s#116600 From: "Christine" Date: Thu Aug 4, 2011 6:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Any Aussies/others interested in Pilgrimage to India and Nepal Feb. 2012? christine_fo... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > --- On Sun, 31/7/11, Christine wrote: > > >Dhammagiri Forest Monastery in Brisbane is arranging a Pilgrimage to Nepal and India to the Buddhist Holy Places in February 2012. > > >This will consist of one busload with either a two week or a three week option, fully escorted. The bus will be modern with an on-board toilet. :-) > .... > S: Will you be going? If so, do report back. You'll be one of the experts this time..... and an "on-board toilet":-) You mean none of the joys of ditches, mango trees, prickly grass with several hundred others? > > Metta > > Sarah > ===== > Hello Sarah, I'm hoping to go - I'm not entirely hopeful about the 'on-board' toilet .... I've been on retreats where the PortaLoo failed, and I dread to think of a bus where that happens :-) with metta Chris #116601 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 4, 2011 7:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Factors for predominance condition nilovg Dear Phil, Op 3-aug-2011, om 1:53 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Are virya and chanda more common than citta as the factor for > predominance condition? I mean , of the four factors, do vimamsa > and citta represent more rarefied factors than virya or chanda when > there is kusala? I think your book says at one point that citta as > kusala predominance factor is "pure"... ------ N: Vimamsa, pa~n~naa, accompanies kusala citta, whereas viriya and chanda can accompany kusala citta or akusala citta, and when citta is predominant it can be kusala or akusala. The citta has to be accompanied by at least two hetus, otherwise it is too weak to be predominance-condiiton. Viriya and chanda have to accompany citta with at least two hetus for the same reason. Vimamsa accompanies mahaa-kusala citta and then the citta has three hetus. As to citta being predominance-condition, in the case of kusala the citta is resolute, firmly established in kusala while performing a task. When the citta is kusala it is hard to tell which factor is more common. It depends on the accumulated inclination. There is no reason why viriya or chanda are more rare as predominance-condition. ------ Nina. #116602 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 4, 2011 7:45 pm Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) nilovg Dear Alex, Op 3-aug-2011, om 16:27 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > Why did the Buddha use active/imperative present verb form rather > than talk in passives if He didn't want it to be taken as a command > to develop it? I would accept "descriptive rather than > prescriptive" if the Buddha would use passive or past-passive voice. ------ N: There are many shades and intensities of the passive form, and also the tone of voice conditions different intensities. It can be a compassionate advice, or a command. When I tell you: read this, it is no a command. It depends on the person's inclinations whether he will read or not. In the case of the vinaya rules, it is a different matter. Then it is more like a command, since the monk has to keep the rules. In the case of bhaavanaa, nobody can be forced to do this or that. In Pali there is another ending:-abba, like sevitabba, must follow, and this can be translated as: must, can or may. It all depends on the context. We cannot take words out of context. ------- Nina. #116603 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 4, 2011 7:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections, was: Pt's Galaxy ... nilovg Dear Phil, Op 4-aug-2011, om 2:11 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > I will go thrpugh Perfections and write down some of my favourite > passages to reinforce the good guys. ------ N: That is always good, rereading quotes is helpful. Nina. #116604 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Aug 4, 2011 7:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] chariots do exist as assemblage of parts. upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Ken) - In a message dated 8/3/2011 9:32:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi KenH, all, >KH:I think the chariot metaphor is the one that says, "Just as when >chariot parts are correctly assembled we say a chariot exists, so too, >when the five khandhas arise together, we say a person exists." >============================================================ You yourself have admitted that chariot does exist (when its parts are correctly assembled). Same with person, even more so, because 4 of 5 khandhas can never be physically separated like the chariot's physical parts. With best wishes, Alex ===================================== Here's the thing, Alex: When we "observe a person," we are actually carving out from the experiential flow, via perception/recognition/memory (sa~n~na), a variety of sights, sounds, and (possibly also) odors & touch sensations, and quickly mentally combining these (on the basis of their interrelationships) into "a person". Moreover, we ignore the constant flux, with nothing remaining the same, and instead impose a static view when there is nothing static to be found. When these relatively simple phenomena, constantly arising and ceasing, one flowing into the next, do not occur related in the appropriate fashion, and that "fashion" is amazing complex, no concept of "a person" is formed. The bottom line, in any case, is that apart from these more directly observed phenomena, there is nothing of a "person" at all, but we impute a person-as-reality nonetheless. As regards the person one knows as "oneself", the situation is simply far more complicated, because also a host of mental operations and conditions are among the simple phenomena experienced, and, moreover, there is a sense of "internal-ness" and "oneself" added to the mix, but the principle is the same. As I view the matter, the Buddha taught this chariot metaphor not to instill any sense of the reality of a "person," but just the opposite - to show us the basis for our conceptualizing of persons, namely mere reification of collections of impersonal phenomena when they are interrelated in certain ways, and to disabuse us of the belief that there is a core of identity - of essence and individuality and reality - to actually be found. Our thinking tends to mentally decompose and then quickly combine (like puzzle pieces), and to impose a freeze-frame view, when the reality is that of a variation of quality within a dynamic, seamless flow of experience. Getting to the point of awakening to reality requires the removal of layers and layers of delusion, the chief removal technique being one of looking to see "a person" but finding only simpler, fleeting and impersonal (but interrelated) phenomena, thereby coming to see that in investigating the apparent "person," no actual entity is ever found, but only sights, sounds, tastes, smells, bodily sensations, and mental & emotional qualities and operations. With metta, Howard Emptiness /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none " such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta) #116605 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Aug 4, 2011 7:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Robert) - In a message dated 8/4/2011 4:01:46 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Robert E, ------------ <. . .> > RE: It is Buddha who said not to engage in sexual misconduct, not a priest or a cult leader. So what is the status of the Buddha's admonitions in your view? ------------ KH: I think I know the difference between a Buddha and a cult leader, but do you? And I don't have any problems with the Buddha's admonitions, thanks very much. My concern in this conversation has been for people like Phil who think sila is something over which there is some control. ------------------------------------------------------ HCW: Ken, with regatd to control of sila, are you unaware of the Buddha having taught the following? "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' If this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because this abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' "Develop what is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' If this development of what is skillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because this development of what is skillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.'" " _AN 2.19_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an02/an02.019.than.html) ------------------------------------------------------ For as long as people insist on believing that, they are not hearing the Buddha's admonitions at all. They can only hear the same sort of teaching found in religions and cults. That's fair enough for what it's worth, but I think secular moralists tend to be more helpful than religious ones. Ken H ================================= With metta, Howard /"One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into _right view_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-ditthi/index.html) : This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong resolve & to enter into _right resolve_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-sankappo/index.htm\ l) : This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong speech & to enter into _right speech_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-vaca/index.html) : This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong action & to enter into _right action_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-kammanto/index.htm\ l) : This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong livelihood & to enter into _right livelihood_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-ajivo/index.htm l) : This is one's right effort."/ " _MN 117_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html) #116606 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 12:07 am Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > And I don't have any problems with the Buddha's admonitions, thanks very much. My concern in this conversation has been for people like Phil who think sila is something over which there is some control. > > > That's fair enough for what it's worth, but I think secular moralists tend to be more helpful than religious ones. > Dear Ken "Why should we take advice on sex from the pope? If he knows anything about it, he shouldn't! George Bernard Shaw #116607 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 12:11 am Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > KH: I haven't committed adultery or anything near it since learning about namas and rupas. I can't say pariyatti was the cause of my abstinence, but it probably was. > Dear Kenh great to hear robert .......>>>>>>There are few things that we so unwillingly give up, even in advanced age, as the supposition that we still have the power of ingratiating ourselves with the fair sex. Samuel Johnson #116608 From: "philip" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 12:38 am Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! philofillet Hi Ken The rare treat of a post by Rob K brought me across the misrepresenation below of my understanding of Dhamma, my god, how many times in this thread have I referred to dhammas arising or not, "the good" guys are supportive dhammas which of course arise beyond control. I brought up the topic at DSg because I knew there were friends whose posts would likely prove to be supportive factors, see the quotation from Perfections. You live in a dream world where everyone understands Dhamma a lot less than you do ( except for a select few, of course) There is no telling how this situation will play out, dhammas will arise to support abstaining, or not. I understand this. But you have your imaginary dimwits to flog, so flog away, oh wise one.... If you have anything to write to me in the future, address it to the group, thanks. Phool > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > > > > And I don't have any problems with the Buddha's admonitions, thanks very much. My concern in this conversation has been for people like Phil who think sila is something over which there is some control. > > > > > That's fair enough for what it's worth, but I think secular moralists tend to be more helpful than religious ones. > > > Dear Ken > "Why should we take advice on sex from the pope? If he knows anything about it, he shouldn't! > George Bernard Shaw > #116609 From: "Alberto" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 12:55 am Subject: Re: Alberto's note sprlrt Hi Sarah, Nina, Lukas & all; Here's some more comments on what I remember of the 30th July talk at the Foundation. - Alberto 1. I told Khun Sujin that I couldn't remeber what she had said in her previous talk about vitakka cetasika. - She explained again that seeing arises with seven cetasikas only, without vitakka, but that the arising of seeing consciousness conditions the arising of the receiving citta next, then investigating, and so on, all of which arise with vitakka; and that vitakka acts like the feet of the world. 2. Mary, from New Zealand, asked about kamma, said that she couldn't accept that one's suffering (akusala vipaka) is due solely to "one's own" akusala kamma done in the (even very distant) past, rather than by some other "objective" causes (other people and so on). - Khun Sujin replied briefly but I don't remember what she said. - I also said something on the subject, which I've also forgot, but I've thought about this topic which is a tough one to accept (and even more so to understand) and I think that the much used simile of the seed and the fruit might still help: at harvest's time we pick up what we have previoulsy sown, which in its turn is what we want to harvest later, no quibble about that. Do we apply this natural law to kamma and vipaka as well or rather it is "my vipaka", regardless of the kamma, of which "we" (as such or such person) may well not have even done? 3. Khun Sujin then brought the subject back to the realities presently arising, seeing which can only see visible object and then thinking that thinks about it as various concepts... P.S., to Lukas; I'm back from Bkk and can't ask Khun Sujin your questions, but I can say something myself: Only ariyas don't have ditthi, which is an akusala cetasika arising always with lobha and moha, sometimes with pleasant feeling, other times with neutral ones. It is part of sankhara khandha, i.e. it accumulates. Miccha ditthi is a factor of the wrong path, animals and small children don't have the paths, neither samma nor miccha. Panna is a kusala root cetasika also included in sankhara khandha, it accumulates, i.e. its arising is a condition for its arising again in future. #116610 From: "philip" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 12:58 am Subject: attachment and delight philofillet Hi Nina, Enjoyed listening to Lodewijk on the way to work, heard this from p.91. "We should have patience towards a desirable object so that lobha does not arise, so that there is no attachment and delight in visible object and the otger sense objects that appear." When you write "attachment and delight" are you thinking of a particularly strong form of lobha, the kind that Sarah told me about the other day, I forget the Pali now, the strong lobha that can condition bad deeds? As for ordinary lobha, it is always always there, isn't it? Even when sanna recognizes a tree, there is lobha, we want to recognize things, lobha with every object. Is it this ordinary kind of lobha or strong forms of lobha when AS says "so there is no attachment and delight?" Metta, Phil #116611 From: "philip" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 1:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Factors for predominance condition philofillet Hi Nina, Thank you for the clear explanation. From the book: "When we accomplish a task with cittas which are resolute, firmly established in kusala, the citta can be tge predominance-condition for the accompanying dhammas." In other words the hetus themselves are so strong that there is no need for virya and chanda to lend them support? Or virya and chanda are there as well, but just not predominant. Virya is there except for a few kinds of cittas. But chanda? Does it only arise when it is predominance condition? metta, phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Phil, > Op 3-aug-2011, om 1:53 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > > Are virya and chanda more common than citta as the factor for > > predominance condition? I mean , of the four factors, do vimamsa > > and citta represent more rarefied factors than virya or chanda when > > there is kusala? I think your book says at one point that citta as > > kusala predominance factor is "pure"... > ------ > N: Vimamsa, pa~n~naa, accompanies kusala citta, whereas viriya and > chanda can accompany kusala citta or akusala citta, and when citta is > predominant it can be kusala or akusala. The citta has to be > accompanied by at least two hetus, otherwise it is too weak to be > predominance-condiiton. Viriya and chanda have to accompany citta > with at least two hetus for the same reason. Vimamsa accompanies > mahaa-kusala citta and then the citta has three hetus. > > As to citta being predominance-condition, in the case of kusala the > citta is resolute, firmly established in kusala while performing a task. > When the citta is kusala it is hard to tell which factor is more > common. It depends on the accumulated inclination. There is no reason > why viriya or chanda are more rare as predominance-condition. > ------ > Nina. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > #116612 From: Ken O Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 4:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SN 1.1 A Reed - commentarian explanation ashkenn2k Dear Rob E >Sure, this is possible - but my point is that there is no indication of any kind > >in the sutta itself that this is the case. So what is the evidence that this >story about the deva is correct, or that the Buddha tried to say something >"paradoxical" to challenge the deva? I see no indication that what the Buddha >said was "paradoxical" either. It is not paradoxical to me, but makes perfect >sense. > >It also cannot be paradoxical and understandable at the same time. So when the >commentator says the purpose was to give the deva a "paradox" that he will not >be able to understand, this then contradicts his own statement about the various > >meanings of the "paradox," which he apparently has no problem understanding >himself. So if he can understand it and explain it, as he does, and if we can >understand it, then why would it be difficult for the deva to understand it? It >doesn't make sense, as it is internally inconsistent and self-contradictory. > >This would be so if it were true. The only thing of this kind that I can see in >the sutta is that the deva is confused about how to cross the flood of samsara, >and the Buddha teaches him. I see nothing beyond this. If one believes that all >the commentaries are the result of enlightened understanding, then I guess one >must accept every commentary as truth. But I do not see this commentary as >rising to that level, as it does not relate in an illuminating way to the >Buddha's relationship to the deva. KO: I don't wish to sound defensive or argumentative. The usage of paradox in IMHO is to jolt the devatta up. We can understand because we have the necessary panna of dhamma. But the devatta or a person who do not know dhamma, may have a hard time understanding. I believe you will have met many of your friends who are good and kind in nature but do not understand Buddhism or just have a superficial understanding of it. Commentary is just describing the situation, the story behind a situation of a teaching, thereafter it explain the meaning of the teaching to help us to understand the deep meaning of what Buddha taught. It is not easy to have full faith of commentary. the commentary main purpose in this sutta is telling the story behind why Buddha act in this way. Just like if you read Dhammapada short verses, there is a story in such verses. It is by means not belittling any beings, it is just stating a fact of that situation. The truth about the commetary is to illumate Buddha teaching so that more people could benefit. Again not easy to accept them, in this modern day there were many diverse viewpoints even among Buddhists themselves. As long as there is commentary, I do urge more people to read it. Even if some of the viewpoints like sabhava, 17 cittas moments etc are not accepted by some, it is still a good wealth of knowledge to benefit everyone of us. Ken O #116613 From: Ken O Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 4:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Factors for predominance condition ashkenn2k Dear Phil hetu conditioning are factors but not determining. If they are the determining factors, then there is no salvation. It is the cetasikas and cittas that are the determiners. conditioning are just the connectors but not drivers or determiners Ken O >Hi Nina, > >Thank you for the clear explanation. > >From the book: "When we accomplish a task with cittas which are resolute, firmly > >established in kusala, the citta can be tge predominance-condition for the >accompanying dhammas." > > >In other words the hetus themselves are so strong that there is no need for >virya and chanda to lend them support? Or virya and chanda are there as well, >but just not predominant. Virya is there except for a few kinds of cittas. But >chanda? Does it only arise when it is predominance condition? > > >metta, >phil #116614 From: Vince Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 9:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "THE EXPERIENCE OF SAMADHI" cerovzt@... Send Email Send Email Hi Colette you wrote: > Is "Nyoponika Thera" a proper name of a person or is it a group of people? sorry for my spelling.. and funny question :) anyway, in the Nyaponika Thera's :) book there is much more work about Time than Space. A very useful reading also is the first chapter of "The World as Will and Representation" of A. Schopenhauer. His metaphysics was very coincident with Buddhism and he is a good help for this issue. Here in PDF: ** Page 10 and forward. http://tinyurl.com/3bq8k7a best, Vince. #116615 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 10:26 am Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! kenhowardau Hi Sarah and Pt, ------ <. . .> >>KH: There is no real reason for me to object to this conversation. To be fair to you both, you were just using your medical conditions as metaphors for vipaka. You were not professing to identify an actual dhamma and its cause. >> > S: This reminds me a little of Phil's objection to Nina's example of a flower that can be smelt, tasted or touched - different rupas appearing. His objection was to the mixing of conventional truths with absolute truths. However, I don't see any problem in either set of examples. ------ KH: Yes, it's a difficult area for me. That's probably why I keep coming back to it. Not only here at DSG but also at the Foundation (back in 2008?) I have been the odd man out a degree. People are much more relaxed about mixing the two truths than I am. Perhaps it's just that they feel more confident in their ability not to get caught out. But I suspect there is something important that I haven't grasped yet. ----------------------------- > S: Instead of saying "reach for the medicine" or "avoid ginger" as we might in another setting, we're discussing dhammas here. ----------------------------- KH: Yes, with you so far. ------------------------------------------ > S: We're not just using medical conditions as metaphors, we're discussing how there are various namas and rupas that can be known anytime. ------------------------------------------ KH: That's a slightly different point, but I think I still follow. ------------------------------------------------------- > S: Of course, if there is an attempt to try and experience a particular nama or rupa, it's wrong. However, I think it's also useful to understand that when tasting ginger or looking at sunrises, there are many different experiences through different sense and mind-doors. The unpleasant bodily feeling, such as when experiencing the heat whilst eating a chili, can only be through the body-door. ----------------------------------------------------- KH: Yes, but if I bite a hot chili and think, "Arr, this is unpleasant vipaka," aren't I confusing concepts with realities? I don't want to misquote anyone, but at the Foundation someone said, "Touch the table. There is hardness." And I thought to myself, but wasn't there already hardness? Weren't we already sitting on chairs? with clothes touching our bodies . . .?" ----------------------------- > S: Let me know if you still have objections to the chat! ----------------------------- KH: I never had any objections. I think I need to keep harping on about this "mixing" business until something twigs and I see what I am missing. ------------------- <. . .> S: Yes, exactly. Not necessarily any wrong view or akusala kamma-patha whilst drinking the wine at all- just a habit better not accumulated even by a sip. ------------------ KH: Society is quite shameful the way it sings the praises of alcohol without a thought for those poor people who can't handle it. If I think I can safely have an occasional drink I should have it in private, and shut up about it. :-) Ken H #116616 From: "philip" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 11:46 am Subject: Visama lobha ( wsd [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! philofillet Hi Sarah and and all > > >Thanks also for telling me about visama lobha, sounds right down my alley! > >S:Visama lobha is the kind of lobha that leads to improper behaviour of one kind or other and which is likely to lead to extreme measures to cover the tracks. This is the kind of lobha which I mentioned can be a 'block', > especially if one is obsessed with it and it leads one away from > association with the wise. Ph: I find it interesting and encouraging that I am spending so much time at DSG these days. There is a verse in theragata that I reallt appreciated at the end of last year, when I had survived tons of temptations for illicit sex, a monk writing that he had somehow not been submerged in the flood, that he had held on to the island that he had clambered up on to, or words to that effect. Now I can feel the flood ( akusala dhammas, especially this very powerful Visama lobha, pulling me down. (Having more conditioning power than thr rather weak army of kusala dhammas.) If it weren't for DSG, the battle eould have already been decided, probably. This situatiin is making it very very. clear how association with wise friends is such a powerful conditioning factor. S: Visama lobha is conditioned by kamma and > accumulations, but still if the inclination is there, there can be > listening to the dhamma and gradually the extreme lobha can be eradicated > if not in this lifetime, then over lifetimes. I think the Agga~n~na Sutta > in DN gives some very good examples. Lots of other examples of truly deviant behaviour which would qualify. As usual, however, it's not so much about categorising situations as about particular cittas.< Ph: Certainly about cittas, but the situations themselves seem to be stressed by tge Buddha too, punishment by the king (in my case, a lawsuit from the husband, a lawyer friend tells me that hapoens a lot in Japan) , disgrace, bad sllep, such worldly dhammas. Again, I think the Budfha uses warnings about worldly fallout and punishment after death because he knows sone people have panna if a degree that will be impressed/impacted by such warnings, he is a wise doctor who prescribes different medicine to different patients at different times. This particular patient is very impressed by warnings about punishment from the king/rich husband. So imagining that conventional situation has a helpful impact on kusala dhammas in my case, or maybe akusala dhammas at the thought of being sued(dosa, lobha for my confortable situation) are also involved in abstaining. In any case, thanks, I want to open a thread on Visama lobha. Do you think that some people have more visama lobha as result of different preponderence of 6 roots at birth?I forget the Pali term for those, I expect you'll say no, but why are some people so much more prone to visama lobha than others? I don't feel anxious about this, I am happy to understand where my akusala tendencies lie. Metta, Phil > > (SN3:11 Seven Jatilas) > > 1.“It is by living together with someone, great king, that his virtue is > to be known, and that after a long time, not after a short time; by one > who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is wise, not > by a dullard. > > 2.“It is by dealing with someone, great king, that his honesty is to be > known, and that after a long time, not after a short time; by one who is > attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is wise, not by a > dullard. > > 3.“It is in adversities, great king, that a person’s fortitude is to be > known, and that after a long time, not after a short time; by one who is > attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is wise, not by a > dullard. > > 4.“It is by discussion with someone, great king, that his wisdom is to be > known, and that after a long time, not after a short time; by one who is > attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is wise, not by a > dullard.” > > Metta > > Sarah > ====== > #116617 From: "philip" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 12:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Smell etc, inseparable rupas philofillet Hi Nina > > > > Ph: But there is a flower lying on the ground that I can hold in my > > hands and lick and bite and sniff? If there is a solid object that > > I csn pick up and hold, I have no trouble understanding how rupas > > can rise as inseparables, how fragrance must gave a support etc. > > > ------ > N: Just an example to show that in the ultimate sense there are > different objects experienced through different doorways, one at a > time. In reality there is no flower that exists. We may think that it > was there already and that it lasts. But we can think of a flower, we > do not have to avoid thinking of concepts. Ph:Well, it is still difficult for me to understand how nutritive essence and colour, for example, arise together as fleeting realities, but it is not so important, perhaps the next time I come across this topic there will be better conditions for understanding. I think tge most important thing is tgat I understand whether the object tgat we call an appke has a real existence or not, it can inly be experienced through sense door and subsequent minf door processes that create a concept as far as my experience of them is concerned. An apple and a being can only be experienced as concepts, whether they have actual existence or not, that much is clear.. The purpose of Dhamma isn't to explain science, science only brings up poiisoned arrow topics, I think, or other kinds of thinking that mislead us and waste our time and energy... Metta, Phil > > > ----- > N: Sounds are not the same. Because of conditions they are different. > Sound can be heard, that is all. No need to think of units of ruupa > or how this sound is produced. > ------- > > > > Ph: Can I pick up an object that we call and think of as a flower > > flower and sniff it according to the Buddha? I'm perplexed, sorry. > > A dead body lies on the ground, decomposing. Moment by moment is > > there actually no body there but rupas rising and falling away, > > somehow more rotten than the ones that rose and fell away a > > moment earlier, but no solid body? > > > ------ > N: When odour, unpleasant odour impinges on smellingsense, there are > conditions for smelling. Then odour is the object and no need to > think of the source of the odour, that is another object, namely a > concept. > -------- > > What are wrinkles.Don't wrinkles indicate that a solid body covered > > by skin is changing over time? Why does the Budha talk about old > > bodies, wrinled, with teeth falling out etc. They are not real. > > Isn't the point of the teaching of paramattha dhammas and concepts > > that a > > panna can see through objects and reduce them to dhammas for the > > sake of detachment and liberation, and the Buddha didn't say that > > the objects don't exist? > > > ------- > N: The Buddha wanted to help people to come closer to the truth in > speaking about parts of the body, or a body that is decaying. One can > see the whole, solid body as mere elements. When the time was right > he would explain that each of the khandhas we cling to are like foam, > a bubble, a dream: > Vis. Ch XIV, 224 > there are similes pertaining to each of the five khandhas > separately and this is how they are seen in detail. > --------- > > regarded as a > lump of froth because it will not stand squeezing, feeling as a bubble > on water because it can only be enjoyed for an instant, perception as a > mirage because it causes illusion, formations as a plantain trunk > because it has no core, and consciousness as a conjuring trick because > it deceives (S.iii,140-42).