understanding of realities could develop while using names. Of courrse we listen to names to understand dhamma! .... > There could be kusala or akusala dhamma that arise with names. .... S: Just my point! Usually akusala, but kusala can develop which understands realities as realities and knows names are just names. Metta Sarah p.s You still haven't finished all Sukin's qus. I enjoyed reading your answers to the first half:-) ======== #109591 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:43 pm Subject: Re: intentional actions. sarahprocter... Hi Pt, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > Kevin has been saying something similar lately - like wrong concentration being profitable because it can condition (create conditions for) right concentration to arise at some point. So I wonder what exactly is the explanation there? ... S: Well, by pakatu-upanissaya paccaya, akusala can condition kusala, but the Buddha didn't recommend following the Wrong Eightfold Path just in case some akusala conditioned the Right Eightfold Path. That would be a very circular route. Instead he just recommended following the Right Eightfold Path from the beginning! ... >I remember that it was said sometime ago that akusala can be a condition for kusala - like when panna recognises dosa (which has just fallen away) as akusala, ... S: Yes, but that doesn't mean that dosa is encouraged:-) ... >but I wonder whether that extends to the possibility that wrong effort or wrong concentration can in fact condition right effort/concentration in the future? I'm not sure, I wonder what Sukin and Sarah think on that matter. ... S: Same thing - any reality can condition right effort/concentration/understanding now. Again, it would be further wrong view to thereby think that the Wrong Path should therefore be developed. (If you look under "Natural decisive support condition" in Nina's book on "Conditions", or else in U.P. under "Decisive support condtion", you'll find more. Metta Sarah ======= #109592 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:46 pm Subject: Re: enlightenment sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > A lay person can achieve Arhatship, at least at the death moment. > > "I say there is no difference between a lay follower who is thus liberated in mind and a bhikkhu who has been liberated in mind for a hundred years,that is, between one liberation and the other."&" > SN55.54 (4) Ill BB Trans > > > > There is no difference in Nibbana between a lay person who becomes an Arahat and a monk who was such for 100 years. > > Great news! ... S: Yes, thank you Alex. Great news indeed for those who always seem to think that we should all retreat to the forest or ordain or follow some ascetic practices! Metta Sarah ====== #109593 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:56 pm Subject: news of Phra Kom, Amatakavesago sarahprocter... Dear Nina & old friends of Kom, I had a little correspondence with Phra Kom's sister recently and sent him a copy of your Conditions and one of Rupas today to his temple. I was going to mention the following off-list, but thought some other old DSG members may also like to hear more news about him. His sister, Val, wrote: >He was with Ajahn Santi in Nakorn Pathom for a year, Wat Punyavasa and Wat Khao Opasa in Rayong for a year his ordination name now is Amatakavesago. (S: but she said he's usually called Than C or Ajahn C)/ His mailing address is Bodhithanphra, 34/1 Nonghee village, Nonghee subdistrict, Nonghee district, Roi-ed 45140. She also wrote: >Phra Kom is fine. He is doing well at the temple, where he teaches abidhamma to villagers and school teachers. A fan club of older ladies has been started for him :-). He is also responsible to teach new monks and three young samaneras (novices). The village is in a rural area, surrounded by rice fields, water baffalos, and cows. The villagers are not rich in term of materials, but rich in term of spacious mind and big smiles. Occasionally, a family of mouses would want to share the kuti space with him or a snake would greet him on his way to the sala or food hall. Although the life conditions are rougher than the one he was used to (mosquitoes and insects, climate extremity, unfamiliar food, language, and customs, almsround on barefoot with cuts and bruises, etc.) his mind and spirit are bright, because of the constant contact with dhamma, supporting kalayanamitta, great teacher, and simple way of life. Before the vassa, the whole monastery, except an old monk, gave dhamma talks about the Vinaya in Chaiyabhumi province, attended by more than 200 monks and laypeople. Dhamma treats him well. >....there are only fifteen monks and a few laypeople there [usually at his temple]. She also mentioned that he sometimes looks at his old email address. Metta Sarah ======== #109594 From: Ken O Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body ashkenn2k Dear Jon > >J: I'd rather talk about simply the object of consciousness being a concept. To >say that something arises or that it appears to consciousness is to infer that >it *is* something. The term 'concepts' is used to refer to a purely mind-created > >object, i.e., an object that neither arises nor appears. > KO:? Interesting Jon, if it does not appears in thinking so how would you think of words like kusala :-0, or are your trying to argue about English vocabulary.? Definitely i am not as good.? Mind created :-), so it is mind created, if it does not appear through mind created, how would you know the word kusala :-P >> =============== >Objects can condition sanna that >> associated this object with pleasure feelings or craving. Ain't that signficant >> >> >> enough. >> =============== > >J: It would help if you could give an example of what you have in mind here. >Thanks. > KO:? hmm explain below > >J: Not sure about this. Would you mind giving an example of 'concepts being used > >for development'. That may help the discussion. > KO:? Jon, if you could,?not?to listen?or read?words and understand dhamma, then I salute you and you should teach me how you do it.?? Listening to words is a good example of concept that help in development.? this is an example how sanna association with concepts to help in developing panna. ? >> =============== > >J: I'm still not with you. Would you mind giving an example of 'dhammas that >arise with concepts' (as opposed to 'dhammas' only)? Thanks. KO:? hmm can concepts arise without through thinking which is a dhamma.? i thought I have explained it :-) > >J: Concepts are not to be taken for dhammas as the object of insight >development. That's all. KO:? No one ask you to take concepts as dhammas,?but can you learn dhamma without concepts. Without concepts there is no development for dhamma even for Ven Sariputta who needs to listen to dhamma before?he could become enlighted.?? Ken O #109595 From: Ken O Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Part 2 on Intentional development, simplified ashkenn2k Dear Jon >> ... >> KO: are you saying going to BKK is not a deliberate activity >> =============== > >J: Of course, going to Bangkok is a deliberate activity. But I haven't said that > >going to Bangkok is one of the factors. The factor in question is hearing the >teachings properly explained. Whether or not this happens depends on multiple >conditions, most notably past kamma. It cannot be made to happen by undertaking >a particular intentional activity ('going to Bangkok'). > KO:? so you think other teachers cannot teach proper dhamma :-)??So now we have multiple conditions,?giving more excuses?? The pot calling the kettle black on deliberate activity.??Deliberate activity is not?particular intentional activity, :-)? I wonder the way we twist our words and?English vocabulary.? ?Past kamma does not determine present actions, it could determine favourable conditions though.? Ken O #109596 From: Ken O Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Intentional development, simplified ashkenn2k Dear pt >pt: I'm not sure anymore whether there's any argument since we all seem to agree > >on the fundamentals - there's intention with every citta, there's also >concentration and effort, etc, so every citta and the activity associated with >it can be called "deliberate, intentional, etc" on that basis. And I think we >also all agree that all these can be either kusala or akusala depending on the >citta. > KO:? Intent can arise with kusala and akusala.? even going to Bkk is an intentional activity, the old monks that went to listen to Buddha, must have been intent to listen.? One cannot allude all intentional activity as akusala because Abhidhamma is very clear, there is kusala and akusala intent.? There are intentional activity that is kusala, like going to listen to dhamma talks by Buddha perform by the ancient monks.? if it is not an intentional activity, then why bother to go to listen to Buddha.? Ken O #109597 From: Kevin F Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3a farrellkevin80 Hi Sarah, Sara: Some of Kevin's recent points discussed : Sarah: Wishing to be calm is not samatha at all, it's wanting to gain something, not seeing the danger of anatta. Kevin: Seeing the drawbacks in an unconcentrated mind is kusala. Sarah: Not understanding the meaning of samatha - all kusala is calm. Calm or not calm, a reality that can be known. Kevin: Yes, all samattha is kusala, one moment at a time. If there a moment