> > ------- > N: The Tiika elaborates on these similes, and the text is partly > similar to the `Dispeller of Delusion' (p. 36-38). > Ruupa is just like a lump of froth without any substance and it > cannot be grasped, since it breaks up immediately. Ruupa is like wood > surrounding the pith of a tree, without core or substance, it is > weak, and it should not be taken as "I" or "mine". Ruupa continually > breaks up from the first stage of a foetus on, until it finally > breaks up at death. > The Dispeller adds: fragments.> > > Feeling is like a bubble of water. Just as a bubble of water is > unsubstantial, is ungraspable, and does not last long, so is feeling. > Just as a bubble arises due to four causes: the water surface, the > drop of water, wetness of the water and the air which holds it up by > drawing it together as an envelope, just so feeling also arises due > to four causes: the physical base, the object, the flame of > defilements and the impact of contact (phassa). ... > > Saaa is like a mirage, since it is unsubstantial and cannot be > grasped. One cannot grasp it, drink it, wash in it, bathe in it or > fill a pot with it. A mirage quivers and deceives many people. .. > > The khandha of formations is like a plantain stem since it is > unsubstantial and cannot be grasped. Just as a plantain stem is a > combination of many sheets and is without core, evenso the khandha of > formations which is a combination of many dhammas, the cetasikas, it > is without core, and cannot be grasped. It cannot be taken as > permanent, etc. ... > > The khandha of consciousness, viaa.na, is like an illusion (maya). > It is without substance or core, and it cannot be grasped. Just as an > illusion is changeable and appears swiftly, so is citta. ...> > ------ > Nina. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > #116618 From: "philip" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 12:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Factors for predominance condition philofillet Hi Ken O. I think citta as predominance condition is refering to the hetu by itself, isn't it? Of course there are accompanying cetasikas but the predominance condition is citta, on some occasions.. I must say I find it easier to understand chanda and virya as predominance condition, but... Oh, maybe I don't understand what you mean by "determining" factors. Determing the arising of kusala javana cittas? Determining salvation? Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Phil > > hetu conditioning are factors but not determining. If they are the > determining factors, then there is no salvation. It is the cetasikas and cittas > that are the determiners. conditioning are just the connectors but not drivers > or determiners > > > Ken O > > > > >Hi Nina, > > > >Thank you for the clear explanation. > > > >From the book: "When we accomplish a task with cittas which are resolute, firmly > > > >established in kusala, the citta can be tge predominance-condition for the > >accompanying dhammas." > > > > > >In other words the hetus themselves are so strong that there is no need for > >virya and chanda to lend them support? Or virya and chanda are there as well, > >but just not predominant. Virya is there except for a few kinds of cittas. But > >chanda? Does it only arise when it is predominance condition? > > > > > >metta, > >phil > #116619 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 1:00 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! ptaus1 Hi KenH and Phil, > KH: To understand the Dhamma is to understand the realities of the present moment. Once we have that understanding it will be all we need. Concepts of adultery and marriage will no longer have a hold on us. There are only dhammas! > > If we don't have right understanding, however, then the Dhamma will mean nothing more to us than just another religious superstition. And in that case my advice would be; make your own decisions on the best evidence available to you. Don't rely on superstitions. This is a wide-ranging subject, I think I'm both with you and Phil on this one. As mentioned, my understanding is that abstention can be generalized into three different levels: 1. without understanding, when one abstains because of intellectual beliefs like - god will punish me, it's the law, etc. 2. with intelectual understanding, when one intellectually understands what'll be the detrimental consequences of a deed, and thus abstains. 3. with direct understanding, when there's recognition of craving for this, or against that, as anatta. I believe that out of these three, the one you are most in favor of is the last one - when essentially a dhamma is recognised as anatta. And this is also the only one out of the three that actually constitutes gradual eradication of defilements, and can be said to be exclusively Buddhist. However, abstention for the most part, in my case at least, doesn't happen on that level three. I.e. it's mostly to do with some sort of thinking and believeing, with or without intellectual understanding. Now, is that sort of abstention particularly Buddhist? No. Does it help? I think it does in some way. It doesn't get you any step closer to getting out of samasra, but at least it keeps you out of hell realms where there's little or no chance of hearing and considering the Dhamma. And finally, did the Buddha endorse the sorts of abstention of levels one and two? Not sure about the first one, but yes the second one. Of course, third one is without dispute. Best wishes, pt #116620 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 1:21 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! epsteinrob Hi Ken H., and Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Ken (and Robert) - > > In a message dated 8/4/2011 4:01:46 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > kenhowardau@... writes: > > Hi Robert E, > > ------------ > <. . .> > > RE: It is Buddha who said not to engage in sexual misconduct, not a > priest or a cult leader. So what is the status of the Buddha's admonitions in > your view? > ------------ > > KH: I think I know the difference between a Buddha and a cult leader, but > do you? Ken, I know the difference between the words of the BUDDHA and those of a priest or cult leader. It doesn't seem that you do. When you attribute the very thoughts and words of the Buddha to priests and cult leaders, it is obvious there is some confusion there on your part. > And I don't have any problems with the Buddha's admonitions, thanks very > much. My concern in this conversation has been for people like Phil who > think sila is something over which there is some control. Well, Ken, you can say what you like, and take offense at my natural response to what you actually said, but the truth is that it is the Buddha who said to do X and Y, and suggested that we can do so. Perhaps it is you who are misunderstanding the teaching of the Buddha in this case, since you say it is priests and cult leaders who are spreading a false teaching about 'control' when they suggest that one should follow the precepts, and all the while you are referencing what the Buddha taught! So how can you 'not have any problem with the Buddha's admonitions,' and deny that they are correct at the same time? > ------------------------------------------------------ > HCW: > Ken, with regard to control of sila, are you unaware of the Buddha > having taught the following? > > > > "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is > unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not > say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because it is possible to > abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' If > this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would > not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because this abandoning > of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, > 'Abandon what is unskillful.' > "Develop what is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what is > skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is skillful, I would not say to > you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because it is possible to develop > what is skillful, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' If this development > of what is skillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to > you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because this development of what is > skillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Develop what is > skillful.'" > " _AN 2.19_ > (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an02/an02.019.than.html) > ------------------------------------------------------ Well, Howard, those who don't believe in action, people, physical objects or volition will simply say that this entire sutta and all those like them are merely figures of speech pointing to dhammas. The philosophy that "there is nothing but arising dhammas" while seeming true on its face, is taken to imply that there is no action, no world, no people, no objects per se, but only the passive experience of single qualities arising one at a time. It is all experience and no action, and volition is just an experience of consciousness, not a force which causes action to take place. > For as long as people insist on believing that, they are not hearing the > Buddha's admonitions at all. They can only hear the same sort of teaching > found in religions and cults. > > That's fair enough for what it's worth, but I think secular moralists tend > to be more helpful than religious ones. > > Ken H > ================================= Ken - taking the Buddha's teachings literally and plainly, and following his admonitions and directions, is not the path of a cultist, but of a Buddhist. Good luck with the dismissal of what the Buddha said in favor of the interpretations of latter-day commentators. Perhaps your version of the commentaries is actually the cultic material here, did you ever think of that? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #116621 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 1:29 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > As for the 'unresolved' issue - the point is that all day we think we have to decide whether to do A or B, but when there's awareness, it's apparent the reality is just thinking and that the concepts we're used to finding so important, are just....well, concepts! This is why when sati-sampajanna develop, there are fewer and fewer 'issues', 'dilemmas' or concerns about what the practice is. It wouldn't really be an issue for me if I didn't have my good friends here challenging the practices that appear natural to me and others here. The disparagement of certain activities over others is also not a natural phenomenon but the result of certain concepts that may be held onto. > R:> I guess when sitting, those who sit will sit, and when not sitting, those who do not sit will be doing something else. :-) > ... > S: Yes and to refine it further, there will be conditioned dhammas regardless :-) It just depends whether or not there is any awareness, any understanding right now. If in fact meditation promotes awareness as I believe it does, despite the protestations of those who hold another view, the simple declension of all activities and phenomena to one equal opportunity may not be correct. That is something that you may have already resolved for yourself, but I have reached a different conclusion. None of this of course keeps you from doing yoga or me from sitting if and when I do - it is just a matter of accepting one's natural inclinations and activities. To me, sitting is part of the path - a most important path, and I've seen nothing in any other practice, including the dhammas-only philosophy, to convince me that it is not of equal or greater value to the path. > You appreciate the distinction between thinking and concepts and how the reality now, when we think about these issues, is just thinking which can be known as such. Dare I say that we're making good headway in the discussion? I think that apart from all issues, yes, it is great to have those distinctions and I hope it represents progress in that way. I'm certainly happy to share and learn in that dimension, even while clinging to my terrible belief in "formal meditation." :-) Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - #116622 From: "philip" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 1:44 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! philofillet Hi Ken and all The below was a bit overwritten. But please be aware Ken, of your tendency that I share, to ascribe traits to people that suit your desire concept of what people should think rather than what they actually think. I guess it is called building a strawman? In my case, I assume that all people think about paramattha dhammas rather than actually have mindfulness of their characteristics. In your case, again and again and again, you tell people that they believe in control of dhammas, or in a self that controls dhamma, and again and again people tell you that they don't believe that. We all have sakkaya ditthi, of course, there are no Ariyans here, at least I highly doubt it, but the sakkaya ditthi does not arise in the form of believing in a self that can control dhammas. I personally believe that the BUddha appeals to our self-esteem, that when he says for example, "this is an inferior path, a path for inferior people, not for superior people, this is not for you" (or words to that effect in one of my favourite suttas) he is appealing to the natural self-esteem that people have. And if I am stirred and think "I will not do that bad deed!" there is still no believe that there is a self that can decide not to do a deed, only dhammas, performing functions, as conditioned. But concepts about myeslf being this sort of person or that sort of person who does or doesn't do this or that can be helpful as long as it is remembered (and it is easy to remember) that there is no self that controls this or that. Anyways, you will of course see all kinds of wrong view wholes in what I wrote, and so be it. I'll return to the tone of my post to you earlier yesterday, probably won't be discussing much with you, but not bad feelings. I enjoyed writing a sarcastic, cutting post to you, it's fun to do that sometimes, lobha enjoys it, and at the moment of writing kusala dhammas are not strong enough to arise to prevent it. Please think a little more about how blithely you may misrepresent people's understanding. And I will try to do so as well. The things you say about all followers of the Buddha who don't listen to A. S are really pretty silly, there are people out there who understand Dhamma, Ken, lots of them. As we say in Japanese, ja ne, later. Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Ken > > The rare treat of a post by Rob K brought me across the misrepresenation below of my understanding of Dhamma, my god, how many times in this thread have I referred to dhammas arising or not, "the good" guys are supportive dhammas which of course arise beyond control. I brought up the topic at DSg because I knew there were friends whose posts would likely prove to be supportive factors, see the quotation from Perfections. You live in a dream world where everyone understands Dhamma a lot less than you do ( except for a select few, of course) > > There is no telling how this situation will play out, dhammas will arise to support abstaining, or not. I understand this. But you have your imaginary dimwits to flog, so flog away, oh wise one.... > > If you have anything to write to me in the future, address it to the group, thanks. > > Phool > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > And I don't have any problems with the Buddha's admonitions, thanks very much. My concern in this conversation has been for people like Phil who think sila is something over which there is some control. > > > > > > > That's fair enough for what it's worth, but I think secular moralists tend to be more helpful than religious ones. > > > > > Dear Ken > > "Why should we take advice on sex from the pope? If he knows anything about it, he shouldn't! > > George Bernard Shaw > > > #116623 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 1:55 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! kenhowardau Hi Pt, Thanks for keeping this thread going Pt, I think it still has something to offer. -------- > Pt:As mentioned, my understanding is that abstention can be generalized into three different levels: -------- KH: What sort of abstention are we talking about here? Are we talking about kusala citta with virati cetasika? Or we talking about a concept? -------------- > Pt: 1. without understanding, when one abstains because of intellectual beliefs like - god will punish me, it's the law, etc. 2. with intelectual understanding, when one intellectually understands what'll be the detrimental consequences of a deed, and thus abstains. 3. with direct understanding, when there's recognition of craving for this, or against that, as anatta. > I believe that out of these three, the one you are most in favor of is the last one -------------- KH: Yes, but all of those are kusala cittas, aren't they? And kusala is always good. The whole point of this conversation is that we are talking about concepts. Adultery and marriage are concepts, aren't they? When the Buddha spoke about abstention from adultery, he was actually talking about citta and cetasikas. You won't find a dhamma called marriage or adultery. So what is marriage, and when does abstention from adultery occur? Are these things that the Dhamma can tell us? I don't think so. I think the Dhamma tells us how to know cittas from concepts. One point I tried to make was that a wise and wonderful person such as myself (joke) who knows there are only dhammas, will not be greatly enamoured with concepts. And so he won't be sufficiently bothered to go wandering into forbidden areas looking for new relationships. People like us tend to be content with our present situations. Rob K thinks it's just because I'm past it. :-) ---------------------- <. . .> < Pt: However, abstention for the most part, in my case at least, doesn't happen on that level three. I.e. it's mostly to do with some sort of thinking and believeing, with or without intellectual understanding. Now, is that sort of abstention particularly Buddhist? No. Does it help? I think it does in some way. ----------------------- KH: If there is kusala citta then off course it's good, but kusala citta is a rare thing. I think most of our abstentions are just concepts of abstention. And our concepts of abstention might sometimes involve stronger akusala than our concepts of adultery. Ken H #116624 From: "philip" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 2:00 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! philofillet HI Rob E > Ken - taking the Buddha's teachings literally and plainly, and following his admonitions and directions, is not the path of a cultist, but of a Buddhist. Good luck with the dismissal of what the Buddha said in favor of the interpretations of latter-day commentators. Perhaps your version of the commentaries is actually the cultic material here, did you ever think of that? > Ken H wrote some rather outlandish things about cults and priests, but don't take his excesses as an indication of where Acharn Sujin's understanding lies. I liked when I met her and I asked about about the need to follow conventional sila, and she simply said "not enough." And she's right. It's not enough to get out of samsara. But she would never deny that the Buddha taught principles of conventional rectitude. Ken's insistence on that is frankly like a frankfurter floating around in our house. It floats into the range of our consciousness on occasion (too often for those who tangle with him habitually) and may be disturbing or irritating at the time, but it needn't be eaten. It shouldn't be eaten! And as long as it isn't eaten and it's kind of cute in a way! Metta, Phil p.s the frankfurter isn't a penis, I'm just feeling giddy from the heat and the first day of my summer vacation coming! #116625 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 2:47 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: SN 1.1 A Reed - commentarian explanation epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > The truth about the commentary is to illumate Buddha teaching so that more people > could benefit. Again not easy to accept them, in this modern day there were > many diverse viewpoints even among Buddhists themselves. > > As long as there is commentary, I do urge more people to read it. Even if some > of the viewpoints like sabhava, 17 cittas moments etc are not accepted by some, > it is still a good wealth of knowledge to benefit everyone of us. I am very interested in the ancient commentaries, and I am sure that many of them are illuminating. I enjoy very much the detailed explanations of certain Sutta verses, especially when they are sometimes hard to understand. In some cases I see a problem with certain sections that seem contradictory to the original sutta. This does not diminish my interest in getting greater knowledge from the commentaries in general. I find the parts of the Visuddimagga I have read and some of the commentaries of the satipatthana sutta and others to be very valuable. I certainly think it is important that we have them. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #116626 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 2:51 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > Ken's insistence on that is frankly like a frankfurter floating around in our house. It floats into the range of our consciousness on occasion (too often for those who tangle with him habitually) and may be disturbing or irritating at the time, but it needn't be eaten. It shouldn't be eaten! And as long as it isn't eaten and it's kind of cute in a way! > > Metta, > > Phil > > p.s the frankfurter isn't a penis, I'm just feeling giddy from the heat and the first day of my summer vacation coming! I'm glad you're in a good mood! As Freud once said, "Sometimes a frankfurter is just a frankfurter." Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #116627 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 4:12 pm Subject: When not Dreaming... ;-) bhikkhu5 Friends: The Blessed Buddha once said: In the seen is merely the process of seeing... In the heard is merely the process of hearing... In the sensed is merely the process of sensing... In the thought is merely the process of thinking... So knowing, you will not be connected 'with that'... So disconnected you will not be absorbed 'into that'... So neither with that, nor into that 'You are not' created by that sensation! When there is no 'You' inferred or conjectured by that very experience, then 'You' are neither 'here', 'there', 'both', 'beyond' nor 'in between'...! On realizing the importance of this incident the Blessed One exclaimed: Where neither solidity, fluidity, heat, nor motion find any footing, there no sun, moon nor star ever shines. There is neither any light, nor is there any darkness! When the Noble, through stilling of all mental construction, through quieting of all mental formation, directly experiences this, then is he freed from both form and formlessness, then is he released from both pleasure and all pain ..." Udana - Inspiration: I - 10. Further comments and explanation here: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/No_Substance_'Out_There'.htm Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * http://What-Buddha-Said.net #116628 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 6:35 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > One point I tried to make was that a wise and wonderful person such as myself (joke) who knows there are only dhammas, will not be greatly enamoured with concepts. And so he won't be sufficiently bothered to go wandering into forbidden areas looking for new relationships. People like us tend to be content with our present situations. > > Rob K thinks it's just because I'm past it. :-) > >________ Heh, Dear Ken I do see your point about religions mishandling human relations with their well-meaning(?) pressure, but your comments about secular idealogies being superior re. sex I don't get. Robert >>>Lisa, if the Bible has taught us nothing else - and it hasn't - it's that girls should stick to girls' sports, such as hot oil wrestling and foxy boxing and such and such.<<< Homer Simpson #116629 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 7:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! nilovg Dear Ken H, Op 5-aug-2011, om 2:26 heeft Ken H het volgende geschreven: > KH: Yes, but if I bite a hot chili and think, "Arr, this is > unpleasant vipaka," aren't I confusing concepts with realities? ------ N:Not necessarily, you are thinking of a reality, or naming it. ----- > > > K: I don't want to misquote anyone, but at the Foundation someone > said, "Touch the table. There is hardness." And I thought to > myself, but wasn't there already hardness? Weren't we already > sitting on chairs? with clothes touching our bodies . . .?" ----- N: Yes. But this was said as an example, to help people to have more understanding of hardness. ------ Nina. #116630 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 7:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] chariots do exist as assemblage of parts. nilovg Hi Howard, I think you explained this very well. Nina. Op 4-aug-2011, om 15:01 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > As I view the matter, the Buddha taught this chariot metaphor not to > instill any sense of the reality of a "person," but just the > opposite - to > show us the basis for our conceptualizing of persons, namely mere > reification of collections of impersonal phenomena when they are > interrelated in > certain ways, and to disabuse us of the belief that there is a core > of identity > - of essence and individuality and reality - to actually be found. #116631 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 7:28 pm Subject: Re: Visama lobha ( wsd [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! nilovg Dear Phil, Op 5-aug-2011, om 3:46 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Do you think that some people have more visama lobha as result of > different preponderence of 6 roots at birth? ----- N: In the case of human birth, the rebirth-consciousness is kusala vipaaka. It can be accompanied by two or three sobhana hetus, or, it may be ahetuka, santiira.nacitta without hetus. In the latter case one is handicapped from birth. When there is an unhappy rebirth in an unhappy plane the rebirth- consciousness is santiira.nacitta that is akusala vipaakacitta, without hetus. There never are akusala hetus at rebirth. As to visama lobha, this depends on someone's accumulated inclinations. But inclinations can be changed. ----- Nina. #116632 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 7:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Smell etc, inseparable rupas nilovg Dear Phil, Op 5-aug-2011, om 4:00 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > An apple and a being can only be experienced as concepts, whether > they have actual existence or not, that much is clear.. ------ N: On account of experiences through the sense-doors there is remembrance of: an apple or a person. It seems that they were there already or can stay for a while. A person are only citta cetasika and ruupa that do not stay for a moment, but we forget and we cling. I quote from my "Physical phenomena": < We read in the "Visuddhimagga" (XI, 92): "The air element that courses through all the limbs and has the characteristic of moving and distending, being founded upon earth, held together by water, and maintained by fire, distends this body. And this body, being distended by the latter kind of air, does not collapse, but stands erect, and being propelled by the other (moving) air, it shows intimation, and it flexes and extends and it wriggles the hands and feet, doing so in the postures comprising walking, standing, sitting and lying down. So this mechanism of elements carries on like a magic trick, deceiving foolish people with the male and female sex and so on." We are deceived and infatuated by the outward appearance of a man or a woman and we forget that this body is a "mechanism of elements" and that it flexes and wriggles hands and feet, showing intimation by gestures or speech, because of conditions.> -------- > Ph: The purpose of Dhamma isn't to explain science, science only > brings up poisoned arrow topics, I think, or other kinds of > thinking that mislead us and waste our time and energy... ----- N: We do not have to discard science, but the point of view is different. Science does not lead to detachment from the idea of self. ------ Nina. #116633 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 8:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Appreciation of the Group sarahprocter... Dear Kelvin, Lovely to hear from you after quite a break! I was thinking of you quite recently and mentioned your name in a post in regard to how you'd helped me with a correction before. I appreciated all your reflections and sharing of them. Just a few brief comments: --- On Mon, 1/8/11, Kelvin wrote: >I thought of all of you during my 10-day retreat from which I got back last night. The importance of study, reflection and discussion really hit me. Without a proper suta-maya panna there can not even be the right cinta-maya panna, far away is the proper bhanava-maya panna. So it's critical we have a proper guide or map and there's no arguing that the only ancient map still intact is the whole Tipitaka including the Commentaries. ... S: Of course, I agree with you:-) ... >While other traditions maps were there they are not available to us as a whole and an incomplete map is almost as bad as a wrong map because one can get stuck or be led through blind alleys. ... S: I'd just like to add that even with the very best map, one can still get lost and mis-read the map. As we know, the cinta-maya panna leading to the "proper bhavana-maya panna", doesn't depend on the quantity or detail in the map available, but the careful considering and wise reflecting based on the map, leading to the direct insight of dhammas. We have all come across example of scholars or translators who have access to the best maps but somehow end up losing the track all the same. ..... >So the faith in ancient wisdom and descriptions from ones who surely have walked through the correct path is critical. All this skeptical doubts really does not properly prepare one to have a stable and grounded understanding of the basic suta-maya panna of this profound Dhamma; saddha is an indriya for a reason. Samma ditthi is the first factor as often stated in this group and now I see why it is so critical. ... S: Yes, as the terms imply, even the suta-maya panna has to be right understanding based on what has been heard. A very small child who hears the Dhamma won't have any suta-maya panna following exposure to the map. As you suggest, it is the right understanding which lessens and eradicates the sceptical doubt. (The Buddha said "you may well doubt", not "you should doubt....", as I understand, Howard.) .... S: Your comments on sila were also interesting. You've been considering carefully. As Pt mentioned, the texts refer to the following of sila by order, by natural inclination and through right understanding - cinta and bhavana-maya-panna. Only the last is a firm confindence in the value of abstaining from such harm and following the path which is harmless and wise. As Ken H mentioned, this follows from the understanding of namas and rupas, the growing confidence and removal of the doubt you referred to. ... >I also been investigated into the "dark nights" syndrome (James ala Daniel Ingram) and it's all due to lack of proper suta-maya panna. It's easy to get led astray and find oneself in quite dark alleys. .... S: And especially, a lack of proper cinta-maya panna, wise consideration based on what's been heard. When this, the pariyatti, is really firm, there won't be a straying into the "dark nights" of ignorance and wrong view. >I took Dhamma vicaya to heart and really sat down to just study the world albeit on a cushion with the map that's been given to me since birth. ... S: As I recall, your family are Burmese, so you grew up with a lot of access to the Teachings and have considered carefully since - so even "the cushion" can be a suitable place when there's right understanding:-) ... >To me it was experiencing the compounded nature of our existence through sensations but being able to tune into different ones amidst this sea gave some glimpses of the different sense-doors and mental factors. .... S: Sounds suspiciously Goenka-ish. Through the body-sense, just the 3 elements of solidity, temperature and air can be experienced and known. This can only be when there is no selection at all:-) ... >Some reflection after gave rise to thoughts about anatta gave me better intellectual understanding of what I experienced so once again former discussions came to be very helpful. .... S: That's good and thx for mentioning it. Perhaps you would elaborate for others. I also appreciate your great appreciation of the wisdom of the Buddha and his teaching skills. ... S: Now only one comment in your message surprised me and it was this: K:> I share my merits with you all (except KenH). ... S: :-/ Perhaps next time you can share your merits with all without exception? Here's a great quote (I thought) that Ken H wrote to Howard when asked to define 'control': "There is no power or authority that can be exercised over dhammas." I'd be interested to hear you comments on that. Thx again for all your sharing. Look f/w to more. Metta Sarah ====== #116634 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 8:54 pm Subject: Re: Identity crisis: Are Buddhists atheists? sarahprocter... Hi Rodney/Caine & Rajesh --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Rodney wrote: > > Atheists seem so obsessed with there being no god that they give the idea of one more popularity. I think it does not really matter to Buddhists. We are more concerned with inward spirituality than outward existence of such. > > Caine Das ... S: Firstly, welcome to DSG, Rodney/Caine. (Sorry, I'm a little confused about your name - perhaps you could clarify.) Where do you live? I think you make good comments. The various labels, such as 'atheist' or even 'Buddhist' aren't of much importance. What is important is whether there is any understanding now of the mental and physical phenomena or whether there is the wrong view of a Self existing now that experiences and is experienced. Look forward to hearing more from you both. Metta Sarah ======= #116635 From: Lukas Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 9:14 pm Subject: Anagarika's precepts szmicio Dear Dhamma friends, How many precepts anagarikas have? Could u explain in more detailed way? The anagarika concept? is it possible to Anagarika to smoke cigarets? best wishes Lukas #116636 From: Caine Das Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 10:01 pm Subject: Re: Identity crisis: Are Buddhists atheists? hamugbodas I apologize for the confusion Sarah. I have changed my email to reflect my ordination name. I am a Buddhist Monk. Rodney is my birth name. I live in Knoxville, TN currently. Thank you for the welcome to the group, the discussions are enriching. Caine Das #116637 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 5, 2011 11:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Alberto's note nilovg Dear Alberto, Thanks for the notes. Op 4-aug-2011, om 16:55 heeft Alberto het volgende geschreven: > Here's some more comments on what I remember of the 30th July talk > at the Foundation. - Alberto > > 1. I told Khun Sujin that I couldn't remeber what she had said in > her previous talk about vitakka cetasika. > > - She explained again that seeing arises with seven cetasikas only, > without vitakka, but that the arising of seeing consciousness > conditions the arising of the receiving citta next, then > investigating, and so on, all of which arise with vitakka; and that > vitakka acts like the feet of the world. ------- N: Seeing arises at the eyebase and sees visible object. The following cittas also experience visible object but they do not see it. They need vitakka in order to experience visible object. Vitakka hits the object so that citta can experience it. Vitakka is important for the experiencing of objects. Vitakka is called the feet of the world, it keeps the world going. ------- > > > A: 2. Mary, from New Zealand, asked about kamma, said that she > couldn't accept that one's suffering (akusala vipaka) is due solely > to "one's own" akusala kamma done in the (even very distant) past, > rather than by some other "objective" causes (other people and so on). > > - Khun Sujin replied briefly but I don't remember what she said. ------ N: As we read in the suttas, we are heirs to the kamma we committed. Important to remember, otherwise you would blame other people or the situation you are in for unpleasant vipaaka. Understanding kamma and vipaaka will lead to more patience in any situation. -------- > > A: - I also said something on the subject, which I've also forgot, > but I've thought about this topic which is a tough one to accept > (and even more so to understand) and I think that the much used > simile of the seed and the fruit might still help: at harvest's > time we pick up what we have previoulsy sown, which in its turn is > what we want to harvest later, no quibble about that. > Do we apply this natural law to kamma and vipaka as well or rather > it is "my vipaka", regardless of the kamma, of which "we" (as such > or such person) may well not have even done? ------ N: We do not know which kamma produces vipaaka at this moment. Seeing pleasant or unpleasant objects is vipaaka, so are the other sense- cognitions. We need not think about which cause produces vipaaka in our life, but some cittas are vipaaka and immediately afterwards there are our reactions towards it, kusala or akusala. All are conditioned phenomena. I read to Lodewijk from my "Listening to the Dhamma": < The troubles in the world arise through lack of understanding. When we understand that our experiences at this moment arise because of the appropriate conditions we will be less inclined to correct other people. When they say unpleasant things or act in a disagreeable way they do so because of inclinations which have been accumulated from the past and therefore, how could we change them? We continued our conversation in the house of Ell and Ivan Walsh for several hours. Acharn Sujin reminded us that no matter what kind of problems arise, we can only solve them by remembering that in the ultimate sense there is no person, only citta, consciousness, cetasika, mental factors which accompany citta, and rpa. Citta and cetasika are nma. Each citta is accompanied by several cetasikas which arise together with the citta and fall away immediately together with the citta. The citta which falls away is succeeded by the next citta, and each citta conditions the next citta. Good and bad qualities are different cetasikas, they fall away together with the citta, but these qualities are accumulated from one moment of citta to the next moment of citta, from life to life. When we have more understanding that life is actually citta, cetasika and rpa, we will be less inclined to think of a "self", of this or that person who speaks or acts in a particular way towards "us". We make our life complicated when we think with worry about situations, about problems concerning people, about the way we should act in this or that situation. Instead of thinking of problems we should remember that there are only citta, cetasika and rpa. Thinking and worry are only nmas which arise because of conditions and which are beyond control. By right understanding of citta, cetasika and rpa problems can be solved in a more direct, effective way. > --------- > A: 3. Khun Sujin then brought the subject back to the realities > presently arising, seeing which can only see visible object and > then thinking that thinks about it as various concepts... ------ N: Very good. Thinking can think for a long, long time and when we do not think of daana, siila or bhaavana, thinking is akusala. It is mostly akusala. ------ Nina. #116638 From: Lukas Date: Sat Aug 6, 2011 1:52 am Subject: Depression and unseftyness szmicio Dear friends, We miss our bus to Poland, I feel a lot of unseftyness and a depression and dukkhadomanassa. The worst is not the fact we stuck here, but that we are weak. Each of us have its own problems. Best wishes Lukas #116639 From: "Kelvin" Date: Sat Aug 6, 2011 1:53 am Subject: Re: Appreciation of the Group kelvin_lwin Dear Sarah, > >While other traditions maps were there they are not available to us as a whole and an incomplete map is almost as bad as a wrong map because one can get stuck or be led through blind alleys. > ... > S: I'd just like to add that even with the very best map, one can still get lost and mis-read the map. As we know, the cinta-maya panna leading to the "proper bhavana-maya panna", doesn't depend on the quantity or detail in the map available, but the careful considering and wise reflecting based on the map, leading to the direct insight of dhammas. We have all come across example of scholars or translators who have access to the best maps but somehow end up losing the track all the same. K: Of course there's no shortage of ways to go wrong and Commentaries are an attempt to prevent that. But you 'chose' to study Theravada and consider and reflect whatever is taught in it. You focus on a certain passage and consider it, you don't jump all around. There are plenty of intentional actions arahants can do. What I cannot do is have complete control over the arising dhammas and have them be different. But there's so many arising at the present moment so surely it's integral to be able to at least select a particular factor to study. It may very well fail but after sufficient practice and skillful means one can certainly get better at it. It is not making one thing arise instead of another but really understanding the process. Otherwise there would be no hope of really experiencing it and having a clear understanding of anything, dhammas or concepts or what have you. I think Buddha's position and teaching is pretty clear on this control, atta and practice. As I said prior, we should realize he's explaining in 3D so really it makes no sense for us to keep arguing in 2D. Recall the description of Abhidhamma's accomplishment to taking the water in the sea and then being able to tell each droplet's source. We are always going to experience in compounded way with all the different sense-doors and factors overlaid upon each other. It's never going to be like each vithi process comes by itself and that's all you observe. Without means to be able to highlight certain parts amidst all that's going on, we cannot even infer the process. > S: Your comments on sila were also interesting. You've been considering carefully. As Pt mentioned, the texts refer to the following of sila by order, by natural inclination and through right understanding - cinta and bhavana-maya-panna. Only the last is a firm confindence in the value of abstaining from such harm and following the path which is harmless and wise. As Ken H mentioned, this follows from the understanding of namas and rupas, the growing confidence and removal of the doubt you referred to. K: To remove even the seeds of breakage of sila is pretty tough. Direct experience of the dhammas with irrefutable proof is going to be required. Even the flash of annoyance or impatience how it can build up and could potentially lead to breakage of sila at a momentary slip. Being able to guard all the sense-doos and remain unswayed was a trait well praised by Buddha but that also does not happen automatically. > >To me it was experiencing the compounded nature of our existence through sensations but being able to tune into different ones amidst this sea gave some glimpses of the different sense-doors and mental factors. > .... > S: Sounds suspiciously Goenka-ish. Through the body-sense, just the 3 elements of solidity, temperature and air can be experienced and known. This can only be when there is no selection at all:-) K: I am now a true devotee of Goenkaji and will invest all my efforts into his organization going forth. Before I did not understand how the technique will encompass cittanupassana or dhammanupassana but now I've seen how it is so. I believe this to be the vehicle to plant seeds that will give fruition for the next Sasana. As you said I was born in Burma and then grew up in America but mainly came for this purpose. It turns out I need the help of sensations to investigate deeper and without a proper anchor I was floundering. I know this to be my experience but it does not have the truth for others. > >Some reflection after gave rise to thoughts about anatta gave me better intellectual understanding of what I experienced so once again former discussions came to be very helpful. > .... > S: That's good and thx for mentioning it. Perhaps you would elaborate for others. I also appreciate your great appreciation of the wisdom of the Buddha and his teaching skills. K: I was vague on purpose because I think more details would only invite more debate. I almost don't have to read the posts to know what each of the old timers would say. Also the new members have very hardened positions that are readily apparent. Maybe I'm no different but at least I have the faith in Tipitaka to help me. Any misunderstanding is due to my own lack of ability and not the fault of the ancient ones. > S: Now only one comment in your message surprised me and it was this: > > K:> I share my merits with you all (except KenH). > ... > S: :-/ Perhaps next time you can share your merits with all without exception? K: haha it was a joke alluding to antagonistic role he played in my mind. I wish him more metta to overcome his past. I was also trying to mention as many members as it popped into my head. I think it became readily obvious to me that Buddha said what needed to be taught, no more and no less. So we should all be careful to not draw lines where he did not or chose not to. He had perfectly good reasons for doing so. That made me wish I was present in front of a living Buddha to express my gratitude. - Kel #116640 From: Ken O Date: Sat Aug 6, 2011 2:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Factors for predominance condition ashkenn2k Dear Phil >Oh, maybe I don't understand what you mean by "determining" factors. Determing >the arising of kusala javana cittas? Determining salvation? KO: When you one do good or bad, it is the kuala or akusala cetasikas that cause it to be good or bad. Paccaya is just describing that such root conditions which accompanying roots are putting an effect on the citta, cetasikas. they are just connectors and effects but they are not the one that will cause good and bad which are the root cetasikas themselves. Ken O #116641 From: "philip" Date: Sat Aug 6, 2011 3:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Factors for predominance condition philofillet Hi Ken O Paccaya is just describing that such root conditions > which accompanying roots are putting an effect on the citta, cetasikas. they > are just connectors and effects but they are not the one that will cause good > and bad which are the root cetasikas themselves. Sorry stll don't understand, the paccaya in this case is not the conditioning force of the hetu? What is "connection"if not. dhammas conditioning other dhammas? According to Nina's book all these four predominance factors can cause accomplishment of deeds if I understand correctly. Metta, Phil #116642 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Aug 6, 2011 7:33 am Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! kenhowardau Hi Robert K, ---- <. . .> RK: I do see your point about religions mishandling human relations with their well-meaning(?) pressure, but your comments about secular idealogies being superior re. sex I don't get. ---- KH: *As I understood* the question under discussion, it was: "What do you tell someone who doesn't want to be told there are ultimately only dhammas and no control? What do you tell someone who insists on the type of instructions that might be followed if there really was a controlling self? " As I understood Sarah's answer it was to consider the other people involved, how your would actions it affect them, and that sort of thing. A religious answer, on the other hand, is constrained by a set of inflexible, God-given laws: "Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou shalt . . ." Is that how you understood the question? Which type of answer do you think is better? Ken H #116643 From: "philip" Date: Sat Aug 6, 2011 8:52 am Subject: Visama lobha ( wsd [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! philofillet Hi Nina, I am giving you too many questions, please put them some on your back burner, no rush. I understand the below.And yet there is the teaching I remember from Vism about people's tendencies influenced by preponderance of all 6 hetus, for exampke greedy but non-hateful type, with little pannna. (Hi Phil!) That teaching says tgat is influenced by kusala and akusala roots. The two teachings seem contradictory, somehow. Is that Vism teaching a later addition by Buddhagosa or someone else? Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Phil, > Op 5-aug-2011, om 3:46 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > > Do you think that some people have more visama lobha as result of > > different preponderence of 6 roots at birth? > ----- > N: In the case of human birth, the rebirth-consciousness is kusala > vipaaka. It can be accompanied by two or three sobhana hetus, or, it > may be ahetuka, santiira.nacitta without hetus. In the latter case > one is handicapped from birth. > When there is an unhappy rebirth in an unhappy plane the rebirth- > consciousness is santiira.nacitta that is akusala vipaakacitta, > without hetus. There never are akusala hetus at rebirth. > As to visama lobha, this depends on someone's accumulated > inclinations. But inclinations can be changed. > ----- > Nina. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > #116644 From: "philip" Date: Sat Aug 6, 2011 9:07 am Subject: Visama lobha ( wsd [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! philofillet Hi again Nina, Oh, I see. That Vism teaching is about "inclinations, that can changed" as you say. Perhaps because inclinations are unlikely to change in this one lifetime it seems lije they are roots we are born with, but no. Monent by moment of understanding, and they begin to cgange, lije adding or subtracting pieces of gravel from a quarry pit, it will take time. No, not tgat image. In the simikes of samsara without beginning, such as rubbing that moyntain with a cloth, I think the point is to motivate samsara, not to feel resigned to immeasurable number of rebirths to come. I say tgat because rest of suttanta is more encouraging. I think it is unwise to pay too much attention to the satipatthana sutta's 7 months, 7 weeks, 7 days, but also unwise to firmly belueve that we are destined for aeons and aeons of rebirths, or tgat aeons will be required for tendencies to change dramatically. But I am unswratanding tgat my friendly but foolish and greedy tendencies will nor change dramatically in this lifetime. When I say foolish, I mean weak in penetrative insight, perceptions of annica, for example, not even that, my mibd doesn't work that way, and tgat's thd way it will be in this lifetime, I think, but whi knows? metta, phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Nina, I am giving you too many questions, please put them some on your back burner, no rush. > > I understand the below.And yet there is the teaching I remember from Vism about people's tendencies influenced by preponderance of all 6 hetus, for exampke greedy but non-hateful type, with little pannna. (Hi Phil!) That teaching says tgat is influenced by kusala and akusala roots. The two teachings seem contradictory, somehow. Is that Vism teaching a later addition by Buddhagosa or someone else? > > Metta, > Phil > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > > Dear Phil, > > Op 5-aug-2011, om 3:46 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > > > > Do you think that some people have more visama lobha as result of > > > different preponderence of 6 roots at birth? > > ----- > > N: In the case of human birth, the rebirth-consciousness is kusala > > vipaaka. It can be accompanied by two or three sobhana hetus, or, it > > may be ahetuka, santiira.nacitta without hetus. In the latter case > > one is handicapped from birth. > > When there is an unhappy rebirth in an unhappy plane the rebirth- > > consciousness is santiira.nacitta that is akusala vipaakacitta, > > without hetus. There never are akusala hetus at rebirth. > > As to visama lobha, this depends on someone's accumulated > > inclinations. But inclinations can be changed. > > ----- > > Nina. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > #116645 From: "philip" Date: Sat Aug 6, 2011 11:55 am Subject: Re: Smell etc, inseparable rupas philofillet Hi Nina (and Azita) > ------ > N: On account of experiences through the sense-doors there is > remembrance of: an apple or a person. It seems that they were there > already or can stay for a while. A person are only citta cetasika and > ruupa that do not stay for a moment, but we forget and we cling. Ph: Today I heard an old talk from India, A.S talking on this subject, a moment of awarenesd of rupa of the body, but then back to thinking of a person. It wax a talk where Azits said it suddenly became so clear for her, and Jon asked her to expand on that comment, and she (azita) did and it was also great. But it's gone now for me. Acharn Sujin really does have an amazing way of cutting through the fog, remarkable. I remember I had that feeling quite often sitting in the garden at Khun ?'s house... But the point remains for me that it about panna now, about the truth that beings are only concepts to understanding. But still believe they have their own existence. NIna, I read there is "wrong view rhat believes in a being, a person, a self." Are those three different variations of ditthi? I don't believe in the self, or persons, but I believe in beings, physiological being. I can only experience them as concepts, but I believe they have a physiological existence, and they only rise and fall away momentarily through the cognition/ perception process...is that a different ditthi than believing in an eternal self? Azita, did what you understood in that talk stick with you? I think it did, you've always been unwavering, we have to start with "no Nina" from the beginning etc... Metta, Phil > > < We read in the "Visuddhimagga" (XI, 92): > > "The air element that courses through all the limbs and has the > characteristic of moving and distending, being founded upon earth, > held together by water, and maintained by fire, distends this body. > And this body, being > distended by the latter kind of air, does not collapse, but stands > erect, and being propelled by the other (moving) air, it shows > intimation, and it flexes and extends and it wriggles the hands and > feet, doing so in the postures comprising walking, standing, sitting > and lying down. So this mechanism of elements carries on like a magic > trick, deceiving foolish people with the male and female sex and so on." > > We are deceived and infatuated by the outward appearance of a man or > a woman and we forget that this body is a "mechanism of elements" and > that it flexes and wriggles hands and feet, showing intimation by > gestures or speech, because of conditions.> > -------- > > > Ph: The purpose of Dhamma isn't to explain science, science only > > brings up poisoned arrow topics, I think, or other kinds of > > thinking that mislead us and waste our time and energy... > ----- > N: We do not have to discard science, but the point of view is > different. Science does not lead to detachment from the idea of self. > ------ > Nina. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > #116646 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Aug 6, 2011 8:37 am Subject: The Sun! bhikkhu5 Friends: Friendship is seeding the 7 links to Awakening! The Blessed Buddha once said: Just as dawn is the forerunner and the precursor of the rising of the Sun, exactly so is good and Noble friendship for any disciple the forerunner and the precursor of the mental emergence of the Seven Links to Awakening! When a Bhikkhu has a good and Noble friend, it is to be expected that he will develop and cultivate these 7 Links to Awakening. And how does a Bhikkhu who has a good & Noble friend develop & cultivate these 7 Links to Awakening? Here, friends, this Bhikkhu trains, develops, deepens, reinforces and refines: 1: The Awareness Link to Awakening: sati-sambojjhanga. 2: The Investigation Link to Awakening: dhammavicaya-sambojjhanga. 3: The Energy Link to Awakening: viriya-sambojjhanga. 4: The Joy Link to Awakening: pti-sambojjhanga. 5: The Tranquillity Link to Awakening: passaddhi-sambojjhanga. 6: The Concentration Link to Awakening: samdhi-sambojjhanga. 7: The Equanimity Link to Awakening: upekkh-sambojjhanga. based upon seclusion, disillusion, ceasing of craving, and culminating in release! It is in exactly in this way that any Bhikkhu, who has a good and Noble Friend, truly trains, grows, intensifies, reinforces & refines the 7 Links to Awakening... <....> Source edited extract: The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikya. Book [V: 101] section 46: The Links. 48: The Sun.... Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <....> #116647 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Aug 6, 2011 4:53 pm Subject: Re: "THE EXPERIENCE OF SAMADHI" szmicio Hi colette, I am strict to Theravada, so I cant read madhyamyka or whatever else. I strongly belive that Buddha's words are the only true words. Acharn Sujin told once: 'each word of Buddha is so true. Each moment the Buddha words can be verified.' Best wishes Lukas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "aubecolette" wrote: > > Sorry, Lucas, > > but as I have warned practitioners of Western Kabbalism and Hermetics, since 2004, "I am OPERATIONAL", "I'M PRACTICING". Buddhism and Vajrayana, Yogacara, et al, are new forms of the same practice I have. If I were to "have my way with you" (jokingly, mockingly) through your MISCONCEPTIONS then I am CAUSING SUFFERING. The book I am reading now is a very good depiction of the experience I had while learning PRANAYAMA, ca. 1985, without an instructor or any kind of support system to assist me through the rigors of PRANAYAMA. > > I do not for a second believe that you've attempted the breathing technique nor have you experienced the foundational changes in consciousness that the technique imposes upon the practitioner. > > I accept your conception of ASTRAL PROJECTION as having a significance and, thus a value, to the Jhana practiced that the book deals with. HOWEVER, I am still experiencing the bliss of the absorption and it's equanimity. Due to my IGNORANCE of how well the Buddhists have practiced and documented THE SAME PRODEDURES I've always performed (see "Timelessness"), I feel that it would be COUNTER PRODUCTIVE to my path. > > Make no mistake, the Jewish community of Skokie has a documention of characteristics that I possess in my technique, thus they have imposed upon me a "NO RENEWAL" restriction on this book that I had to have ordered through the INTERLIBRARY LOAN SYSTEM. And so, being "CALLED ON THE CARPET", I've gotta stay focused and held within this "consciousness of REALITY" so that I can finisah as much as possible of the book, knowing full well that I probably will not finish reading the book, MY FIRST TRY. > > And so my dilema, and our dilema, is illuminated, but it should not be cognized as a frustration or an aggrivation. It is to be accepted as nothing more than SOP and abandoned. If I ever get the financing to begin creating another personal library of "GRIMOIRES", then I already know the first five books of Buddhism that I will purchase to compose my library. The first book is CRAZY WISDOM. > > Though it is interesting why you would care to raise the issue of ASTRAL PROJECTION, in this context. It's far too early, as I've said, inm the process to bother with such a deviant "off ramp" as that. I'm in the jungle, my jungle, that I'm comfortable with and I have found a path that I have not yet experienced or known. It has amazing similarities to paths I have previously trodden, yet it is in the Buddhist and Hindu CONTEXT. Thus, it is a blatant RED FLAG to raise my awareness and consciousness as to the path I'm trodding. That is to say: "LOCK & LOAD", all safeties off, all arsenals active. OVERCONFIDENCE will invite me to LOWER MY DEFENSES, GUARD. > > In my elation of finding COMPANIONSHIP on this lonely path, I have already said that "I can do this", "I'm attacking this". I have known the concept of "MURDER BY FRIENDLY FIRE" since the late 60s and early 70s (the Nixon admin. from living in a suburb of Washington D.C. at that time) and so my acknowledgement and awareness of MY GUERRILLA TACTICS are paramount i.e. lay back and absorb the conflict first, examine, then act. NO SIR, my enemy is SOP and the lethargy of INSTITUTIONALISATION. > > Thank you for you commetns and advice. > > toodles, > colette > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > > > Hi colette, > > I think you may be pretty much involved in astral projections, lucid dreams or out of body exeperiences. I also used to be involved to that, and from my experience I know that this is not kusala. Cause the point of the teachings is like understanding the 4 Noble Truths, that will bring the eradiction of kilesas(very different than normal samadhi experiences). And I think if you mention akasa, a space here during samatha this may be samatha with wrong view involved. So this is pleasant experience only, but I am not sure if this goes with right understanding. > #116648 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 7, 2011 12:03 am Subject: Re: Visama lobha ( wsd [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! nilovg Dear Phil, Op 6-aug-2011, om 0:52 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > I understand the below.And yet there is the teaching I remember > from Vism about people's tendencies influenced by preponderance of > all 6 hetus, for exampke greedy but non-hateful type, with little > pannna. (Hi Phil!) That teaching says tgat is influenced by kusala > and akusala roots. The two teachings seem contradictory, somehow. > Is that Vism teaching a later addition by Buddhagosa or someone else? ----- N: No contradiction. I was explaining about the rebirth- consciousness, the first moment of life. Which roots arise more often during life depends on someone's accumulated inclinations. ----- Nina. #116649 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 7, 2011 12:10 am Subject: Re: Visama lobha ( wsd [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! nilovg Dear Philip, Op 6-aug-2011, om 1:07 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > I think it is unwise to pay too much attention to the satipatthana > sutta's 7 months, 7 weeks, 7 days, but also unwise to firmly > belueve that we are destined for aeons and aeons of rebirths, or > tgat aeons will be required for tendencies to change dramatically. ------ N: 7 months, who knows, it depends on whether the practice is in accordance with this. As to the aeons, not so strange when realising how much ignorance has already been accumulated for aeons. But all this is thinking and one may forget that thinking is only a fleeting dhamma, not all that important. The aeons can remind one that patience, courage, endurance are needed. And above all: understanding of the present moment. Step by step, but it is not impossible. Think of the sutta Howard often quotes: abandon evil, if this would be impossible, I would not ask you to do this. Lodewijk likes this sutta, he read it aloud for all in the bus in India. ------ Nina. #116650 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 7, 2011 12:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Smell etc, inseparable rupas nilovg Dear Phil, Op 6-aug-2011, om 3:55 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Acharn Sujin really does have an amazing way of cutting through > the fog, remarkable. I remember I had that feeling quite often > sitting in the garden at Khun ?'s house... ------ N: Yes, clear and direct, solving misunderstandings. ------ > > Ph: But the point remains for me that it about panna now, about the > truth that beings are only concepts to understanding. But still > believe they have their own existence. ----- N: The khandhas we call Nina are different from the khandhas we call Phil. But we forget that khandhas are khandhas, impermanent phenomena that do not stay. They fall away and then there are new khandhas again which causes us to think that there are persons that stay. ------ > > Ph: NIna, I read there is "wrong view rhat believes in a being, a > person, a self." Are those three different variations of ditthi? ----- N: A being includes any living being, such as an insect. A person, a self or attaa. Even a dish, something outside can be taken for attaa, having a core or substance. Kh Sujin explained about attaanudi.t.thi. --------- > Ph: I don't believe in the self, or persons, but I believe in > beings, physiological being. I can only experience them as > concepts, but I believe they have a physiological existence, and > they only rise and fall away momentarily through the cognition/ > perception process...is that a different ditthi than believing in > an eternal self? ------- N: Many varieties of di.t.thi. All conditioned phenomena, all conditioned dhammas arise and fall away, no matter it is cognized or not. They take their own course. -------- > > Ph: Azita, did what you understood in that talk stick with you? I > think it did, you've always been unwavering, we have to start with > "no Nina" from the beginning etc... ------- N: No Nina who exists and stays. Think of the khandhas we call Nina. Momentary naamas and ruupas. -------- Nina. #116651 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 7, 2011 12:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] attachment and delight nilovg Dear Phil, Op 4-aug-2011, om 16:58 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > "We should have patience towards a desirable object so that lobha > does not arise, so that there is no attachment and delight in > visible object and the other sense objects that appear." > > When you write "attachment and delight" are you thinking of a > particularly strong form of lobha, the kind that Sarah told me > about the other day, I forget the Pali now, the strong lobha that > can condition bad deeds? As for ordinary lobha, it is always always > there, isn't it? Even when sanna recognizes a tree, there is lobha, > we want to recognize things, lobha with every object. Is it this > ordinary kind of lobha or strong forms of lobha when AS says "so > there is no attachment and delight?" ------ N: Any kind or shade of lobha. Through satipa.t.thaana there can be more patience towards whatever object appears. At that moment the sensedoors are guarded, one is not taken in or overwhelmed by the object nor deluded, not even by ordinary lobha. Lobha may be 'ordinary' but it is still lobha. One is so used to it that one does not know that there is lobha after seeing. It may be accompanied by indifferent feeling, and then we are not so delighted. Actually, it is dangerous if ordinary lobha is not known, because one may take it for calm. Then, when in a quiet place where there are no temptations, one may cultivate wrong samaadhi, taking for calm what is ordinary lobha. ------- Nina. #116652 From: Ken O Date: Sun Aug 7, 2011 1:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Factors for predominance condition ashkenn2k Dear Philip without the root cetasika will that be root conditioning. It is craving and ignorance that cause rebirth and not the paccaya of the craving and ignorance. Paccaya shows the relationships between the cetasikas and cittas and rupa and how they interlink together to cause rebirth, but they are not the cause of rebirth. Just like the spideweb is made by the spider, without the spider where is the spider web. So the cessation of the craving and ignorance leads to the cessation of conditioned dhammas. You do not see in the text - the cessation of paccaya lead to the cessation of conditioned dhammas. If paccaya is the cause of rebirth, then there is no salvation; since they could rise alone without root cetasikas, then the cycle will not stop even if craving and igorance have ceased. Paccaya is the web but not the spider. It is hard to look at the web that is intricate but it is easy to find the spider. IMHO, that is why paccaya is the last of the book, because it is very intricate. Citta and Cetasika and rupa are first to be taught because it is easier to identify their presence Predominance means it exerts a signifant influence but not the cause (root cetasikas). In my personal opinion, it is the cause that we must be mindful and it is the understanding of the nature of the cause that leads to development. thanks Ken O > > > >Hi Ken O > > Paccaya is just describing that such root conditions >> which accompanying roots are putting an effect on the citta, cetasikas. they >> are just connectors and effects but they are not the one that will cause good >> and bad which are the root cetasikas themselves. > >Sorry stll don't understand, the paccaya in this case is not the conditioning >force of the hetu? What is "connection"if not. dhammas conditioning other >dhammas? According to Nina's book all these four predominance factors can cause >accomplishment of deeds if I understand correctly. > #116653 From: "philip" Date: Sun Aug 7, 2011 1:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Factors for predominance condition philofillet Hi Ken O > without the root cetasika will that be root conditioning. It is craving and > ignorance that cause rebirth and not the paccaya of the craving and > ignorance. Paccaya shows the relationships between the cetasikas and cittas and > rupa and how they interlink together to cause rebirth, but they are not the > cause of rebirth. Just like the spideweb is made by the spider, without the > spider where is the spider web. > Paccaya is the web but not the spider. It is hard to look at the web that is > intricate but it is easy to find the spider. IMHO, that is why paccaya is the > last of the book, because it is very intricate. Citta and Cetasika and rupa are > first to be taught because it is easier to identify their presence Ph: Ok, now I understand, the spider and the web simile is very good. Of course when I think about paccayas I know that there are cetasikas at work and that they are the key, not the web itself. But I do find thinking in terms of a web is good for understanding anatta. In Nina's book: "Lobha cetasika is not a predominant factor but lobha mula citta, citta rooted in attachment, can be a predominance condition, as we have seen." So you would object to this and say that it is not the citta rooted in lobha, but tge lobha itself that is predominant? Elsewhere Nina writes "lobha is attached to the object it experiences but it cannot accomplish anything." Don't you agree with this?How about saying tgat with kusala (salvation, as you say) there must be predominant cetasikas like virya, chanda, panna, but with akusala, sliding away from wholesome states, lobha cannot be predominant for the reason Nina writes above, but citta rooted in moha lobha is predominant? Thanks Ken. I have never managed to discuss paccayas before. I know I am attracted tgem because they feel related to the deepest wisdom, and that feels good (i.e lobha is involved, tons of it) but there can also be a liitle loosening of clinging to self involved as well... Metta, Phil Metta, Phil > Predominance means it exerts a signifant influence but not the cause (root > cetasikas). In my personal opinion, it is the cause that we must be mindful > and it is the understanding of the nature of the cause that leads to > development. > > > > thanks > Ken O > > > > > > > > >Hi Ken O > > > > Paccaya is just describing that such root conditions > >> which accompanying roots are putting an effect on the citta, cetasikas. they > > > >> are just connectors and effects but they are not the one that will cause good > > > >> and bad which are the root cetasikas themselves. > > > >Sorry stll don't understand, the paccaya in this case is not the conditioning > >force of the hetu? What is "connection"if not. dhammas conditioning other > >dhammas? According to Nina's book all these four predominance factors can cause > > >accomplishment of deeds if I understand correctly. > > > #116654 From: "philip" Date: Sun Aug 7, 2011 3:14 pm Subject: Visama lobha philofillet Hi Nina and all In the "attachment and delight" thread Nina told us that normal lobha is dangerous too, we should eliminate all lobha. I think normal lobha is close to inevitable, fron the moment of birth to the last breath. I think the Buddha taught about visama lobha for a reason, there must be conditions to work on weakening visama lobha first. I suspect that giving the mind pleasant, relatively non-harmful sources of lobha can help create conditions to weaken the power of visama lobha. I think of my "meditation" , there is plenty of lobha, but it conditions resistance to visama lobha. For example, one factor that is encouraging abstaining from illicit sex is knowledge that my pkeasant meditation will be taken from me by powerful remorse and worry re the bad deed. Another example is the story of tge cleavage on the train. I opened my eyes ftom "meditation" to find myself face to face with half-exposed breasts. But the "meditation" had been so pleasant that there was a natuaral, effortless return to it. The breaths beat the breasts. (Breasts are not bad, but if I had looked at them in a way rgat made the woman uncomfortable it would have been toxic behaviour, toxic kamma, even if the woman had been dressed in a way that invited it.) I say let's do whatever is effective to weaken visama lobha, even if normal lobha is involved, as it always is in anything we do, including thinking about Dhamma.,. Of course someday there has to be eradication of all forms of lobha...but is that noble eradication anywhere near enough to necessitate worrying about normal lobha now? Nina, of course I know you are not saying we should worry about normal lobha, just understand that it is also dangerous. Metta, Phil p.s posting a lot these days, sorry if it's excessive, will be starting an i-phone fast tomorrow... #116655 From: "azita" Date: Sun Aug 7, 2011 3:34 pm Subject: Re: Smell etc, inseparable rupas gazita2002 hallo Phil, > Hi Nina (and Azita) > > Ph: Today I heard an old talk from India, A.S talking on this subject, a moment of awarenesd of rupa of the body, but then back to thinking of a person. It wax a talk where Azits said it suddenly became so clear for her, and Jon asked her to expand on that comment, and she (azita) did and it was also great. But it's gone now for me. Acharn Sujin really does have an amazing way of cutting through the fog, remarkable. I remember I had that feeling quite often sitting in the garden at Khun ?'s house... > Azita, did what you understood in that talk stick with you? I think it did, you've always been unwavering, we have to start with "no Nina" from the beginning etc... azita: gosh, Phil, wish I could say yes, but I honestly dont remember what it was that 'suddenly became clear to me' - mayb a moment of brief understanding followed by moha or attachment to 'my' understanding. I am currently in Bkk and went to foundation yesterday where we discussed things like 'cheating dhammas' which I found to be a very interesting topic, bec firstly didnt know anything about them and secondly it became clear that unless there is understanding of presently arising phenomena, 'we' can be fooled into thinking that what is really akusala is kusala. The discussion generally always come back to right understanding of present moment. If there is no correct knowledge of here and now, NOW, then when will there be? One of my questions was how does clinging condition bhava [existence]. I couldnt see how clinging now could be condition for future existence, but it became obvious that clinging can condition kusala/akusala kamma pattha and that leads to further/future becoming. Why dont you make another trip over here Phil? It would be great to have you in the discussion group again. Patience, courage and goodcheer, azita #116656 From: "philip" Date: Sun Aug 7, 2011 5:46 pm Subject: Re: Smell etc, inseparable rupas philofillet Hi Azita > I am currently in Bkk and went to foundation yesterday where we discussed things like 'cheating dhammas' which I found to be a very interesting topic, bec firstly didnt know anything about them and secondly it became clear that unless there is understanding of presently arising phenomena, 'we' can be fooled into thinking that what is really akusala is kusala. Ph: Interesting. As you know, I tend to say that I suspect "awareness of realities" may invole a lot of thinking with attachment to being aware of realities, and that could be a good exmple of cheating dhammas, but there are times when I'm listening to A.S that those suspicions fall away and there is confidence that there can be such awareness. I have to say listening to her and onded other people at times does that more than reading at DSG, I don't know why listening has that effect for me. I tried to find your great little talk but couldn't, it's somewhere in India 2004! I've used up all my extra holidays for this year but will certainky be back in Thailand next year, see you then. Metta, Phil > The discussion generally always come back to right understanding of present moment. If there is no correct knowledge of here and now, NOW, then when will there be? > One of my questions was how does clinging condition bhava [existence]. I couldnt see how clinging now could be condition for future existence, but it became obvious that clinging can condition kusala/akusala kamma pattha and that leads to further/future becoming. > Why dont you make another trip over here Phil? It would be great to have you in the discussion group again. > > Patience, courage and goodcheer, > azita > #116657 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Aug 7, 2011 5:52 pm Subject: Visama lobha ( wsd [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! szmicio Hi Phil, All word of Buddha is perfect. Also Thera's words are so perfect and accurate to the reality. 7 days, 7 weeks, 7 months this is perfect exposition of the time needed. I think this is good to check commentaries on that sevens. They may clear out a lot. The aeons, as Nina told, this is really slow path. Yesterday I had a discussion of practice and I mentioned that no progress at all, just usual daily life that is needed for development. Very slow way, very natural, It does not make to stop any akusala. The same old things appear as Bhante Dhammadhara mentioned. We could not change them. They need to come. Best wishes Lukas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Philip, > Op 6-aug-2011, om 1:07 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > > I think it is unwise to pay too much attention to the satipatthana > > sutta's 7 months, 7 weeks, 7 days, but also unwise to firmly > > belueve that we are destined for aeons and aeons of rebirths, or > > tgat aeons will be required for tendencies to change dramatically. > ------ > N: 7 months, who knows, it depends on whether the practice is in > accordance with this. As to the aeons, not so strange when realising > how much ignorance has already been accumulated for aeons. But all > this is thinking and one may forget that thinking is only a fleeting > dhamma, not all that important. The aeons can remind one that > patience, courage, endurance are needed. And above all: understanding > of the present moment. Step by step, but it is not impossible. Think > of the sutta Howard often quotes: abandon evil, if this would be > impossible, I would not ask you to do this. Lodewijk likes this > sutta, he read it aloud for all in the bus in India. > ------ > Nina. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > #116658 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Aug 7, 2011 8:45 am Subject: The inevitable Problem... bhikkhu5 Friends: The inevitable and ever returning problem: Death! All health ends in sickness, all youth ends in ageing, all life ends in assured death! All worldly being begins with birth, is haunted by ageing, surprised by sickness, and struck down by death, often in a state of desperate panic and frantic fear... As though if huge mountains made of rock so vast that they reach up into the sky, were to attack from every side, grinding & crunching beneath them all that lives, so indeed do Ageing and Death roll over all beings, whether gods, kings, warriors, priests, merchants, craftsmen, poor, or animals, crushing all beings, sparing none! And neither armies, nor guards, nor medicines, nor spells, or riches, can even delay this by a single second! (SN I 102). Death should thus be remembered as the ruin of success by seeing it as the final & unavoidable wrecking of any life's success! Vism I 232 How short this life! You die this side of a century, but even if you live past, you die of old age... Sutta Nipta 4.810 SURPRISE! Death carries off the man while distracted by gathering flowers of sensual pleasures, exactly & even so as a great flood carries away a sleeping village. Dhammapada Illustration 47 Background Story 47 OFF GUARD Death sweeps away the man distracted, not yet had his fill of sensual pleasures, even as he gathers these flowers. Dhammapada Illustration 48 Background Story 48 DRIVEN Exactly as a cowherd drives the cows forward, even & exactly so do aging, sickness & death drive all beings forwards towards the End. Dhammapada Illustration 135 Background Story 135 BEYOND But those who listen and act accordingly when the depth of Dhamma is revealed, they indeed cross beyond this realm of Death so hard to overcome Dhammapada Illustration 86 Background Story 85_86 END-MAKER Neither in the distant space, nor in the deepest ocean, nor in the darkest cave, can anyone escape the crushing fact of Death ...!!! Dhammapada Illustration 128 Background Story 128 AWARE OF FACTS The man who understands this inevitable death, if clever, lives morally pure, while keenly clearing with great urge his path to Nibbana. Dhammapada Illustration 289 Background Story 288-289 <....> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <....> #116659 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 7, 2011 10:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Factors for predominance condition nilovg Dear Phil, Op 4-aug-2011, om 17:20 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > From the book: "When we accomplish a task with cittas which are > resolute, firmly established in kusala, the citta can be the > predominance-condition for the accompanying dhammas." > > In other words the hetus themselves are so strong that there is no > need for virya and chanda to lend them support? > Or virya and chanda are there as well, but just not predominant. > Virya is there except for a few kinds of cittas. But chanda? Does > it only arise when it is predominance condition? ------- N: Only one predominance factor at a time can be predominance- condition. We cannot say: because the hetus are so strong, because each of these factors can be predominance-condition only when the citta has at least two roots. Indeed, viriya and chanda are there as well, but at that moment they are not predominance-condition. Chanda arises with many cittas not only when it is predominance- condition. It does not arise with moha-muulacitta nor with ahetuka cittas. It arises with all lobha-muulacittas, all dosa-muulacittas and all sobhana cittas. ------ Nina. Messages: Show Message Summaries (Group by Topic) Sort by Date ^ #116660 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 7, 2011 11:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visama lobha nilovg Dear Phil, Op 7-aug-2011, om 7:14 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > In the "attachment and delight" thread Nina told us that normal > lobha is dangerous too, we should eliminate all lobha. I think > normal lobha is close to inevitable, fron the moment of birth to > the last breath. I think the Buddha taught about visama lobha for a > reason, there must be conditions to work on weakening visama lobha > first. > ----- N: In satipa.t.thaana there is no first and following with regard to the object of awareness, it all depends on the sati what object it takes. No one can select. ------ > Ph: I suspect that giving the mind pleasant, relatively non-harmful > sources of lobha can help create conditions to weaken the power of > visama lobha. > ----- N: Lesser lobha to cure big lobha? In that case not kusala, but lobha is accumulated. What about understanding of any object that appears? Besides, there is no person who can arrange for this or that. Today you may succeed, the next day it is all failure. ------- > Ph: I think of my "meditation" , there is plenty of lobha, but it > conditions resistance to visama lobha. For example, one factor that > is encouraging abstaining from illicit sex is knowledge that my > pkeasant meditation will be taken from me by powerful remorse and > worry re the bad deed. > ----- N: Your examples occurred because of conditions. Conditioned thinking, going on and on. When you think of one thing, the meditation subject, there is no time to think of something else. No you who could create objects. ------ > > Ph: I say let's do whatever is effective to weaken visama lobha, > even if normal lobha is involved, as it always is in anything we > do, including thinking about Dhamma. > ------- N: You make it appears whether there is always normal lobha, but that is too much. There can be thinking of Dhamma without lobha. Studying it in order to have more understanding of realities. You ascribe too big a role to lobha. It arises more often than we would imagine, but there are also kusala cittas without lobha. Kusala can be accumulated. ------- > Ph: ,.Of course someday there has to be eradication of all forms of > lobha...but is that noble eradication anywhere near enough to > necessitate worrying about normal lobha now? Nina, of course I know > you are not saying we should worry about normal lobha, just > understand that it is also dangerous. > ------ N: Any degree of akusala is a danger, one accumulates more of the same. But for now let us think just of understanding. That is why the Buddha taught us Dhamma. There is no need to name realities lobha, ordinary lobha, or visama lobha. We have to learn characteristics when they appear, little by little. First know the difference between naama and ruupa. Before that it is not possible to have clear understanding of different naamas. Naama should be known as naama and ruupa as ruupa, not mixing them. Nina. #116661 From: "philip" Date: Sun Aug 7, 2011 11:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visama lobha philofillet Hi Nina, thanks again for all your feedback. > > > ------- > N: You make it appears whether there is always normal lobha, but that > is too much. There can be thinking of Dhamma without lobha. Studying > it in order to have more understanding of realities. You ascribe too > big a role to lobha. It arises more often than we would imagine, but > there are also kusala cittas without lobha. Kusala can be accumulated. Ph: Well, I know I was greatly impressed by Acharn Sujin's talk on dome of lobha, jyst a few openings, and from you I have learned tgat for kusala to arise there must be a concurrence of many dhammas, learned it was rare. And it feels to me that there is lobha and desire to be happy when I study Dhamma. I ascribe it to other people, that is wrong. But for mr there is seeking mental comfort throughDhamma. I want to improve the state of the khandas. Of course some rare moments of detached awareness > ------ > N: Any degree of akusala is a danger, one accumulates more of the > same. But for now let us think just of understanding. That is why the > Buddha taught us Dhamma. There is no need to name realities lobha, > ordinary lobha, or visama lobha. We have to learn characteristics > when they appear, little by little. First know the difference between > naama and ruupa. Before that it is not possible to have clear > understanding of different naamas. Naama should be known as naama and > ruupa as ruupa, not mixing them. Ph: You are right,well said. And my talk of using lesser lobha to battle greater lobha was dumb,I take it back. It may go on by conditions, but not as some sort of intentional program. Thanks. Metta, Phil > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > #116662 From: "philip" Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 12:02 am Subject: Visama lobha ( wsd [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! philofillet Hi Lukas, yes let's be patient. But i think it is too fatalistic to say "we could not stop them, they need to come," There is the sutta passage that is so oftenquoted here, avoid evil and do good, monks, if it were not possible, I would not tell you to do it... If you drink alcohol or do drugss because you feel there is no way to resist the conditions, it is very sad. If we are doing bad things, habitually, against the precepts in my opinion we should not touch deep teachings about conditions, or we will make excuses to carry on with bad behaviour. I can feel myself doing so with the temptation to have sex with the married woman. If I do, I will put away the book on paccayas and stop posting about deep topics, I promise you. Studying the deep Dhamma is a treat to myself wwhen I am behaving well. I know that doesn't aound like very good Dhamma, but so be it. Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Hi Phil, > All word of Buddha is perfect. Also Thera's words are so perfect and accurate to the reality. > > 7 days, 7 weeks, 7 months this is perfect exposition of the time needed. I think this is good to check commentaries on that sevens. They may clear out a lot. > > The aeons, as Nina told, this is really slow path. Yesterday I had a discussion of practice and I mentioned that no progress at all, just usual daily life that is needed for development. Very slow way, very natural, It does not make to stop any akusala. The same old things appear as Bhante Dhammadhara mentioned. We could not change them. They need to come. > > Best wishes > Lukas > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > > Dear Philip, > > Op 6-aug-2011, om 1:07 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > > > > I think it is unwise to pay too much attention to the satipatthana > > > sutta's 7 months, 7 weeks, 7 days, but also unwise to firmly > > > belueve that we are destined for aeons and aeons of rebirths, or > > > tgat aeons will be required for tendencies to change dramatically. > > ------ > > N: 7 months, who knows, it depends on whether the practice is in > > accordance with this. As to the aeons, not so strange when realising > > how much ignorance has already been accumulated for aeons. But all > > this is thinking and one may forget that thinking is only a fleeting > > dhamma, not all that important. The aeons can remind one that > > patience, courage, endurance are needed. And above all: understanding > > of the present moment. Step by step, but it is not impossible. Think > > of the sutta Howard often quotes: abandon evil, if this would be > > impossible, I would not ask you to do this. Lodewijk likes this > > sutta, he read it aloud for all in the bus in India. > > ------ > > Nina. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > #116663 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 12:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Visama lobha nilovg Dear Phil, Op 7-aug-2011, om 15:37 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > . But for me there is seeking mental comfort throughDhamma. ------ N: Different cittas, but do not deny the kusala that arises, same as in the case of visiting your parents. The Dhamma is our refuge the Buddha said. The Buddha comforted people who were in distress. But it seems that you keep looking in all corners: is there some hidden lobha? Perhaps too much thinking? But also this is a conditioned dhamma. Nina. #116664 From: Ken O Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 6:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Factors for predominance condition ashkenn2k Dear Phil > > >In Nina's book: "Lobha cetasika is not a predominant factor but lobha mula >citta, citta rooted in attachment, can be a predominance condition, as we have >seen." So you would object to this and say that it is not the citta rooted in >lobha, but tge lobha itself that is predominant? Elsewhere Nina writes "lobha is > >attached to the object it KO: hetu paccaya is not a predominance condition. According the to Guide to Conditional Relations, he roots, which are firmly fixed to the ground, (1) take up water and soluble nutriments and constantly feed the trees for their growth and development and (2) keep the trees firmly fixed to the groudn to prevent from falling down when they are blown about by winds or push against. In the same book, there are two predmoniance condition (adhipati paccaya), object predominance and conascence predmoninance. (i) In Kusa jataka, Pabhavati visible object, as the conditioning state of object-predmoninance, became the condition for King Kusa successive minds of greed. Conascence predominance are chanda, effort, citta and panna. So lobha mula citta are not predominanace. Pre-demoninace is like the momentum of a moving car, or like the fly that caught in the web and cause vibrations to the spider who will react tnd then catch it. The cause of the vibration is the predominance factor of the spider and the reaction is the greed. The more vibrations the more greed it arise. But it is the greed that is the one that make the spider react while the vibrations keep wanting the spider attention towards the object that cause the vibration. Without greed, any pre-dominance of an object will not effect to those without greed like an Arahant. Pre-dominance play a significant influence that cause the greed to rise again and again but not greed itself that cause the action. It is greed itself that cause rebirth and not pre-dominance. Ken O #116665 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 6:58 am Subject: The Boat! bhikkhu5 Friends: What brings beings over the Sea of Suffering? The Blessed Buddha once explained the means and method to escape pain: One should respect an intelligent one, from whom one can learn the Dhamma, just as the deities respect & honour their divine god Indra. Then with clear and elevated mind, he will reveal the Dhamma to one, when he is respected! If one cultivates such a great man carefully, making it his/her aim to listen and learn attentively, entering upon the Dhamma, and upon what conforms with the Dhamma, then his/her understanding will become clever & subtle! However, if one associates with the petty & envious fool, who has no direct experience of the aim, then one will die still pestered by perplexing doubts! Since how can a man, who has been dragged down into a swift-flowing river, who is been carried along with the current, ever help any others to cross? Similarly, how can one who has not learned the Dhamma, & has not listened to the explanations given by the learned ones, who is ignorant of it himself, and has not overcome doubt, help others to realize the stainless certainty? Just as one embarking upon a strong boat, with well build oars and rudder, could bring many others across there, being clever, considerate, knowing well how to do it. In exactly the same way can one, who is self-developed, who understands, who is learned and imperturbable make others realize it, if they have got the capacity to understand, and the willingness to listen... Therefore should one cultivate only a good man, who is clever and learned! Understanding the meaning, walking the Way by knowing the true Dhamma, one will thereby plunge into happiness... Sn 316-323 The Boat of Dhamma ferries beings across suffering to Happiness! On this Dhamma as Teaching, Tool and Vehicle: Dhamma_Contemplation , Dhamma_Presence , Simple_Core123 , Be_Good , Supreme_ Triumph Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * http://What-Buddha-Said.net The Boat! #116666 From: "philip" Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 8:12 am Subject: Re: Visama lobha philofillet Hi Nina (p.s to Ken O) Yes, the Buddha comforted people in distress, let's praise him and be grateful for that. Yes, I am aware of lobha everywhere, at the root of activites. AS and her students assume lobha and wrong view behind what is known as meditation today, perhaps there can be more generosity and less assuming that there is akusala when you consider meditation. Actually in talks, on several times I have heard you bring up tge possibility, perhaps prompted by Lodewijk, that wanting to go on a retreat to have a quiet place is not wrong. But thank you Nina. I talk a lot about lobha but that does not mean that I am failing to take refuge in the teaching, much joy and gratitude for tge teaching. and how much less I would understand were it not for having come across DSG and AS and you and your books. Ok, i-phone break starts today, during my vacation. Will be back with more questions soon. Metta, Phil p.s thanks Ken O, I will think about what you have written. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Phil, > Op 7-aug-2011, om 15:37 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > > . But for me there is seeking mental comfort throughDhamma. > ------ > N: Different cittas, but do not deny the kusala that arises, same as > in the case of visiting your parents. The Dhamma is our refuge the > Buddha said. The Buddha comforted people who were in distress. But it > seems that you keep looking in all corners: is there some hidden > lobha? Perhaps too much thinking? But also this is a conditioned dhamma. > Nina. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > #116667 From: "philip" Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 3:14 pm Subject: Re: Visama lobha philofillet Hi Nina (p.s to pt and Sarah) A final question/friendly complaint. Several times in your books how many cetasikas must arise concurrently for there to be kusala, there is a stressing that kusala us very rare. Why are you telling me now that it isn't? Is it because I am talking about the rarity of kusala when listening to and reflecting on the Dhamma rather than in meditation. You will probably say that tgere is more lobha involved in meditation, but I will say again that in my awarerness there is more lobha involved in the mental manipulation of concepts about paramattha dhammas and application of them onto life situations/trouble rhan there is in sittung and watching mind states coming and going durung mediration. Well, that is very clearly tge case for me, but it could be a natter of my accumulations, so I shouldn't assume it is the case for everyone. I guess it isn't, because I have proposed this many times, and no student of AS has ever said I know what you mean.... ...anyways, I will leave it there. You might notice tgat I am getting closer to sricking to questions and am moving away from voicing this same complaint again and again, let's see if that continues... Thanks again, Nina. I just finished writing down quotations from the virya chapter in perfections, it is so good I ended up filling 8 pages of a notebook! Metta, Phil P.S to Sarah and pt, thanks again for your support. I'm happy to say that I am continuing to play squash with the woman (difficult to find such a competitive partner and a grwat game of squash is worth risking Hell for) but we have had several good talks that deflated the sexual energy in our relationship, so far at least. There is a lot of confudence that that will continue and you two were v. important in fostering that confidence. BTW Sarah, when I said you (plural) failed to prevent me from doing rhat bad thing some ywars ago, I didn't mean directly, right before I went to Canada. I meant indirectly, the idea that precepts are not akin to prohibitions, a slack idea that exists not only at DSG (for example, nobody comes out to challenge Ken H's disgraceful belittling of the precepts,well Rob K did, a bit) but elsewhere in the West, prohibitions are so uncool in the West... Anyways, you really came through as Dhamma friends,thanks. Over and out until next week! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > > Hi Nina (p.s to Ken O) > > Yes, the Buddha comforted people in distress, let's praise him and be grateful for that. > > Yes, I am aware of lobha everywhere, at the root of activites. AS and her students assume lobha and wrong view behind what is known as meditation today, perhaps there can be more generosity and less assuming that there is akusala when you consider meditation. Actually in talks, on several times I have heard you bring up tge possibility, perhaps prompted by Lodewijk, that wanting to go on a retreat to have a quiet place is not wrong. > > But thank you Nina. I talk a lot about lobha but that does not mean that I am failing to take refuge in the teaching, much joy and gratitude for tge teaching. and how much less I would understand were it not for having come across DSG and AS and you and your books. > > Ok, i-phone break starts today, during my vacation. Will be back with more questions soon. > > Metta, > Phil > > p.s thanks Ken O, I will think about what you have written. > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > > Dear Phil, > > Op 7-aug-2011, om 15:37 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > > > > . But for me there is seeking mental comfort throughDhamma. > > ------ > > N: Different cittas, but do not deny the kusala that arises, same as > > in the case of visiting your parents. The Dhamma is our refuge the > > Buddha said. The Buddha comforted people who were in distress. But it > > seems that you keep looking in all corners: is there some hidden > > lobha? Perhaps too much thinking? But also this is a conditioned dhamma. > > Nina. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > #116668 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 3:33 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! ptaus1 Hi KenH, > > Pt:As mentioned, my understanding is that abstention can be generalized into three different levels: > -------- > > KH: What sort of abstention are we talking about here? Are we talking about kusala citta with virati cetasika? Or we talking about a concept? pt: Well, both. In the first two cases, I think citta that's accompanied with abstention would have a concept as the object, while the third case would have a dhamma as object of citta. > > Pt: 1. without understanding, when one abstains because of intellectual beliefs like - god will punish me, it's the law, etc. > 2. with intelectual understanding, when one intellectually understands what'll be the detrimental consequences of a deed, and thus abstains. > 3. with direct understanding, when there's recognition of craving for this, or against that, as anatta. > > > I believe that out of these three, the one you are most in favor of is the last one > -------------- > > KH: Yes, but all of those are kusala cittas, aren't they? And kusala is always good. pt: Hm, well I assume that the first two could still be abstention with akusala cittas. That wouldn't be Buddhism, but I guess there's marginal value in substituting a potential akusala kamma patha with akusala of lesser strength. At best, it prevents rebirth in hell for a time, though it accumulates akusala, and will likely lead to more trouble. As for when the first two are kusala, they can still be without actual arising of panna of satipatthana kind, and so, these moments won't lead to eradication of defilements. As for benefits, these still keep you in the round, but at least you get the senses as a potential kusala result and then possibly get to hear the Dhamma. A long shot. > KH: The whole point of this conversation is that we are talking about concepts. Adultery and marriage are concepts, aren't they? > > When the Buddha spoke about abstention from adultery, he was actually talking about citta and cetasikas. You won't find a dhamma called marriage or adultery. pt: I think it's useful to consider this in practical terms as per one's capacities.We can use conventional terms like adultery to refer to akusala kamma patha and the other way around. The actual difference will be how one gets to experience the moment of that akusala kamma patha or abstention from the same. If there's panna, one can describe it/understand as you do, in terms of dhammas. If there's no panna, one will understand/describe it as adultery, on an intelectual level. Each according to his capacities at the time. Thus, the admonishion not to engage in adultery/akusala kamma patha, can serve as a reminder/condition for the actual abstention to occur. Whether abstention is then experienced on the level 1, 2, or 3, well, whatever it is, it can't be changed. > KH: So what is marriage, and when does abstention from adultery occur? Are these things that the Dhamma can tell us? I don't think so. pt: If we take each other's words on their best merits, then when speaking about adultery, it can be understood that akusala kamma patha will be happening somewhere in there among all the other cittas with lobha, dosa, etc. Further, admonishion not to engage in adultery serves quite well on both ultimate and conventional levels, i.e. according to one's capacities. I.e. if the admonishion conditions arising of panna which sees the anatta characteristic of extreme lobha, well, that's what happens and it can't be changed. If the admonishion conditions intellectual consideration along the same lines, but without panna of the satipatthana kind, well, that's what it is and it can't be changed. KH: I think the Dhamma tells us how to know cittas from concepts. pt: Yes, and many other things. I think it depends on one's capacities what appeals the most at the time. For me, I think the most imortant now is the difference between a/kusala, which is pretty much beginner stuff. I think nama/concept difference comes a bit later. Then after that one I think the last would be that all dhammas are worthless in terms of clinging, etc. But that's way advanced insight I think. > KH: One point I tried to make was that a wise and wonderful person such as myself (joke) who knows there are only dhammas, will not be greatly enamoured with concepts. And so he won't be sufficiently bothered to go wandering into forbidden areas looking for new relationships. People like us tend to be content with our present situations. pt: Yes that's possible. Another thing, you never know when defilements are going to come up. There's a jataka story, somewhere in A.S.'s Perfections, where the Bodhisatta after being an ascetic for a long time and the wisest person in the world, suddenly can't resist taking a woman who suddenly got naked by accident. How much harder it is for us without all the perfections of a Bodhisatta. > KH: If there is kusala citta then off course it's good, but kusala citta is a rare thing. I think most of our abstentions are just concepts of abstention. And our concepts of abstention might sometimes involve stronger akusala than our concepts of adultery. pt: Agreed. Best wishes pt #116669 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 3:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Factors for predominance condition nilovg Dear Ken O, Op 7-aug-2011, om 22:00 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > Conascence > predominance are chanda, effort, citta and panna. So lobha mula > citta are not > predominanace. ------- N: You are right that the hetu that is lobha is not conascent predominant condition, but the citta it accompanies is conascent predominant condition. ------ Nina. #116670 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 3:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Visama lobha nilovg Dear Phil, Op 8-aug-2011, om 0:12 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Actually in talks, on several times I have heard you bring up tge > possibility, perhaps prompted by Lodewijk, that wanting to go on a > retreat to have a quiet place is not wrong. ------- N: The question is what are the cittas like? Also, is this in the case of a monk of a layperson? ------ Nina. #116671 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 4:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Visama lobha nilovg Dear Phil, Op 8-aug-2011, om 7:14 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > A final question/friendly complaint. Several times in your books > how many cetasikas must arise concurrently for there to be kusala, > there is a stressing that kusala us very rare. Why are you telling > me now that it isn't? Is it because I am talking about the rarity > of kusala when listening to and reflecting on the Dhamma rather > than in meditation. ------- N: Kusala is rare in comparison to akusala, but this does not mean that there always is akusala, even when listening to Dhamma. When the objective is not daana, siila or bhaavana the citta that thinks, motivates speech or actions is akusala. Bhaavanaa includes samatha, vipassanaa, studying and explaining the Dhamma. -------- > Ph: You will probably say that tgere is more lobha involved in > meditation, but I will say again that in my awarerness there is > more lobha involved in the mental manipulation of concepts about > paramattha dhammas and application of them onto life situations/ > trouble rhan there is in sittung and watching mind states coming > and going durung mediration. Well, that is very clearly tge case > for me, but it could be a natter of my accumulations, so I > shouldn't assume it is the case for everyone. I guess it isn't, > because I have proposed this many times, and no student of AS has > ever said I know what you mean.... ------- N: :-)) I know what you mean. ------- > > Ph: ...anyways, I will leave it there. You might notice tgat I am > getting closer to sticking to questions and am moving away from > voicing this same complaint again and again, > let's see if that continues... ----- N: Yes, I noticed that. Your questions are always good. ------- > > Ph: Thanks again, Nina. I just finished writing down quotations > from the virya chapter in perfections, it is so good I ended up > filling 8 pages of a notebook! ------ N: Can you quote after your break? ------- > Ph: I meant indirectly, the idea that precepts are not akin to > prohibitions, a slack idea that exists not only at DSG (for > example, nobody comes out to challenge Ken H's disgraceful > belittling of the precepts,well Rob K did, a bit) but elsewhere in > the West, prohibitions are so uncool in the West... ------- N: I think that when people belittle Ken H they misunderstand him. He stresses the present moment and understanding naama and ruupa. As Kh Sujin said: understanding naama and ruupa solves all problems in life. Or when we had doubts about problems: "Just be aware". This is really a point we can think about. As Sarah reminds us, we are so taken in by all the stories in life but what is really there: naama and ruupa. Thinking is a kind of naama. Awareness of naama and ruupa will lead to more mettaa, less inclination to always blame others. More mettaa: this means not hurting or harming others by transgressions as formulated by the precepts. Satipa.t.thaana in connection with keeping the precepts: the sotaapanna has developed understanding of naama and ruupa and will not transgress the precepts. It is good to consider the connection. ------- Nina. #116672 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 5:17 pm Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E & Phil, --- On Thu, 4/8/11, Robert E wrote: >R:I am here for the good Sangha of course, and the good friends. The teaching is important of course, but to have spiritual friends is a real blessing. ... S: I agree with you and I think it's good to stress the value of good friends. Of course, we won't always agree. And, Phil, the good and kind friend can also encourage other friends with little/no interest in the Dhamma, such as your good squash partner, to be kind and considerate to family members and those around them, to live contentedly and to follow good habits including keeping the precepts so as not to hurt others. If we don't encourage our friends in kusala, but instead encourage them in bad habits, we are not good friends at all. Instead we encourage them to act like the "careless people" Scott Fitzgerald referred to, who "smashed up things and creatures". Or as the Buddha said in the the Satta Sutta (A Being) about the demolishing of sand-castles, SN 23:2 (Bodhi transl): "Suppose, Raadha, some little boys or girls are playing with sand castles. So long as they are not devoid of lust, desire, affection, passion, and craving for those sand castles, they cherish them, play with them, treasure them, and treat them possessively. But when those little boys or girls lost their lust, desire, affection, thirst, passion, and craving for those sand castles, then they scatter them with their hands and feet, demolish them, shatter them, and put them out of play." S: And isn't this what we do too - play with our sand castles, follow our desires and cravings, treat them possessively and then move on carelessly to the next object of desire? So what has to be scattered and shattered? Craving, beginning with the strongest cravings which hurt other beings: "So too, Raadha, scatter form, demolish it, shatter it, put it out of play; practise for the destruction of craving. Scatter feeling....Scatter perception...Scatter volitional formations...Scatter consciousness, demolish it, shatter it, put it out of play; practise for the destruction of craving. For the destruction of craving, Raadha, is Nibbaana."* S: When we truly learn to appreciate that there are only namas and rupas, we'll realise that app the craving, all the desire we enjoy so muh is just for rupas, feelings, memories, other conditioned mental tendencies and consciousness as experienced from moment to moment. This is why the understanding of these dhammas at the present moment is the only way for wisdom to pierce the cloak of ignorance which leads to such craving, imagination and "carelessness" to those around us. Metta Sarah =========== *"Evameva kho raadha, tubbhepi ruupa.m vikiratha vidhamatha viddha.msetha, viki.lanika.m karotha. Ta.nhakkhayaaya pa.tipajattha. Vedana.m vikiratha vidhimatha viddha.msetha viki.lanika.m karotha ta.nhakkhayaaya pa.tipajjatha. Sa~n~na.m.... sa.mkhaare.....Ta.nhakkhayo hi raadha, nibbaananti." Metta Sarah ======== #116673 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 5:32 pm Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E (& Phil), --- On Thu, 4/8/11, Robert E wrote: >P: But denying that the Buddha prescribed physical seclusion to his listeners is consistently peculiar, in my opinion, for what it's worth... R:>It is based on the belief that anything physical is inconsequential, except as an object of citta, and that in fact physical action does not exist, except as an arising experiential rupa. People don't say this straight out, but they suggest it quite strongly. .... S: Let's just look at these comments a little: 1. No one believes that "anything physical is inconsequential except as an object of citta", but it's true that it is the namas - the cittas and cetasikas that really cause all the harm in the world. This is why D.O. begins with ignorance (and attachment). Without ignorance and attachment, there is no dukkha. The Buddha didn't teach the cause of dukkha to be "anything physical", but attachment. In a sense all conditioned dhammas - mental and physical -are "inconsequential" in that they are conditioned, fleeting, arise and fall away. It is the importance we place on what is the ephemeral, dukkha and anatta that leads to such grief. 2. "..physical action does not exist, except as an arising experiential rupa." What else is "physical action" if it is not impermanent rupas conditioned by citta, kamma, nutriment and temperature? I'm not sure what you mean here by "experiential rupa"? Does anything exist which is not nama or rupa? Apart from namas and rupas, there are just concepts which are imagined or thought about as we've been agreeing in another thread. .... >R:If you look at the statements that perplex you with this in mind, they will all make sense. .... S: When we truly appreciate that the only way out of samsara is the development of understanding at the present moment of whatever appears - rupa, vedana, sanna, sankhara or vinnana (as just quoted in the sutta about smashing the sand-castles) - we won't be interested in thinking about "a better time" or "a better place". Metta Sarah ====== #116674 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 5:44 pm Subject: Re: Samadhi -- Re: Welcome -- Re: Liking calmness -- Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing sarahprocter... Dear Ken O (& KB), --- On Thu, 4/8/11, Ken O wrote: >You also said that it is in later Abhidhamma text,the 17 moments of sense process are written. Yes you are right in that view but this does not devalue the immense understanding derive from the Abhidamma commentaries. But sense process cannot be just one citta. for example if one see the sutta, like the restraining of our sense lso that no defilements affect the mind. The mind moves in series just like a monkey move from branch to branch as said by the Buddha. At the moment of seeing, it is not possible to restrain because seeing is a kamma result. How could a kamma result becomes a kamma producer at the same time if there are defilements during the moment of seeing. So it must another citta and not during seeing. Another explanation if defilement could affect senses straight, then there is no salvation and it would determining also. Because the senses will be deflied since defilements arise at the moment of sense citta arise. Then it is defiled, it cause a future birth. So how to get out of samasara then. There should be another cittas involved after the arisen of sense cittas. These are my personal opinions and not of the commentaries .... S: I think it's good reasoning and this is how we should carefully consider the texts - not just blindly accepting or rejecting what we read. Having said that, I think the commentaries are just based on what can be found in the Tipitaka itself and that if we explore carefully, we can find the details of the sense process cittas in the Psm and Abhidhamma. However, most of us need the explanations of the commentaries to elaborate what can be found there. Metta Sarah p.s Always good to see you back after your breaks:-) ========== #116675 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 5:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] chariots do exist as assemblage of parts. sarahprocter... Hi Howard (& Alex), Like Nina, I thought you gave a good explanation of the illusion of a chariot and I would encourage Alex to read it carefully again. --- On Thu, 4/8/11, upasaka@... wrote: > Here's the thing, Alex: When we "observe a person," we are actually carving out from the experiential flow, via perception/recognition/memory (sa~n~na), a variety of sights, sounds, and (possibly also) odors & touch sensations, and quickly mentally combining these (on the basis of their interrelationships) into "a person". Moreover, we ignore the constant flux, with nothing remaining the same, and instead impose a static view when there is nothing static to be found. When these relatively simple phenomena, constantly arising and ceasing, one flowing into the next, do not occur related in the appropriate fashion, and that "fashion" is amazing complex, no concept of "a person" is formed. The bottom line, in any case, is that apart from these more directly observed phenomena, there is nothing of a "person" at all, but we impute a person-as-reality nonetheless. <...> > As I view the matter, the Buddha taught this chariot metaphor not to instill any sense of the reality of a "person," but just the opposite - to show us the basis for our conceptualizing of persons, namely mere reification of collections of impersonal phenomena when they are interrelated in certain ways, and to disabuse us of the belief that there is a core of identity - of essence and individuality and reality - to actually be found. Our thinking tends to mentally decompose and then quickly combine (like puzzle pieces), and to impose a freeze-frame view, when the reality is that of a variation of quality within a dynamic, seamless flow of experience. Getting to the point of awakening to reality requires the removal of layers and layers of delusion, the chief removal technique being one of looking to see "a person" but finding only simpler, fleeting and impersonal (but interrelated) phenomena, thereby coming to see that in investigating the apparent "person," no actual entity is ever found, but only sights, sounds, tastes, smells, bodily sensations, and mental & emotional qualities and operations.< .... I hope you'll both continue to discuss this important topic. Metta Sarah ====== #116676 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 5:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Alberto's note sarahprocter... Hi Alberto, Thx so much for sharing your comments. It is difficult to remember the points afterwards, but the Dhamma sinks in and, like the adze handle simile shows, the panna gradually develops. Are you back in Italy now? How was your general experience? I hope you found it worthwhile. --- On Thu, 4/8/11, Alberto wrote: >Do we apply this natural law to kamma and vipaka as well or rather it is "my vipaka", regardless of the kamma, of which "we" (as such or such person) may well not have even done? .... S: Good points on kamma. We often refer to kamma (especially in Buddhist countries), but actually, it's a very deep topic as you suggest. While there's still an idea of 'my' kamma and 'my' vipaka, there can't really be any understanding of kamma and vipaka as conditioned dhammas and this is why K.Sujin always brings it back to seeing, vipaka citta, now: >3. Khun Sujin then brought the subject back to the realities presently arising, seeing which can only see visible object and then thinking that thinks about it as various concepts... .... S: Seeing is the result of kamma and then there is the world of thinking about concepts, nothing to do with results of kamma anymore. When the intention (cetana) is sufficiently strong, leading to particular deeds, there is kamma patha and the cycle continues. Usually people think in terms of events and situations as kamma and its result and this is why it never seems 'fair' or 'right'. The only way is to understand dhammas as you point out. Look forward to hearing any more from you and thx again for your notes and to Sukin for the nice pic! Metta Sarah ===== #116677 From: "Christine" Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 6:17 pm Subject: .pdf VISUDDHIMAGGA - THE PATH OF PURIFICATION 2011.08.07 christine_fo... Hello all, Finally, Accesstoinsight has a .pdf of Ven āṇamoli's translation of: VISUDDHIMAGGA - THE PATH OF PURIFICATION 2011.08.07 A bow of gratitude to the many ATI volunteers who helped with the transcription of this important classic text! - jtb Visuddhimagga - The Path of Purification: The Classic Manual of Buddhist Doctrine and Meditation, by Bhikkhu āṇamoli. "The Visuddhimagga is the 'great treatise' of Theravada Buddhism, an encyclopedic manual of Buddhist doctrine and meditation written in the fifth century by the great Buddhist commentator, Bhadantacariya Buddhaghosa. The author's intention in composing this book is to organize the various teachings of the Buddha, found throughout the Pali Canon, into a clear and comprehensive path leading to the final Buddhist goal, Nibbana, the state of complete purification. In the course of his treatise Buddhaghosa gives full and detailed instructions on the forty subjects of meditation aimed at concentration, an elaborate account of the Buddhist Abhidhamma philosophy, and detailed descriptions of the stages of insight culminating in final liberation" Summary from the back cover of the BPS edition]. [Not available in HTML] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/PathofPurification2011.pdf with metta Chris #116678 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 6:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! sarahprocter... Hi Ken H (& Pt), --- On Fri, 5/8/11, Ken H wrote: >> S: This reminds me a little of Phil's objection to Nina's example of a flower that can be smelt, tasted or touched - different rupas appearing. His objection was to the mixing of conventional truths with absolute truths. However, I don't see any problem in either set of examples. ------ >KH: Yes, it's a difficult area for me. That's probably why I keep coming back to it. Not only here at DSG but also at the Foundation (back in 2008?) I have been the odd man out a degree. People are much more relaxed about mixing the two truths than I am. Perhaps it's just that they feel more confident in their ability not to get caught out. But I suspect there is something important that I haven't grasped yet. .... S: No, I don't think so (anything you haven't "grasped"). I think it's rather like talking Sutta-talk as opposed to Abhidhamma-talk - I tend to be more careful and more precise when discussing the Dhamma with someone who doesn't appreciate the 'all' as being namas and rupas, whereas if I'm talking to, say Jon or Nina whom I've known well for so long, I'll use more short-hand, more conventional terms and know there won't be any misunderstanding. So, talking to you and Pt about the taste of a chili, for example, I know that neither of you for a minute will think that a chilli really exists and is tasted. If I were speaking to someone else, I'd spell this out. So, at the Foundation, the same. I was bitten by a dog once and was in quite some pain. K.Sujin said 'just kamma'. Well, such a response could have and often does lead to misunderstandings. It's just the same with suttas or what we might wrote here. ----------------------------- >KH: Yes, but if I bite a hot chili and think, "Arr, this is unpleasant vipaka," aren't I confusing concepts with realities? .... S: It depends! Always back to the citta and whether there's any right understanding or not. At the moment of tasting and reflecting of the vipaka, there might well not be any idea of a chili at all. On the other hand, there might be a serious wrong view that the hot chili exists in some way. ... >I don't want to misquote anyone, but at the Foundation someone said, "Touch the table. There is hardness." And I thought to myself, but wasn't there already hardness? Weren't we already sitting on chairs? … with clothes touching our bodies . . .?" .... S: You're right, but I think you're taking these examples too seriously:) The point is to indicate that there is hardness already, but most of the time it's forgotten or not realised. People actually think they experience a table or chair instead. ... >>S: Yes, exactly. Not necessarily any wrong view or akusala kamma-patha whilst drinking the wine at all- just a habit better not accumulated even by a sip. ------------------ >KH: Society is quite shameful the way it sings the praises of alcohol without a thought for those poor people who can't handle it. If I think I can safely have an occasional drink I should have it in private, and shut up about it. :-) ... S: I wouldn't blame 'society', but I also wouldn't think we could "safely have an occasional drink" without any harm. I remember when we were in Lumbini one time (and it's on one of the recordings), a Thai lady from California was suggesting the same - that it was 'medicinal' and 'harmless' in her case. K.Sujin shook her head and talked about the danger in accumulating the taste for alcohol and how even a litle should be avoided. Metta Sarah ====== #116679 From: Rajesh Patil Date: Mon Aug 8, 2011 10:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Identity crisis: Are Buddhists atheists? rajpat_00 Thanks everybody for showing difference between Atheists and Buddhists. Make India Buddhist Rajesh --- On Fri, 5/8/11, sarah wrote: Hi Rodney/Caine & Rajesh --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Rodney wrote: > > Atheists seem so obsessed with there being no god that they give the idea of one more popularity. I think it does not really matter to Buddhists. We are more concerned with inward spirituality than outward existence of such. > > Caine Das ... S:<....