that is not, it is not. Sarah: Parts of the body - while trying, not understanding. Kevin: Dear Sarah, is that why the Visuddhimagga says to recite verbally first and only later mentally? That is trying. And if you want to recite verbally before it arises naturally you have to try to keep reciting aloud. You should meditate in a certain order. For example, the first tetrad forwards, as in head hair, body, nails, teeth and then skin, and then backwards as in skin, teeth, nails, body hair, head hair. Does that arise naturally or do you have to try to do it? Sarah: He doesn't know that panna can arise and know any reality at anytime. Kevin: That is a far cry from reality. That is all I will say on that point. I understand it both theoretically and "experientially". Sarah: All realities can be the object of right understanding. Who can stop the moment of samatha? *Who can plan to sit or select an object?* Kevin: No one does. Sarah: The dhammas involved are already conditioned. For example, who is thinking about seeing while seeing has arisen and fallen away? Many moments like this all day, no self that can select an object. Kevin: No one is arguing that some self selects objects. It is all anatta. Do you select whether to buy a Jeep or a sedan when you buy a car? There is a decision. Just because a decision is made doesn't mean it is made by atta! It is the same with selecting a subject of meditation-- it is an anatta process, like all are. Sarah: (Btw, Kevin, a discussion the other day about whether arahats and pacceka buddhas can kill themselves - impossible. Rob K had the example he'd seen in a commentary about pacceka buddhas killing themselves before the birth of the bodhisatta, but KS said this was all impossible and they wouldn't know when the bodhisatta would be born. Is it a Mahayana commentary, we wondered?) Kevin: So Rob K. said he had seen it in a Commentary but Khun Sujin says it is impossible. So then you just write it off as impossible, closed case, just because K Sujin says so? You wonder if the Commentary was Mahayana but before checking and finding the Commentary to see for sure, you just write it off as impossible because KS said so?!? Hmmmm. All the best, Kevin ___________ #109598 From: Ken O Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] On Time in the Visuddhimagga ashkenn2k Dear Vince >If she would have capacity to know the Time, then she would be able to perform >calculations, predictions, expectatives and anticipations. And this is not the >case. > KO:??Fruitfly definitely knows time because during night time, it rest. It has have some knowledge of day and night which is time.? and time got nothing to do with delusion >if time is just mind-made it means delusion. When we awake after sleeping for a >while, we don't know if we have been sleeping 1 hour or 4 hours. This ignorance >and dukkha is delusion. > >The cause of time cannot be in the nature of dhammas because the time is not >inside the objects. When you says "must arise" this is an expectative, beyond >the fact it would be accomplished. This expectative is not in the object. > >It will means delusion, except if we talk of the same moment of experiencing the >arising or cease. However, if we are positioned in that continuous moment of >experience, here there is not possibility for a succesion of cittas: here there >is just citta, consciousness. > >Succession of cittas only can belongs to a conventional explanation because >it needs of a self, a past and a future. > >In short and by order: > >- plurality of cittas needs the succession >- succession needs the Time. >- Time needs the self > >So, How can somebody overcome dukkha while there is a need of a self to sustain >that explanation? > KO:? I felt it is impt that I must emphasis?conventional does not mean self or delusion.? Concept does not mean it is delusion.??? Without conventional concepts, no way one could learn dhamma.? Buddha use concept without any delusion.? Conventional does not mean self.??? so the succession of cittas is not a delusion or a self.? Ken O #109599 From: Ken O Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3a ashkenn2k Dear Kevin and Sarah >Sarah: (Btw, Kevin, a discussion the other day about whether arahats and >pacceka buddhas can kill themselves - impossible. Rob K had the example he'd >seen in a commentary about pacceka buddhas killing themselves before the birth >of the bodhisatta, but KS said this was all impossible and they wouldn't know >when the bodhisatta would be born. Is it a Mahayana commentary, we wondered?) > KO:??The correct explanation?is that?it is impossible for pacceka buddhas to kill themselves because they do not have any dosa cetasika to condition to kill.? Ken O