> I think you make good comments. The various labels, such as 'atheist' or even 'Buddhist' aren't of much importance. What is important is whether there is any understanding now of the mental and physical phenomena or whether there is the wrong view of a Self existing now that experiences and is experienced. <...> #116680 From: Lukas Date: Tue Aug 9, 2011 4:21 am Subject: the whole of Holy Life szmicio Dear Friends Bhante Samahita wrote: Best wishes Lukas #116681 From: "Lukas" Date: Tue Aug 9, 2011 4:42 am Subject: Re: Alberto's note szmicio dear Sarah, Alberto On Thu, 4/8/11, Alberto wrote: > >Do we apply this natural law to kamma and vipaka as well or rather it is "my vipaka", regardless of the kamma, of which "we" (as such or such person) may well not have even done? > .... > S: Good points on kamma. We often refer to kamma (especially in Buddhist countries), but actually, it's a very deep topic as you suggest. While there's still an idea of 'my' kamma and 'my' vipaka, there can't really be any understanding of kamma and vipaka as conditioned dhammas and this is why K.Sujin always brings it back to seeing, vipaka citta, now: L: We think a lot. But one when listening and hearing of vipaka, can find out in such a moment that it is real. Best wishes Lukas #116682 From: "aubecolette" Date: Tue Aug 9, 2011 5:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "THE EXPERIENCE OF SAMADHI" aubecolette DELISCIOUS! Thank You for your kindness and generosity, Vince! toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Vince wrote: > > Hi Colette > > you wrote: > > > Is "Nyoponika Thera" a proper name of a person or is it a group of people? > > sorry for my spelling.. and funny question :) > > anyway, in the Nyaponika Thera's :) book there is much more work about Time than > Space. A very useful reading also is the first chapter of "The World as Will and > Representation" of A. Schopenhauer. His metaphysics was very coincident with > Buddhism and he is a good help for this issue. > > Here in PDF: ** Page 10 and forward. > http://tinyurl.com/3bq8k7a > > > best, > > > Vince. > #116683 From: "aubecolette" Date: Tue Aug 9, 2011 5:55 am Subject: Re: "THE EXPERIENCE OF SAMADHI" aubecolette Hi Lukas, There is no problems with your belief system and your appreciation for "Acharn Sujin's" interpretations. Your addherence to THERAVADAN dictates exists. So be it. This is nothing more than WHAT I HAVE TO WORK ON WITH YOU AND THROUGH YOU AS WE WORK TOGETHER ON EXPERIENCING AND REALIZING THE SAME THING. It does not bother me one bit that you are not allowed to read or acknowledge NARGARJUNA'S MULAMADHYAMIKA. No problems. That is how gangs are manifested and maintained: a strict adherence to a dictate and to parameters, walls, even great walls. prisons that encapsulate your consciousness and precipitate your congition of the reality. THIS IS. It exists as it should exist. I acknowledge it's existence and allow it to be. There is no problems with that, with the fact that you are conforming to a strict dictation of parameters. I only ask that you permit me the same kindness and acceptence as I permit to you while I bathe in the bliss and the splendor of the doctrine that has been furthered upon by our TIBETAN and MAHAYANA coleagues, predessessors. Thanx for your contribution and advice. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Hi colette, > I am strict to Theravada, so I cant read madhyamyka or whatever else. > > I strongly belive that Buddha's words are the only true words. Acharn Sujin told once: 'each word of Buddha is so true. Each moment the Buddha words can be verified.' <...> #116684 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Aug 9, 2011 9:53 am Subject: The True Torch! bhikkhu5 Friends: The True Dhamma Makes You Safe! The Buddha-Dhamma is a Torch, since it guides beings through the Darkness! The Buddha-Dhamma is a Boat, since it brings beings across to the far Shore! The Buddha-Dhamma is a Mirror, since it shows beings, how they Actually are! The Buddha-Dhamma is a Medicine, since it cures beings from deep Diseases! <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <...> #116685 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Aug 9, 2011 6:45 pm Subject: Few are Fine! bhikkhu5 Friends: Few are those who can Avoid all Evil Action! The Blessed Gotama Buddha once explained: Bhikkhus & friends, see this little dust, I have taken up upon the nail of my little-finger, what do you think is most: This tiny dust or this great planet Earth? The Bhikkhus then responded: Venerable Sir, this great planet Earth is much more, incomparable more... The minute speck of dust is trifling, microscopic, negligible in comparison. The Blessed Gotama Buddha then succinctly and importantly pointed out: Similarly and exactly so too, Bhikkhus & friends, those beings are few and quite rare, who are reborn among humans or devas! Beings who are reborn elsewhere, lower, as non-humans, in the screaming hell, as scared animals, as hungry ghosts, or as angry demons are much more numerous and common... Why is it so? Because: Few are those beings who avoid destruction of life, who avoid all killing... Few are those beings who avoid mutilating, murder, robbery, and violence... Few are those beings who avoid taking what is not given by not stealing... Few are those beings who avoid using false weights, cheating with papers... Few are those beings who avoid being crooked by bribery, deceit, & fraud... Few are those beings who avoid sexual misconduct and all forms of abuse... Few are those beings who avoid booze and drugs making careless & negligent... Few are those beings who avoid false lying, pretending and double-dealing... Few are those beings who avoid divisive speech, slandering and defamation... Few are those beings who avoid harsh and aggressive scolding and blaming... Few are those beings who avoid idle chatter, gossiping, and empty hear-say... Few are those beings who avoid damaging the nature, seeds and plant life... Few are those beings who respect father, mother, elders, and recluses... Few are those beings who possess the Noble Eye of Dhamma-Understanding! But those beings, who are immersed in ignorance, are much more numerous! Why is it so? Because, Bhikkhus, they have not yet seen the 4 Noble Truths! What four? This is Suffering; Craving is the Cause of all this Suffering; No Craving is the End of Suffering; The Noble 8-fold Way Ends all Suffering, <...> Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikya. [V:467-70] section 56: Saccasamyutta. Thread 63-78: Killing living beings & etc... Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <...> #116686 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 9, 2011 11:41 pm Subject: Addressing the Bhikkhus before teaching Dhamma. nilovg Dear friends, In may suttas the Buddha addressed the Bhikkhus first: "Bhikkhus", before teaching Dhamma. Why? So that they would have sati. This is explained in the beginning of the commentary to the Anguttara Nikaaya. Kh Sujin drew my attention to this. < Why did the Blessed One when teaching Dhamma addressed the bhikkhus first and did he not just teach Dhamma? For the sake of arousing sati. Some bhikkhus while sitting would think of something else, some would be confused in mind, some would consider the Dhamma, some would pay attention to a meditation subject. If the Dhamma was taught without addressing them, explaining which cause, which condition, which meaning this teaching has that is taught, then they would be unable to consider it or they would grasp it wrongly or not grasp it at all. Therefore addressed the Blessed One them first for the sake of arousing sati and taught Dhamma afterwards.> This reminds us not to listen passively to the teachings. It is very common to think of something else when listening, or to be distracted. But while we listen we should not forget that it is important to consider what we hear and apply it. Very gradually we can verify the truth of what the Buddha taught in being aware of the realities occurring in daily life he explained all the time: seeing, hearing, defilements that arise on account of what is experienced through the senses, of whatever dhamma appears now. ------- Pali: Kimattha.m pana bhagavā dhamma.m desento paṭhamaṃ bhikkh" āmantesi, na dhammameva deses"ti? Satijananattha.m. Bhikkh" hi añña.m cintentāpi vikkhittacittāpi dhamma.m paccavekkhantāpi kammaṭṭhāna.m manasikarontāpi nisinnā honti, te anāmantetvā dhamme desiyamāne ‘‘aya.m desanā kiṃnidānā ki.mpaccayā katamāya a.t.thuppattiyā desitā’’ti sallakkhetu.m asakkontā duggahita.m vā ga.nheyyuṃ, na vā ga.nheyyuṃ. Tena nesa.m satijananattha.m bhagavā pa.thama.m āmantetvā pacchā dhamma.m deseti. ------ Nina. -- #116687 From: Ken O Date: Wed Aug 10, 2011 12:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Factors for predominance condition ashkenn2k Dear Nina They are two different aspect. If you wish to describe predominance, then concentrate on it. If we mixed them together hetu and predominance, then people will think hetu is predominance which is not. We have to clear on dhamma. thanks Ken O > >From: Nina van Gorkom >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Monday, 8 August 2011 13:42:51 >Subject: Re: [dsg] Factors for predominance condition > > >Dear Ken O, >Op 7-aug-2011, om 22:00 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > >> Conascence >> predominance are chanda, effort, citta and panna. So lobha mula >> citta are not >> predominanace. >------- >N: You are right that the hetu that is lobha is not conascent >predominant condition, but the citta it accompanies is conascent >predominant condition. >------ >Nina. > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > #116688 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Aug 10, 2011 7:51 am Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! kenhowardau Hi PT, ---------- <. . .> >> KH: What sort of abstention are we talking about here? Are we talking about kusala citta with virati cetasika? Or we talking about a concept? >pt: Well, both. In the first two cases, I think citta that's accompanied with abstention would have a concept as the object, while the third case would have a dhamma as object of citta. ---------- KH: Aside from the question of object there is the more basic question of concept and reality. In the ultimately real world of conditioned dhammas, kusala dhammas are developed by right understanding. In the conventionally real world of concepts, how are wholesome concepts developed? Are they developed by slavish adherence to rules and precepts? Or are they developed by a conventional equivalent of right understanding? My vote is for right understanding every time. But maybe conventional reality is not a suitable topic for DSG. Some people are getting a little upset by it. --------------------------- <. . .> > pt: Hm, well I assume that the first two could still be abstention with akusala cittas. That wouldn't be Buddhism, but I guess there's marginal value in substituting a potential akusala kamma patha with akusala of lesser strength. ---------------------------- KH: Yes, but they would have to occur in different moments, wouldn't they? Abstention is always kusala. If it was closely followed by akusala there could be a *concept* of substituting mild akusala for strong akusala. However, it is very possible that there never was any real abstention. Very possibly, the absence of strong akusala was due simply to lack of opportunity for it. ------------------------------------- > PT: At best, it prevents rebirth in hell for a time, though it accumulates akusala, and will likely lead to more trouble. ------------------------------------- KH: I think you mean it prevents strong akusala kamma for a moment. ------------------- > PT: As for when the first two are kusala, they can still be without actual arising of panna of satipatthana kind, and so, these moments won't lead to eradication of defilements. As for benefits, these still keep you in the round, but at least you get the senses as a potential kusala result and then possibly get to hear the Dhamma. A long shot. -------------------------------- KH: Yes, like the blind turtle putting its head through a yoke, we don't often score a human birth. And when we do we don't often hear the Dhamma. And even when we hear it we don't often like what we hear. ------------ >> KH: The whole point of this conversation is that we are talking about concepts. Adultery and marriage are concepts, aren't they? > > When the Buddha spoke about abstention from adultery, he was actually talking about citta and cetasikas. You won't find a dhamma called marriage or adultery. > pt: I think it's useful to consider this in practical terms as per one's capacities.We can use conventional terms like adultery to refer to akusala kamma patha and the other way around. The actual difference will be how one gets to experience the moment of that akusala kamma patha or abstention from the same. If there's panna, one can describe it/understand as you do, in terms of dhammas. If there's no panna, one will understand/describe it as adultery, on an intelectual level. Each according to his capacities at the time. Thus, the admonishion not to engage in adultery/akusala kamma patha, can serve as a reminder/condition for the actual abstention to occur. Whether abstention is then experienced on the level 1, 2, or 3, well, whatever it is, it can't be changed. ---------------------- KH: I need to give that a closer reading, but things at home have been a bit hectic lately. (By my standards at least.) And I am just on my way out now for the rest of the day. So I'll get back to this later. Meanwhile, any more of your thoughts on the subject will be welcome. Mixing conventional talk with satipatthana is difficult for most of us; it certainly is for me! Ken H #116689 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Aug 10, 2011 9:50 am Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! ptaus1 Hi KenH, > >> KH: What sort of abstention are we talking about here? Are we talking about kusala citta with virati cetasika? Or we talking about a concept? > > >pt: Well, both. In the first two cases, I think citta that's accompanied with abstention would have a concept as the object, while the third case would have a dhamma as object of citta. > ---------- > > KH: Aside from the question of object there is the more basic question of concept and reality. > > In the ultimately real world of conditioned dhammas, kusala dhammas are developed by right understanding. > > In the conventionally real world of concepts, how are wholesome concepts developed? Are they developed by slavish adherence to rules and precepts? Or are they developed by a conventional equivalent of right understanding? > > My vote is for right understanding every time. pt: I have no objections to that, but my thinking is that the object of citta at the time shouldn't be put aside as it seems crucial in this discussion. I.e. whether conventional abstention on ultimate level is represented by a kusala or akusala citta, with or without panna, I think satipatthana that eradicates defilements will only happen when dhamma is the object. However, kusala tendencies will develop even if the object is a concept, if I'm not mistaken, since right understanding can accompany both cittas with concept as object, as well as dhamma as object. > > pt: Hm, well I assume that the first two could still be abstention with akusala cittas. That wouldn't be Buddhism, but I guess there's marginal value in substituting a potential akusala kamma patha with akusala of lesser strength. > ---------------------------- > > KH: Yes, but they would have to occur in different moments, wouldn't they? Abstention is always kusala. If it was closely followed by akusala there could be a *concept* of substituting mild akusala for strong akusala. > > However, it is very possible that there never was any real abstention. Very possibly, the absence of strong akusala was due simply to lack of opportunity for it. pt: Yes, what I meant by abstention with akusala cittas was conventional abstaining from doing something bad with akusala citta as the motivator not to do it. So there never was a virati cetasika in the first place, even though the person can consider that he had "abstained" from a misdeed. > > PT: At best, it prevents rebirth in hell for a time, though it accumulates akusala, and will likely lead to more trouble. > ------------------------------------- > > KH: I think you mean it prevents strong akusala kamma for a moment. pt: Well, I was thinking that akusala kama patha (so intention that strong that it will result in a rebirth citta on a hell plane) is avoided by conventional abstention that ultimately rides on the back of akusala cittas with lesser strength of akusala intention, and these cittas have concepts as objects (basically intellectual consideration of the sort - i better not do this since i fear what god will do to me in retribution). > KH: I'll get back to this later. > > Meanwhile, any more of your thoughts on the subject will be welcome. Mixing conventional talk with satipatthana is difficult for most of us; it certainly is for me! pt: To recap, ultimately it seems we have the following cases that can be conventionally described as abstention: -akusala citta, concept as object, no panna and virati cetasikas -kusala citta, concept as object, yes virati, no panna -kusala citta, concept as object, yes virati and panna -kusala citta, dhamma as obejct, yes virati and panna. Best wishes pt #116690 From: "philip" Date: Wed Aug 10, 2011 12:06 pm Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) philofillet Hi Sarah > > And, Phil, the good and kind friend can also encourage other friends with little/no interest in the Dhamma, such as your good squash partner, to be kind and considerate to family members and those around them, to live contentedly and to follow good habits including keeping the precepts so as not to hurt others. Ph: Yes, Ive appreciated this. Of course the precepts don't apply to her (taking the precepts is an act of volition that indicates our respect for the Buddha and desire to follow his advice) but of course akusala kamma patha apply to anyone. But they cannot be communicated to someone with no sensitivity to the Buddha's teaching. Instead, I chose a teaching from Dhammapada, the wise person sacrifices a middling pleasure (sex and other "skinship") for tge greater pleasure of peace of mibd tgat one has avoided hurting. I'm glad I didn't reject her, metta has been prevalent in my recent dealings with her, so I avoided hurting her, which is always good. I remember Scott once proposing tgat our actions didn't impact others, and I remember Sukin telling me that it was a delusion on my part to believe that a woman had been made uncomfortable (was hurt) by my hungry gaze, that is going too far and is an example of how an overriding interest in "the presently arisen nama and rupa" can be premature, we have to live life at a level of panna (in this case one that says there are people around us that we impact) that is suitable. Someday conditions may lead to a deeper, more liberating understanding, but for now, for me,there is thinking about paramattha topics, the best possible topic for thinking, but life goes on in conventional terms. A.S says in Perfections, I think, that everyone should know the degree of kusala that is suitable, I'm glad I do, and I have confidence that panna will develop THROUGH this gradual level rather than being pushed to leapfrog it, which could lead to it landing in a very strange posture and deprived of the wonderful food for development provided by samuttisacca, conventional truth. For me, the sublime nourishment of paramatthasacca should not be force fed, especially by people who might not understand it yet even at the intellectual level. Very different when listening to Acharn Sujin... Metta, Phil > If we don't encourage our friends in kusala, but instead encourage them in bad habits, we are not good friends at all. Instead we encourage them to act like the "careless people" Scott Fitzgerald referred to, who "smashed up things and creatures". > > Or as the Buddha said in the the Satta Sutta (A Being) about the demolishing of sand-castles, SN 23:2 (Bodhi transl): > > "Suppose, Raadha, some little boys or girls are playing with sand castles. > So long as they are not devoid of lust, desire, affection, passion, and > craving for those sand castles, they cherish them, play with them, > treasure them, and treat them possessively. But when those little boys or > girls lost their lust, desire, affection, thirst, passion, and craving for > those sand castles, then they scatter them with their hands and feet, > demolish them, shatter them, and put them out of play." > > S: And isn't this what we do too - play with our sand castles, follow our desires and cravings, treat them possessively and then move on carelessly to the next object of desire? > > So what has to be scattered and shattered? Craving, beginning with the strongest cravings which hurt other beings: > > "So too, Raadha, scatter form, demolish it, shatter it, put it out of > play; practise for the destruction of craving. Scatter feeling....Scatter > perception...Scatter volitional formations...Scatter consciousness, > demolish it, shatter it, put it out of play; practise for the destruction > of craving. For the destruction of craving, Raadha, is Nibbaana."* > > S: When we truly learn to appreciate that there are only namas and rupas, we'll realise that app the craving, all the desire we enjoy so muh is just for rupas, feelings, memories, other conditioned mental tendencies and consciousness as experienced from moment to moment. This is why the understanding of these dhammas at the present moment is the only way for wisdom to pierce the cloak of ignorance which leads to such craving, imagination and "carelessness" to those around us. > > Metta > > Sarah > =========== > > *"Evameva kho raadha, tubbhepi ruupa.m vikiratha vidhamatha viddha.msetha, > viki.lanika.m karotha. Ta.nhakkhayaaya pa.tipajattha. Vedana.m vikiratha > vidhimatha viddha.msetha viki.lanika.m karotha ta.nhakkhayaaya > pa.tipajjatha. Sa~n~na.m.... sa.mkhaare.....Ta.nhakkhayo hi raadha, > nibbaananti." > > > > Metta > > Sarah > ======== > #116691 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Aug 10, 2011 5:05 pm Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Rob E & Phil, > > --- On Thu, 4/8/11, Robert E wrote: > > >R:I am here for the good Sangha of course, and the good friends. The teaching is important of course, but to have spiritual friends is a real blessing. > ... > S: I agree with you and I think it's good to stress the value of good friends. Of course, we won't always agree. Well, if we agreed all the time, that wouldn't be any fun, would it? :-) ... > S: And isn't this what we do too - play with our sand castles, follow our desires and cravings, treat them possessively and then move on carelessly to the next object of desire? > > So what has to be scattered and shattered? Craving, beginning with the strongest cravings which hurt other beings: > > "So too, Raadha, scatter form, demolish it, shatter it, put it out of > play; practise for the destruction of craving. Scatter feeling....Scatter > perception...Scatter volitional formations...Scatter consciousness, > demolish it, shatter it, put it out of play; practise for the destruction > of craving. For the destruction of craving, Raadha, is Nibbaana."* Good stuff from the Buddha, Sarah. Thanks for that sutta. > S: When we truly learn to appreciate that there are only namas and rupas, we'll realise that all the craving, all the desire we enjoy so much is just for rupas, feelings, memories, other conditioned mental tendencies and consciousness as experienced from moment to moment. This is why the understanding of these dhammas at the present moment is the only way for wisdom to pierce the cloak of ignorance which leads to such craving, imagination and "carelessness" to those around us. This is very nicely put, and I also enjoyed seeing the Pali below. I tried reciting it to myself aloud a few times, even with what must be a terrible accent, and it is very beautiful to hear some approximation of the musicality and rhythm of the original Pali. > *"Evameva kho raadha, tubbhepi ruupa.m vikiratha vidhamatha viddha.msetha, > viki.lanika.m karotha. Ta.nhakkhayaaya pa.tipajattha. Vedana.m vikiratha > vidhimatha viddha.msetha viki.lanika.m karotha ta.nhakkhayaaya > pa.tipajjatha. Sa~n~na.m.... sa.mkhaare.....Ta.nhakkhayo hi raadha, > nibbaananti." Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #116692 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Aug 10, 2011 5:22 pm Subject: Re: Depression and unseftyness sarahprocter... Hi Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Lukas wrote: > We miss our bus to Poland, I feel a lot of unseftyness and a depression and dukkhadomanassa. The worst is not the fact we stuck here, but that we are weak. Each of us have its own problems. .... S: Gain & loss, happiness & misery - some of the worldly conditions we're all susceptible to. We're all weak, we all have our own problems, but it helps a lot to understand these as conditioned dhammas, not belonging to Self at all. Did you read Nina's extra from Sangiitisutta, #116454. I think it's relevant: >Sutta 9. Walshe DN.33.3.1(9) 'Eight worldly conditions (loka-dhammaa): gain and loss, fame and shame (yaso ca ayaso ca), blame and praise, happiness and misery. (A.t.tha lokadhammaa - laabho ca, alaabho ca, yaso ca, ayaso ca, nindaa ca, pasa.msaa ca, sukha~nca, dukkha~nca.) ------ >N: the co states: The worldly dhammas are the dhammas of the world. Nobody is free of these, they exist even for Buddhas. This is also said: "the eight worldly dhammas, monks, keep the world rolling, and the world revolves around the eight worldly dhammas. As to the words gain and loss, this should be known as: when gain has come, loss comes. And it is the same with fame etc. ------- The Tiika states with regard to the dhammas of the world: these are the dhammas that are inevitable for the world of beings. It explains that at times these dhammas follow the world, and at times the world follows them. Gain is the obtainment of food, clothing, etc. and the absence of them is loss. Because of the obtainment of gain there is compliance, whereas because of loss there is dismay. Compliance is followed by dismay when gain has disappeared. -------- N: Nobody can escape the worldly conditions, not even Buddhas and arahats. Gain and loss are among the vicissitudes of life. Kusala kamma is the cause of the experience of pleasant objects through the senses and akusala kamma is the cause of the experience of unpleasant objects through the senses. When pleasant objects disappear we are agitated, we suffer. This can also be applied to the loss of dear people. Their company gives us pleasure and when they have passed away we lament our lack of this pleasure. We dwell in our thoughts for a long time on the loss we suffered, but a moment of vipaakacitta does not last, it falls away immediately. When we think with affliction about the unpleasant object we experienced there is akusala citta with aversion. When we think about gain and loss, these are all gone. There are only conditioned dhammas arising and falling away. When thinking less in terms of persons or situations and have more understanding of cittas arising because of conditions one can gradually learn to be less affected by the worldly conditions of gain and loss, praise and blame, honour and dishonour, happiness and misery. Clinging to the pleasant worldly conditions is accumulated as alatent tendency and this will condition the arising again and again of clinging. Quoting from Kh Sujin's Perfections, Ch 4, the Perfection of > Wisdom: > < Through the study of the Dhamma we gradually come to have more > understanding of the vicissitudes of the world, of gain and loss, > honour and dishonour, praise and blame, wellbeing and pain. We > shall understand that the pleasant "worldly conditions" of gain, > honour, praise and wellbeing only lead to dukkha, suffering, if > there is no paa that knows the causes and their appropriate > results in life....Thus, we should see the incomparable value of > pa and we should apply ourselves to its development so that it > can become fully accomplished. If we develop satipa.t.thaana time > and again, pa will be gradually accumulated so that it becomes > keener, and reaches the degree of a perfection which realizes the > four noble Truths. (end quote). < --------- Metta Sarah ===== #116693 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Aug 10, 2011 5:31 pm Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Rob E (& Phil), > > --- On Thu, 4/8/11, Robert E wrote: > > >P: But denying that the Buddha prescribed physical seclusion to his listeners is consistently peculiar, in my opinion, for what it's worth... > > > R:>It is based on the belief that anything physical is inconsequential, except as an object of citta, and that in fact physical action does not exist, except as an arising experiential rupa. People don't say this straight out, but they suggest it quite strongly. > .... > S: Let's just look at these comments a little: > > 1. No one believes that "anything physical is inconsequential except as an object of citta", I am not sure about this. It seems that there are many many comments that suggest that physical action does not really exist, as all actions, people and objects are conceptual objects of mind, not actualities. I guess there may be a world of rupas, which include single individual qualities such as hardness and such, but such qualities are only experiential, not actually physical. It is true we only experience anything through the senses, including action, objects, etc., but there is a dividing line I think, between those who believe that physical bodies are in fact really there, and those who really think there are only experiences of physical qualities, but no bodies or objects actually being apprehended, and that such are only extrapolations of experiential moments. Do the experiential moments reveal real bodies and objects, brains, eyes, hands and cars, or do experiential moments ultimately reveal that these never really existed except as concepts? I think it is clear for those who believe the latter that this is the reason that no emphasis is put on taking meritorious actions in the world, going into seclusion except into "mental seclusion" as has been said many times, and that such practices as meditation and other physical regimens can have no spiritual effect or content, because they are acting on an illusory conceptual realm, rather than really affecting the experiential realm that does affect the development of panna, etc. For those who think we do exist, albeit temporarily, in psychophysical form, and that this form is part of the path, the physical universe and physical actions, the condition of the physical body, the types of physical actions that are taken, the condition of the brain and how physical structures and skills are developed and conditioned, are all part of what is attended to in terms of development of understanding and confronting defilements, rather than it being a thoroughly internal and "passive" experience. That is the kind of difference of view that I am driving at. I think the emphasis on rupas and namas being totally isolated single experiences of individual qualities that do not ever actually come together to form a whole, takes away the focus from the actions and practices that take place in what is thought to be the conventional world, which, I contend, is the world that we actually experience all or most of the time, and which should be attended as provisionally real and part of the path. It's also what leads to our main difference of belief in what constitutes the path, when Buddha's practices and instructions, codified in both sutta and Visudhimagga, are taken as mere descriptions of the experiential propensities of certain monks, rather than the foundational practices of Buddha's path as he presented it, which is what I believe it to be. I don't translate such practices and instructions into individual momentary experiential terms, with the moments forever divided into unconnected single experiences, and I don't believe that is how Buddha meant them to be taken or acted upon. The experience of single moments may be ultimate and it may be greatly profound, but I think it's only part of the path, not the whole of the path. How everyday life is to be conducted and how the mind is to be trained is not only to see individual dhammas, but to live and develop a certain unified way of being and seeing with the whole body, mind and personality, in my view, and that development of kusala is not just for arising kusala cittas, but for overall ways of living and acting and practicing as well. >...but it's true that it is the namas - the cittas and cetasikas that really cause all the harm in the world. This is why D.O. begins with ignorance (and attachment). Without ignorance and attachment, there is no dukkha. The Buddha didn't teach the cause of dukkha to be "anything physical", but attachment. I agree that the experience of attachment and of kusala, panna and awakening, all take place within the psychological or mental realm, but it is important that the practices that lead out of attachment and delusion are concrete, actual and practiceable, not just experienced when they arise involuntarily. It is the belief in volition, intention, development through conscious and purposeful means, that is practiced in concrete actual practices in the physical world by focusing and disciplining the body and mind, that is dismissed when one only believes in passive involuntary experiences of the path in isolated arising dhammas. > In a sense all conditioned dhammas - mental and physical -are "inconsequential" in that they are conditioned, fleeting, arise and fall away. It is the importance we place on what is the ephemeral, dukkha and anatta that leads to such grief. I agree with that and it is nicely put. > 2. "..physical action does not exist, except as an arising experiential rupa." > > What else is "physical action" if it is not impermanent rupas conditioned by citta, kamma, nutriment and temperature? I'm not sure what you mean here by "experiential rupa"? It's the difference between physical action being unified and real, and the body that acts and practices or that partakes of akusala actions, being concrete and actual, as opposed to simply seeing the nature of involuntary arising individual rupas as experiential objects, that I think is a difference in view. Does action exist or not? Does the body exist and partake of actual action, or is that an illusion? That is the dividing line between real practice and action, and practice and action as mere concept to be discarded and only seen through, not attended as part of the path. > Does anything exist which is not nama or rupa? Apart from namas and rupas, there are just concepts which are imagined or thought about as we've been agreeing in another thread. > .... I think that in itself is a concept, to think that the body is unreal rather than a vehicle of kusala or akusala in its own right, guided, of course, by negative or positive intentions, but still a real living vehicle of action, or not. > >R:If you look at the statements that perplex you with this in mind, they will all make sense. > .... > S: When we truly appreciate that the only way out of samsara is the development of understanding at the present moment of whatever appears - rupa, vedana, sanna, sankhara or vinnana (as just quoted in the sutta about smashing the sand-castles) - we won't be interested in thinking about "a better time" or "a better place". It's not a matter of a better time or place, it's a matter of whether action and practice is part of the path, and I think it is. I don't think that understanding, isolated by itself, is the whole path, or that it can be developed without practice, discipline, action in the world, developing awareness of the mind, calmness and focus of the body, and a combination of practices that leads to the proper vehicle for such experience. To focus on understanding by itself, as if it lives by itself, denies the interconnectedness of our human experience as bodies and personalities with the functioning and awareness of our mental faculties. I think they develop together, not apart. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - #116694 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Aug 10, 2011 6:07 pm Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) sarahprocter... Dear Rob E (& Howard), --- On Thu, 28/7/11, Robert E wrote: > >HCW: >> How does understanding come about? Is it random, a matter of luck, > with no intention involved? Don't you know that this is not so, Sarah? > ------------------------------------------------------ >> S: As the Buddha taught: through hearing the Dhamma, listening, considering and directly understanding presently arising dhammas. >> No, there is nothing 'random' in the way conditioned dhammas occur. As we were discussing with Pt at the weekend, the 'hearing' (or 'reading') of the Dhamma refers to moments of hearing particular sounds (or seeing particular visible objects) when meeting the Buddha or his disciples in person or in text. This is the result of past kamma. The considering and directly understanding of the Dhamma refer to conditioned 'habitual tendencies' of understanding and other factors. ... R:>Just jumping in to ask a question. It occurs to me that the idea that the hearing of the Dhamma is the root of all development towards awakening seems to indicate that the path to enlightenment is completely dependent on understanding language and linguistic concepts. Is this your understanding of the Dhamma? That it is only contained in words? ..... S: If there is not the hearing of the sounds (or seeing of the particular visible objects), followed by the wise reflection on the words, there cannot be the development of right understanding and other factors. If a Buddha doesn't appear in the world and teach the Dhamma, there is no way that the understanding of it can occur (except in the case of a pacceka Buddha). The Buddha considered as to whether there were those "with little dust in their eyes" who might be able to wisely consider and understand his words. Clearly, small children, animals and those without a tendency for right understanding are not able to do so. .... >My understanding is that the path and the reality of the moment can be realized by direct perception that is not necessarily dependent on language, although for most of us we will first form an idea of the Dhamma and the path and then form experiences based on this as we go through life and practice. But, for instance, for someone sharp who was able to just "get" the reality of namas and rupas directly, I would assume they would be able to see this truth through perception without necessarily ever forming an explicit concept of it in language. .... S: Even for someone very "sharp who was able to just "get" the reality of namas and rupas directly", like Sariputta, there has to be the hearing of the Dhamma first, however briefly. We need to listen, consider and then, as you suggest, "direct perception" can occur anytime, any place. It's not a question of the quantity or detail of what has been heard but the wise reflection and direct understanding of the realities pointed to. If we don't hear about dhammas such as seeing and visible object - those dhammas which experience and those dhammas which can only be experienced - and how they are all anatta, there cannot be the development of satipatthana leading to the first stage of insight. However, one can read/hear just a very little which is sufficient for the 'penny to drop' and for the heart of the Teachings to be apparent. It all depends on different accumulations. .... >Likewise for sati, if one were to focus with understanding on what is arising at the moment, one might very well just "see" this without thinking or speaking about it. .... S: I don't think sati is about 'focussing' at all. When there is the right understanding of dhammas, sati arises and is aware of what appears without a special focus/effort. I agree with you that it's certainly not necessary to think or speak about it when such awareness & understanding arises. ... >Even the first three Noble Truths could be realized through naturally arising awareness of the nature of samsara followed by a conviction that suffering could be ended by detachment from sense objects, etc., and then the fourth Noble Truth could be realized through direct experience based on this realization. Would your view of Dhamma rule out such events or forms of development? ... S: This reminds me of a very long and detailed discussion I had with Dan with lots of quotes. The question was whether those without having heard the Buddha's Teachings could become enlightened. I indicated this was impossible as discussed. (I can find the discussion and link you to it if you're interested). People think of the 1st Noble Truth of Dukkha as referring to the suffering and misery in the world. However, it's much deeper than that. It refers to the conditioned and impermanent nature of all dhammas (apart from nibbana). So again, it comes back to clearly understanding dhammas appearing now as they are. Do we really understand awareness or wisdom, for example, as dukkha? There has to be understanding and detachment from all kinds of dhammas, not just detachment from sense objects without clearly understanding these as anatta too. ... >I realize that the Dhamma will not exist as a viable form in the way that it does if a Buddha does not appear in the world, but I am wondering whether it is really all as linguistic and conceptual as the pariyatti-based view makes it appear. ... S: I think Nina quoted some helpful notes of Sukin's. Pariyatti is not about thinking about more and more concepts and words but about the beginning to directly understand what appears now. For example, as we read now, there is seeing, visible object and thinking about what is seen. Are we lost in the concepts or is there any understanding of the seeing, of the visible object or of the thinking which can be directly known now? Good points and questions. Apologies for slow replies. Metta Sarah ======= #116695 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Aug 10, 2011 4:57 pm Subject: (No subject) bhikkhu5 Friends: The Visuddhimagga " The Path of Purification: The Classic Manual of Buddhist Doctrine and Meditation, translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu 'ānamoli is now fully online here free of charge. A deep bow of gratitude to the many ATI & BPS volunteers! :-) _/\_ http://what-buddha-said.net/library/pdfs/PathofPurification2011.pdf The Visuddhimagga is the 'great treatise' of Theravada Buddhism, an encyclopedic manual of Buddhist doctrine and meditation written in the fifth century by the great Buddhist commentator, Buddhaghosa. The author's intention in composing this book is to organize the various teachings of the Buddha, found throughout the Pali Canon, into a clear and comprehensive path leading to the final Buddhist goal, Nibbana. Buddhaghosa gives full and detailed instructions on the 40 subjects of meditation aimed at concentration, an elaborate account of the Buddhist Abhidhamma philosophy, and detailed descriptions of the stages of insight culminating in final liberation. http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/pdfs/PathofPurification2011.pdf Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * http://What-Buddha-Said.net #116696 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Aug 10, 2011 8:18 pm Subject: Re: Visama lobha ( wsd [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! sarahprocter... Hi Phil, --- On Fri, 5/8/11, philip wrote: >>S:I think the Agga~n~na Sutta in DN gives some very good examples. Lots of other examples of truly deviant behaviour which would qualify. As usual, however, it's not so much about categorising situations as about particular cittas.< ... >Ph: Certainly about cittas, but the situations themselves seem to be stressed by tge Buddha too, punishment by the king (in my case, a lawsuit from the husband, a lawyer friend tells me that hapoens a lot in Japan) , disgrace, bad sllep, such worldly dhammas. .... S: I think the Buddha just points to the truths. Isn't it true that when there's wise restraint and metta that we sleep well and there are happy results, whereas when there's no restraint, we sleep badly, live in fear and experience the unhappy results you refer to? What are these "situations" if not kusala/akusala vipaka, kusala/akusala cittas and so on? The worldly dhammas are just the dhammas arising now - pleasant and unpleasant feelings, sukha and dukkha, kusala and akusala vipaka. .... >Do you think that some people have more visama lobha as result of different preponderence of 6 roots at birth?I forget the Pali term for those, I expect you'll say no, but why are some people so much more prone to visama lobha than others? I don't feel anxious about this, I am happy to understand where my akusala tendencies lie. .... S: Just adding to Nina's reply - I think that visama lobha, like all lobha depends primarily on our accumulated tendencies for such. Someone might not have the root of panna at birth but may be very restrained and gentle in their behaviour. We can't generalise. Someone reborn in a deva realm might be swept away by strong lobha. As Pt mentioned with regard to the Jataka in which the bodhisatta was swept away with visama lobha, we never know what conditions may lead to the accumulations manifesting if there sufficient panna, hiri and ottappa hasn't been developed. I think that the more we really see the harm of the visama lobha, there will be fewer and fewer conditions for it to arise and we'll be less and less inclined to pursue behaviours that harm others. I've appreciated the discussion on this topic and all your reflections and frank comments. We can all learn and benefit from such consideration. Metta Sarah ======= #116697 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Aug 10, 2011 8:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- On Fri, 5/8/11, Robert E wrote: >>S: You appreciate the distinction between thinking and concepts and how the reality now, when we think about these issues, is just thinking which can be known as such. Dare I say that we're making good headway in the discussion? R:>I think that apart from all issues, yes, it is great to have those distinctions and I hope it represents progress in that way. I'm certainly happy to share and learn in that dimension, even while clinging to my terrible belief in "formal meditation." :-) ..... S: :-)) Metta Sarah ===== #116698 From: "antony272b2" Date: Wed Aug 10, 2011 9:30 pm Subject: The Implications of Foulness of the Body antony272b2 Hi, On page 160 of "Great Disciples of the Buddha" Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: "With the scalpel of meditative insight Vangisa had to dissect the body and probe beneath its charming exterior in order to see the wretchedness and misery lying within." Antony: I'm thinking that the foulness of the body isn't just that it would stink and look ugly if you took away the skin, but that even in a healthy body having blood vessels etc. involves stressful internal bodily contact and feeling which can be sensed in meditation. I read somewhere where the Buddha said there is no such thing as a healthy body: "This body, Magandiya, is a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.075x.than.html With metta / Antony. #116699 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 10, 2011 10:05 pm Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Sarah) - In a message dated 8/10/2011 3:31:41 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Rob E (& Phil), > > --- On Thu, 4/8/11, Robert E wrote: > > >P: But denying that the Buddha prescribed physical seclusion to his listeners is consistently peculiar, in my opinion, for what it's worth... > > > R:>It is based on the belief that anything physical is inconsequential, except as an object of citta, and that in fact physical action does not exist, except as an arising experiential rupa. People don't say this straight out, but they suggest it quite strongly. > .... > S: Let's just look at these comments a little: > > 1. No one believes that "anything physical is inconsequential except as an object of citta", I am not sure about this. It seems that there are many many comments that suggest that physical action does not really exist, as all actions, people and objects are conceptual objects of mind, not actualities. I guess there may be a world of rupas, which include single individual qualities such as hardness and such, but such qualities are only experiential, not actually physical. It is true we only experience anything through the senses, including action, objects, etc., but there is a dividing line I think, between those who believe that physical bodies are in fact really there, and those who really think there are only experiences of physical qualities, but no bodies or objects actually being apprehended, and that such are only extrapolations of experiential moments. Do the experiential moments reveal real bodies and objects, brains, eyes, hands and cars, or do experiential moments ultimately reveal that these never really existed except as concepts? I think it is clear for those who believe the latter that this is the reason that no emphasis is put on taking meritorious actions in the world, going into seclusion except into "mental seclusion" as has been said many times, and that such practices as meditation and other physical regimens can have no spiritual effect or content, because they are acting on an illusory conceptual realm, rather than really affecting the experiential realm that does affect the development of panna, etc. ----------------------------------------------- HCW: I am one of those who is an "experientialist" (or phenomenalist) who considers there to be nothing but experiencing and experiential content (of three sorts): apparently separate mental qualities & events/operations (namas), apparently separate physical qualities (rupas), and the seamless and unconditioned reality that appears as the foregoing. This does not at all make me a person who does not believe in "acting in the world" etc. I just wouldn't describe it in those terms except as a convenience. ------------------------------------------------ For those who think we do exist, albeit temporarily, in psychophysical form, and that this form is part of the path, the physical universe and physical actions, the condition of the physical body, the types of physical actions that are taken, the condition of the brain and how physical structures and skills are developed and conditioned, are all part of what is attended to in terms of development of understanding and confronting defilements, rather than it being a thoroughly internal and "passive" experience. That is the kind of difference of view that I am driving at. I think the emphasis on rupas and namas being totally isolated single experiences of individual qualities that do not ever actually come together to form a whole, takes away the focus from the actions and practices that take place in what is thought to be the conventional world, which, I contend, is the world that we actually experience all or most of the time, and which should be attended as provisionally real and part of the path. ---------------------------------------------- HCW: The simple elements of experience DO co-occur and interrelate, and that integration is the basis for our macroscopic, conventional world view. ============================== With metta, Howard Experience Only /In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself./ (From the Bahiya Sutta) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ /"Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer. "When hearing... "When sensing... "When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn't construe an [object as] cognized. He doesn't construe an uncognized. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-cognized. He doesn't construe a cognizer./ (From the Kalaka Sutta) #116700 From: "connie" Date: Wed Aug 10, 2011 11:14 pm Subject: Sangiitisutta Eights, 10-end. nichiconn Dear friends, CSCD 338. Walshe DN.33.3.1(10) 'Eight stages of mastery: (a) perceiving forms internally, one sees external forms, limited and beautiful or ugly; (b) (as (a) but) unlimited; (c) not perceiving forms internally, one sees external forms, limited ...; (d) (as (c) but) unlimited; not perceiving forms internally, one perceives forms that are (e) blue, [iii 261] (f) yellow, (g) red, (h) white (as Sutta 16, vv.3.25-32). {p.249: DN 16, 3.25. 'Perceiving forms internally, *408 one sees external forms, limited and beautiful or ugly, and in mastering these, one is aware that one knows and sees them. That is the first stage. 16.3.26. 'Perceiving forms internally, one sees external forms, unlimited and beautiful or ugly ... (as v.25). That is the second stage. 16.3.27. 'Not perceiving forms internally, one sees external forms, unlimited and beautiful or ugly ... (as v.25). That is the third stage. 16.3.28. 'Not perceiving forms internally, one sees external forms, unlimited and beautiful or ugly, and in mastering these, one is aware that one knows and sees them. That is the fourth stage. 16.3.29. ''Not perceiving forms internally, one sees external forms that are blue, of blue color, of blue lustre. Just as a flax flower which is blue, of blue colour, of blue lustre, or a Benares cloth smoothed on both sides that is blue, ... so one perceives external forms that are blue, ... and in mastering these, one is aware that one knows and sees them. This is the fifth stage. 16.3.30 [ii 111] 'Not perceiving forms internally, one sees external forms that are yellow ... Just as a ka.n.nikaara *409 flower which is yellow, ... or a Benares cloth that is yellow, so one perceives external forms that are yellow ... That is the sixth stage. p.450: DN 16.3.31. 'Not perceiving forms internally, one sees external forms that are red ... Just as a hibiscus flower which is red, ... or a Benares cloth which is red, ... so one perceives external forms that are red ... That is the seventh stage. 16.3.32. 'Not perceiving forms internally, one sees external forms that are white, of white colour, of white lustre, just as the morning-star Osadhi *410 is white, ... or a Benares cloth smoothed on both sides that is white, ... so not perceiving forms internally, one sees external forms that are white, ... and in mastering these, one is aware that one knows and sees them. That is the eighth stage of mastery. These, Aananda, are the eight stages of mastery. {*407}} CSCD 339. Walshe DN.33.3.1(11) 'Eight liberations: (a) possessing form, one sees forms; (b) not perceiving material forms in oneself, one sees them outside; (c) thinking: "It is beautiful", one becomes intent on it; one enters (d) the Sphere of Infinite Space; (e) ... the Sphere of Infinite Consciousness; (f) ... the Sphere of No-Thingness; (g) ... the Sphere of Neither-Perception-Nor-Non-Perception; (h) ... the Cessation of Perception and Feeling (as Sutta 15, v.35). [iii 262] {p.229: DN 15, 35. 'There are, Aananda, these eight liberations. *356 What are they? '(1) Possessing form, one sees forms. *357 That is the first liberation. (2) Not perceiving material forms in oneself, one sees them outside. *358 That is the second liberation. [ii 71] (3) Thinking: "It is beautiful", one becomes intent on it. *359 That is the third. (4) By completely transcending all perception of matter, by the vanishing of the perception of sense-reactions and by non-attention to the perception of variety, thinking: "Space is infinite", one enters and abides in the Sphere of Infinite Space. That is the fourth. (5) By transcending the Sphere of Infinite Space, thinking: "Consciousness is infinite", one enters and abides in the Sphere of Infinite Consciousness. That is the fifth. (6) By transcending the Sphere of Infinite Consciousness, thinking: "There is no thing", one enters and abides in the Sphere of No-Thingness. That is the sixth. (7) By transcending the Sphere of No-Thingness, one reaches and abides in the Sphere of Neither-Perception-Nor-Non-Perception. That is the seventh. (8) By transcending the Sphere of Neither-Perception-Nor-Non-Perception one enters and abides in the Cessation of Perception and Feeling. *360 That is the eighth liberation.} CSCD < Date: Thu Aug 11, 2011 8:48 am Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) truth_aerator Hello Howard, RobertE, all, > ----------------------------------------------- >HCW: I am one of those who is an "experientialist" (or phenomenalist) >who considers there to be nothing but experiencing >=================================================== My understanding is this. There is the external and independent of desire, cause for objects that can be experienced in such and such a way. I do not think that we should mix "experiencing" with the external, independent of desire cause. Things happen regardless of our wants, thus showing that there are causes outside and independent of one's desire, perceptions, imaginations, etc. I've read many smart arguments about comparing dreams with reality, but they miss a very important thing. In a dream, or fantasy, or deluded experience, I can perceive an object to be in front of me (such as gold in my hand). However other people cannot see such an objects because "gold in my hands" is private perception that has no external basis that other people could perceive as well. When it comes to real gold in front of many people then no matter how much I try to experience it not being there, the other people will still see it. Desire and imagination does not over ride, desire-independent properties and causes. Unlike a dream, I cannot imagine it away or imagine it being here and have such perception available to others. IMHO. With best wishes, Alex #116702 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:26 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! kenhowardau Hi PT, -------- <. . .> pt: To recap, ultimately it seems we have the following cases that can be conventionally described as abstention: -akusala citta, concept as object, no panna and virati cetasikas -kusala citta, concept as object, yes virati, no panna -kusala citta, concept as object, yes virati and panna -kusala citta, dhamma as obejct, yes virati and panna. -------- KH: That seems right to me. I might add that the first category could include strong akusala. A deluded idea of abstaining from adultery, for example, could involve killing the temptress. :-) In the third category I am not sure about the timing. Does panna arise in the same citta as virati, or not until a closely following citta (that takes a dhamma as its object)? A similar question might be asked about the last category. Can virati take a dhamma as its object? If it can't, how can all the Path factors be said to arise together? Panna could take the [just fallen away] virati-dhamma as its object, of course, but I don't that's what is meant by 'arising together.' Sorry if I have only made things complicated! Ken H #116703 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Aug 11, 2011 9:31 am Subject: The Simile of the Saw! bhikkhu5 Friends: Effective is the Simile of the Saw with 11 Advantages! The Blessed Buddha once said: If, Bhikkhus and friends, evil robbers should cut off your limbs with a double-handled saw, whoever gives way to anger would not be acting on my advice. For thus should you train yourselves: Unperturbed shall our minds remain, no evil words shall escape our lips, friendly and full of sympathy shall we remain, with heart full of goodwill, without any hidden ill will, will we pervade all beings with only friendly thoughts, intense, vast, deep, infinite, freed from all hate, anger and irritation! MN 21 If, Bhikkhus, this sublime mental release by all-embracing friendliness has been much trained and developed, made one's vehicle & foundation, if it is firmly established, brought to greatness and full perfection, one may expect these eleven blessings: 1: One sleeps peacefully! 2: One Awakes peacefully 3: No evil dreams! 4: One is liked by all humans & 5: non-humans 6: The Devas protect one! 7: Fire, poison, & weapons cannot touch one 8: Quick is concentration! 9: One's features brighten up! 10: No panic at death! 11: One is reborn in the fine-material Brahma-world or even higher... AN 11:16 <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * <....> #116704 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Aug 11, 2011 5:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! sarahprocter... Hi Pt (Ken H & Phil), --- On Fri, 5/8/11, ptaus1 wrote: >As mentioned, my understanding is that abstention can be generalized into three different levels: 1. without understanding, when one abstains because of intellectual beliefs like - god will punish me, it's the law, etc. 2. with intelectual understanding, when one intellectually understands what'll be the detrimental consequences of a deed, and thus abstains. 3. with direct understanding, when there's recognition of craving for this, or against that, as anatta. >I believe that out of these three, the one you are most in favor of is the last one - when essentially a dhamma is recognised as anatta. And this is also the only one out of the three that actually constitutes gradual eradication of defilements, and can be said to be exclusively Buddhist. .... S: I thought your summary was very good and is similar to that which we read in the texts. Fyi, having brought CMA and the commentary to Hong Kong, this is what we read in the texts as summarised in CMA, ch 11 #6 and Guide under "#6 The Abstinences (virati)": 1) sammaavaacaa, 2) sammaakammanto, 3) sammaa-aajiivo caa ti tisso viratiyo naama. "1) Right speech, 2) Right action, and 3) right livelihood: these three are termed abstinences." Guide to #6 "The abstinences: The viratis are three beautiful mental factors which are responsible for the deliberate abstinence from wrong conduct by way of speech, action, and livelihood. In mundane consciousness, the viratis are operative only on an occasion when one intentionally refrains from a wrong mode of conduct for which an opportunity has arisen. When a person refrains from evil deeds without an opportunity for their performance arising, this is not a case of virati but of pure moral conduct (siila). The commentators distinguish three types of virati: (1) natural abstinence; 2) abstinence by undertaking precepts; and 3) abstinence by eradication.[see Asl 103-104; Expos., pp. 136-7] 1) Natural abstinence (sampattavirati) is the abstinence from evil deeds when the opportunity arises to engage in them, due to the consideration of one's social position, age, level of education, etc. An example is refraining from theft out of concern that one's reputation would be hurt if one is caught. 2) Abstinence by undertaking precepts (samaadaanavirati) is the abstinence from evil deeds because one has undertaken to observe precepts, for example, the Five Precepts of abstaining from killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, false speech, and intoxicants. 3) Abstinence by eradication (samucchedavirati) is the abstinence associated with the supramundane path consciousness, which arises eradicating the dispositions towards evil deeds. Whereas the previous two viratis are mundane, this one is supramundane. *** "The three viratis have the respective characteristics of non-transgression by bodily misconduct, by wrong speech, and by wrong livelihood. Their function is to shrink back from evil deeds. They are manifested as the abstinence from such deeds. Their proximate causes are the special qualities of faith, shame, fear of wrongdoing, fewness of wishes, etc. They should be regarded as the mind's aversion to wrongdoing." *** S: I think they all arise with kusala cittas only, but it may be quite weak in the first case. No 2) is much more than abstaining because one has just recited the precepts, as a child might do in a Buddhist country. I believe there has to be an understanding of the harm of not abstaining. Clearly, no 3) is through the accumulation of satipatthana. Metta Sarah ====== #116705 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 11, 2011 5:46 pm Subject: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Eights, 10-end and commentary. nilovg Dear friends, sutta 10. DN.33.3.1(10) 'Eight stages of mastery: (a) perceiving forms internally, one sees external forms, limited and beautiful or ugly; (b) (as (a) but) unlimited; (c) not perceiving forms internally, one sees external forms, limited ...; (d) (as (c) but) unlimited; not perceiving forms internally, one perceives forms that are (e) blue, [iii 261] (f) yellow, (g) red, (h) white ... (A.t.tha abhibhaayatanaani. Ajjhatta.m ruupasa~n~nii eko bahiddhaa ruupaani passati parittaani suva.n.nadubba.n.naani, ti eva.msa~n~nii hoti. Ida.m pa.thama.m abhibhaayatana.m......etc. ) ------- N: The commentary states that the eight stages of mastery have been explained before. They have been explained in the "Expositor" (Part V, Ch X) and in the commentary to the "Parinibbaanasutta", Diigha Nikaaya, Ch III, 24 (translation in "The Buddha's Last Days", by Yang- Gyu An). It is explained that they master the opposing states and the objects. Perceiving forms inwardly, he applies a preliminary exercise on blue to his hair, the bile, of the pupils of his eyes. This refers to the colour kasinas used in samatha. The meditator can use this subject also in relation to his body. Blue does not correspond exactly to the Pali term niila. It may be darkly lustrous or nigrescent. As to yellow, this can be applied to fat, skin, handpalm, footsole, yellow part of his eyes. As to red, this can be applied to flesh, blood, tongue or red part of eyes. As to white, this can be applied to bone, tooth, nail or white part of eyes. As to perceiving forms outwardly, this pertains to nimittas outside, not in his body. As to beautiful and ugly, the Expositor states that this refers to pure colours and impure colours. But it mentions that in the Nikaaya commentaries these positions of mastery have been shown as beautiful or ugly by way of limited and immeasurable. As to limited and immeasurable: limited is not expanded and unlimited or immeasurable is expanded. In the Dhammasanganii translated by U Kyaw Khine (225 etc.) unlimited is translated as "capable of extension as required". A meditation subject like a kasina can be extended in size. As to not perceiving forms inwardly, it is explained that he does not get it or does not wish for it. We read in the Dhammasanganii 227 (translated by U Kyaw Khine) with regard to perceiving forms outwardly: "When at a certain time one practises the way for the attainment of rebirth in the Fine Material Sphere, not by concentrating on any part of the body, but by concentrating on an external object of meditation capable of extension as required, with the thought: 'I shall know and see those objects with mastery over them,' and getting detached from sensual pleasures... he achieves and remains in the first jhaana by difficult practice and slow acquisition of jhaana attainment..." The following sections mention difficult practice and swift acquisition of jhaana attainment, facile practice and slow acquisition of jhaana attainment, facile practice and swift acquisition of jhaana attainment. ---------- Conclusion: By the attainment of jhaana, attachment to sense objects are temporarily subdued. By the examples of difficult or facile practice and slow or swift acquisition of jhaana we see that people's inclinations and accumulated skill are different. One is bound to be attached to one's body, to one's hairs, blood, skin or bones, but only different colours can be seen. The colours of one's body are no different from the colours of objects outside. Samatha developed to the degree of jhaana leads to detachment from sense objects, but attachment is not eradicated. By the development of vipassanaa one learns to be aware of colour in order to understand it as only an element that can be seen. What one takes for one's body are only elements that are impermanent. First the wrong idea of self or mine is to be eradicated, and later on attachment to sense objects is eradicated and eventually, at the stage of arahatship all clinging is eradicated. ******* Nina. #116706 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 11, 2011 6:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Factors for predominance condition nilovg Dear Ken O, Op 9-aug-2011, om 16:16 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > > > They are two different aspect. If you wish to describe > predominance, then > concentrate on it. If we mixed them together hetu and > predominance, then people > will think hetu is predominance which is not. > > We have to be clear on dhamma. > -------- N: Correct, we should distinguish between the conditions of root- condition and predominance-condition. As to citta, akusala citta can be predominance-condition, but it has to have two roots. Thus, the types of lobha-mla-citta and dosa-mla-citta can be predominance- condition: they have a dominating influence over the accompanying cetasikas in the fulfilling of a task or enterprise in an unwholesome way. It is the citta that is predominance-condition, not lobha or dosa. Lobha cetasika is not a predominant factor, but lobha-mla-citta, citta rooted in attachment, can be predominance-condition, as we have seen. For example, when there is wrong view and wrong practice, the citta arising at that moment is firm and steady in this way of akusala, and then that citta is predominance-condition for the accompanying dhammas. That type of citta is rooted in moha and lobha and thus it is conditioned by these two roots by way of root-condition. More than one condition operate at the same time. Another example: vima.msa, pa~n~naacetasika, can be a predominant factor. At the same time it conditions the citta it accompanies by way of root-condition. ------- Nina. #116707 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Aug 11, 2011 6:25 pm Subject: Ann's reflections sarahprocter... Dear Ann, You wrote (off-list): >I am ruminating about what it means to "consider the present moment" and hopefully will post about it soon - so much thinking and best to know that thinking is just thinking and that only the gradual development of understanding will give rise to more awareness of the present moment. Looking for the present moment is, of course, wrong practice ... . The last sentence of your email is always a good reminder - just the present citta. .... S: We do all have long stories about our problems, our health, our concerns and all the wordly conditions as I wrote to Lukas about. Thankfully, we have the Dhamma to remind us, as you say, that it's "just thinking" on account of what is experienced through the senses. A moment of bodily painful experience, for example, is so often followed by long stories about our various ailments. As K.Sujin reminded me once when I was feeling miserable with a cold, the cittas with aversion make it so much worse. When there is an understanding now of the heat, the cold, the visible object, the thinking or any of the other dhammas experienced, there's no 'label' about any condition, no concern about oneself. I used to be puzzled when she reminded a friend with cancer not to give even this a label, but just to understand the realities. People take this the wrong way and think that she's suggesting one needn't see doctors or obtain treatment. On the contrary, our life unfolds by conditions anyway - all the conventional actions will follow as they always have - but sati can dart in anytime and be aware of the present dhamma so that one is not enslaved for those moments by ignorance which accompanies our thinking most the day. I like the simile of the sick-room from the Visuddhimagga, Ch. XIV "220. 4. 'As to simile': the materiality aggregate [as object] of clinging is like a sick-room because it is the dwelling-place, as physical basis, door, and object, of the sick man, namely, the consciousness aggregate as object of clinging. The feeling aggregate as object of clinging is like the sickness because it afflicts. The perception aggregate as object of clinging is like the provocation of the sickness because it gives rise to feeling associated with greed, etc., owing to perception of sense desires, and so on. The formations aggregate as object of clinging is like having recourse to what is unsuitable because it is the source of feeling, which is the sickness; for it is said: 'Feeling as feeling is the formed that they form' (S.iii,87), and likewise: 'Because of unprofitable kamma having been performed and stored up, resultant body-consciousness has arisen accompanied by pain' (Dhs.556). The consciousness aggregate as object of clinging is like the sick man because it is never free from feeling, which is the sickness." S: Feeling as the sickness which always afflicts. We're so susceptible to the feelings in the day, aren't we? I always appreciate and find your comments helpful. As you say, any looking for the present moment is wrong practice. Gradually we can learn what the middle path is - the path of right understanding of the presently appearing dhamma without any looking or trying to find it! Pls share any of your further 'ruminations':) Metta Sarah ======== #116708 From: "philip" Date: Thu Aug 11, 2011 7:47 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Smell etc, inseparable rupas philofillet Hi Nina, I heard this topic mentionned in a talk, it is the nimitta of many kalappas that is the object of awareness not just one kalapa, just one is too tiny. This nimitta makes it easier to understand how there can be awareness of fleeting dhammas. Metta, Phil #116709 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 11, 2011 7:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ann's reflections nilovg Dear Sarah and Ann, Ann has very good ruminations. I agree that looking for the present moment is not helpful. It is understanding that will perform this task, not we. But we forget this! Op 11-aug-2011, om 10:25 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > > I used to be puzzled when she reminded a friend with cancer not to > give even this a label, but just to understand the realities. > People take this the wrong way and think that she's suggesting one > needn't see doctors or obtain treatment. On the contrary, our life > unfolds by conditions anyway - all the conventional actions will > follow as they always have - but sati can dart in anytime and be > aware of the present dhamma so that one is not enslaved for those > moments by ignorance which accompanies our thinking most the day. > ------ N: I remember this. We become so frightened when we hear the word cancer. -------- > > S: I like the simile of the sick-room from the Visuddhimagga, Ch. XIV > > "220. 4. 'As to simile': the materiality aggregate [as object] of > clinging is like a sick-room because it is the dwelling-place, as > physical basis, door, and object, of the sick man, namely, the > consciousness aggregate as object of clinging. ... > ------- I quote from my Vis. study and Tiika, that elaborates more: Vis. 220. Text Vis.: 4. 'As to simile': the materiality aggregate [as object] of clinging is like a sick-room because it is the dwelling-place, as physical basis, door, and object, of the sick man, namely, the consciousness aggregate as object of clinging. ------ N: The khandha of consciousness, citta, is like the sick man, and the ruupas that are the physical base, the sensedoor and the sense object are like the place where the sickness occurs, as the Tiika states. ------- Text Vis.: The feeling aggregate as object of clinging is like the sickness because it afflicts. ------ N: The Tiika explains that the feeling that is the sickness should be understood as the three kinds of dukkha: dukkha-dukkha, dukkha due to change (vipari.naamadukkha) and sa"nkhaaradukkha. dukkha-dukkha is intrinsic pain, which is bodily painful feeling and mental unhappy feeling. Dukkha due to change is suffering due to pleasant feeling, which brings suffering when it comes to an end. Sa"nkhaaradukkha is suffering inherent in all conditioned dhammas because they are oppressed by rise and fall. ------- Text Vis.: The perception aggregate as object of clinging is like the provocation of the sickness because it gives rise to feeling associated with greed, etc., owing to perception of sense desires, and so on. ------ N: Saaa is the provocation of sickness. The Tiika explains that just as the disorders of bile and so on, are the immediate cause of disease, so the perception which seizes the features of a man or a woman is the immediate cause of suffering due to change and so on, while it gives rise to feeling associated with lust. ----- Text Vis.: The formations aggregate as object of clinging is like having recourse to what is unsuitable because it is the source of feeling, which is the sickness; for it is said: 'Feeling as feeling is the formed that they form' (S.iii,87), and likewise: 'Because of unprofitable kamma having been performed and stored up, resultant body-consciousness has arisen accompanied by pain' (Dhs.556). -------- N: Feeling is formed, conditioned (sa"nkhaara), by a combination of conditioning factors. The expression 'they form' is the translation of the Pali abhisa"nkaronti. The cetasikas, other than feeling and saaa are sa"nkhaarakkhandha, the khandha of formations, and the chief of these cetasikas is cetanaa, volition or kamma (Co. to the 'To be devoured' sutta, S. III, 86). Akusala kamma that has been performed and accumulated (upacita) produces vipaaka in the form of body-consciousness accompanied by painful feeling. As we have seen, saaa is the near cause (aasannakaara.na) of sickness, just as bile or phlegm. The formations, with cetanaa as chief, are the root-cause (muula-kaara.na) of the sickness which is the dukkha of feeling, just as adversity as to temperature and food are the rootcause of sickness. -------- Text Vis.: The consciousness aggregate as object of clinging is like the sick man because it is never free from feeling, which is the sickness. --------- Conclusion: By this simile the disadvantage of being in the cycle of birth and death has been shown. Time and again saaa seizes the features of a pleasant object, such as a person or a thing, and gives rise to feeling with clinging, and therewith is the provocation of the sickness which is feeling. Feeling is sickness because it is subject to the three kinds of dukkha. The Commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (Topics of the Abhidhamma and Co. p. 281 ) explains that feeling and saaa constitute enjoyment and what facilitates that. Perversity of saaa facilitates clinging. As the Co. explains: '...when it occurs in the matter of the distorted view [N:vipallaasa or perversity] that perceives the beautiful in the ugly, recognition (saaa) becomes a facilitator of that.' We can be reminded that we are suffering from sickness at this moment. This simile can instill a sense of urgency to take recourse in the cure of illness, which is the development of insight leading to the eradication of all defilements. ******* Nina. #116710 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 11, 2011 7:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Smell etc, inseparable rupas nilovg Dear Phil, Op 11-aug-2011, om 11:47 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > I heard this topic mentionned in a talk, it is the nimitta of many > kalappas that is the object of awareness not just one kalapa, just > one is too tiny. This nimitta makes it easier to understand how > there can be awareness of fleeting dhammas. ------- N: We do not have to count, Kh Sujin said. Just the characteristic. But knowing that there are many reminds us that the kalapas are arising and falling away very rapidly. Which one? We would not know. The same with naama such as seeing. Which seeing? We do not have to find out, gone already. But the characteristic can be known little by little. ----- Nina. #116711 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Aug 11, 2011 9:48 pm Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Robert) - In a message dated 8/10/2011 6:51:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, RobertE, all, > ----------------------------------------------- >HCW: I am one of those who is an "experientialist" (or phenomenalist) >who considers there to be nothing but experiencing >=================================================== My understanding is this. There is the external and independent of desire, cause for objects that can be experienced in such and such a way. I do not think that we should mix "experiencing" with the external, independent of desire cause. ------------------------------------------------------- HCW: I do not conflate experiencing with the object-content of experience. They are not the same! But they are also not independent, inasmuch as they are mutually dependent, with neither ever existing without the other. There is no consciousness without it being the knowing OF some object-content, and there is no object that exists other than as the object-content of an act of consciousness. There is, for example, no seeing that is not the seeing of a sight, and there is no unseen sight floating in a sea of sights, each an independent, self-existent entity. To see at all is to see a sight, and to be a sight at all is to be an object of visual consciousness. It is like inside and outside: There is neither without the other. This is the lesson I take in the Sheaves of Reeds Sutta of the interdependence of vi~n~nana - as "the subject," and namarupa - as "the object". Ordinary experiential contact is dualistic, having as subjective pole vi~n~nana (or "separative knowing") and as objective pole its mental/physical object, the contact always being via exactly one of the six sense doors. ----------------------------------------------------- Things happen regardless of our wants, thus showing that there are causes outside and independent of one's desire, perceptions, imaginations, etc. ------------------------------------------------------ HCW: Not at all. Things happening (often) regardless of our wants merely says that our desires are not all-determining. This does not imply a self-existent "external world" of entities. Whether such exists or not is entirely independent of the fact of desire not being all-powerful. --------------------------------------------------- I've read many smart arguments about comparing dreams with reality, but they miss a very important thing. In a dream, or fantasy, or deluded experience, I can perceive an object to be in front of me (such as gold in my hand). However other people cannot see such an objects because "gold in my hands" is private perception that has no external basis that other people could perceive as well. ------------------------------------------------ HCW: You are distinguishing between private and shared experience. That is a valid distinction. It does not, however, guarantee a self-existent "external world". Shared, actually "similar and corresponding" (but never identical), experience may be, IMO, accounted for by similar and corresponding kamma. ---------------------------------------------- When it comes to real gold in front of many people then no matter how much I try to experience it not being there, the other people will still see it. ---------------------------------------------- HCW: Similar experience. That's all. The namas and rupas arising in one stream of consciousness are related to those in kammically related streams, but they are not one-and-the-same. On a hot day, when out walking, the heat I feel and the heat my wife feels are not the same rupas. Also, the sights I see, while related to those my wife sees, are not the same rupas. ---------------------------------------------- Desire and imagination does not over ride, desire-independent properties and causes. -------------------------------------------- HCW: This is irrelevant. -------------------------------------------- Unlike a dream, I cannot imagine it away or imagine it being here and have such perception available to others. -------------------------------------------- HCW: So what? Moreover: 1) No two people ever have exactly the same experience, and 2) Intentional action changes one's experience all the time, by something as simple, for example, as shutting one's eyes or looking elsewhere. -------------------------------------------- IMHO. ------------------------------------------- HCW: Me, too! ;-) ------------------------------------------ With best wishes, Alex =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #116712 From: Ken O Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 3:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Factors for predominance condition ashkenn2k Dear Nina >-------- >N: Correct, we should distinguish between the conditions of root- >condition and predominance-condition. >As to citta, akusala citta can be predominance-condition, but it has >to have two roots. Thus, the types of lobha-mla-citta and dosa-mla-citta can >be predominance- > >condition: they have a dominating influence over the accompanying >cetasikas in the fulfilling of a task or enterprise in an unwholesome >way. It is the citta that is predominance-condition, not lobha or dosa. >Lobha cetasika is not a predominant factor, but lobha-mla-citta, >citta rooted in attachment, can be predominance-condition, as we have >seen. For example, when there is wrong view and wrong practice, the >citta arising at that moment is firm and steady in this way of >akusala, and then that citta is predominance-condition for the >accompanying dhammas. >That type of citta is rooted in moha and lobha and thus it is >conditioned by these two roots by way of root-condition. More than >one condition operate at the same time. >Another example: vima.msa, pa~n~naacetasika, can be a predominant >factor. At the same time it conditions the citta it accompanies by >way of root-condition. yes in the Summary of the Topics of Abhidhamma, there are four dominants and they are also the basis of success. I would not said that just because citta is dominant in lobha mula citta, they are the pre-dominance. Because chanda, viriya could also be predomiance in the arisen of loba mula citta and not necessary citta is the pre-dominance. When one dominant arise, the other three cannot be dominant. It could also be object decisive support which cause a dominant influence to the cittas. A person practise a wrong practice could be due to viriya or chanda to be the pre-dominance and not necessary it is ditthi arisen with lobha mula cittas. so it depends on which is the dominant factor. Ken O #116713 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 3:57 am Subject: Re: .pdf VISUDDHIMAGGA - THE PATH OF PURIFICATION 2011.08.07 epsteinrob Hi Chris. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine" wrote: > > Hello all, > > Finally, Accesstoinsight has a .pdf of Ven āṇamoli's translation of: > VISUDDHIMAGGA - THE PATH OF PURIFICATION 2011.08.07 > > A bow of gratitude to the many ATI volunteers who helped with the transcription of this important classic text! - jtb > > Visuddhimagga - The Path of Purification: The Classic Manual of Buddhist Doctrine and Meditation, by Bhikkhu āṇamoli. > "The Visuddhimagga is the 'great treatise' of Theravada Buddhism, an encyclopedic manual of Buddhist doctrine and meditation written in the fifth century by the great Buddhist commentator, Bhadantacariya Buddhaghosa. The author's intention in composing this book is to organize the various teachings of the Buddha, found throughout the Pali Canon, into a clear and comprehensive path leading to the final Buddhist goal, Nibbana, the state of complete purification. In the course of his treatise Buddhaghosa gives full and detailed instructions on the forty subjects of meditation aimed at concentration, an elaborate account of the Buddhist Abhidhamma philosophy, and detailed descriptions of the stages of insight culminating in final liberation" Thanks so much for letting us know about this. Very exciting! Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #116714 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 4:28 am Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: Rob E.: > >I realize that the Dhamma will not exist as a viable form in the way that it does if a Buddha does not appear in the world, but I am wondering whether it is really all as linguistic and conceptual as the pariyatti-based view makes it appear. > ... > S: I think Nina quoted some helpful notes of Sukin's. Pariyatti is not about thinking about more and more concepts and words but about the beginning to directly understand what appears now. For example, as we read now, there is seeing, visible object and thinking about what is seen. Are we lost in the concepts or is there any understanding of the seeing, of the visible object or of the thinking which can be directly known now? I appreciate all that you said regarding the appearance and understsanding of the Dhamma and the path. Regarding pariyatti, the idea that pariyatti is the beginning of direct understanding confuses me. It seems that the point of pariyatti is that Right Concept must precede Direct Seeing. Is that a wrong apprehension on my part? If pariyatti is the beginning of direct understanding, how does that match up with patipatti and pativedha? It seems to me that I have heard of those stages as being of kind, not just of degree. Can you help me clarify where the Right Concept/Right Conceptual Understanding gives way to the other stages that involve more direct seeing of dhammas? Thanks, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #116715 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 4:51 am Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ---------------------------------------------- > HCW: > The simple elements of experience DO co-occur and interrelate, and > that integration is the basis for our macroscopic, conventional world view. I am not attached to the idea of the world of form being real or unreal, but more interested in whether the view of mere arising-ness should be the predominant view of the path, or whether one should attend to the qualities of intention and action as a "person-in-the-world" in order to follow the path. My view is that the psychophysical reality as it appears is the vehicle of the path, and that conventional Right Action, Meditation, etc., are the vehicles by which discernment, right understanding, etc., develop, rather than isolated reading, discussing, thinking and mere mental clarification of the Dhamma. I think that psychophysical activities that are kusala and the understanding of theoretical Dhamma form a unified feedback loop that dialectically develop the path. Without understanding, meditation might not have much to it, and without meditation understanding remains theoretical for most people. It is the concrete transformation of the psychophysical nervous system, along with intentional training of the mind, that heightens and clarifies the senses and mind into a state that allows them to discern "reality" more directly, with the guidance of the Dhamma thus applied through concrete development. That is my contention, as opposed to the idea that intellectual clarity will transform ordinary life-moments, in and of itself, into path moments through a kind of passive mystical development. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #116716 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 5:46 am Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) truth_aerator Hi RobertE, all, >R:I am not attached to the idea of the world of form being real or >unreal, >============================================================ Regardless of whether external objects exists or don't exist, pragmatically we have to treat them as existing. One avoids bumping into furniture and walls, no matter how much some can philosophize about their non-existence. Just because wall may be 99% empty of solid matter (as some front line research in physics says), it doesn't mean that one can walk through it as if it was empty space. "Conventional" actions still matter no matter how much one can disprove them in some abstract way. As for the path, the Buddha was clear that it has to be done, and that it is hard work. I believe that the Buddha was the Best Teacher and He knew how to best to explain the Dhamma. IMHO, when it comes to Buddhism, no one can explain it better or equal to the Buddha. At best we can quote directly His statements, but even then it is important not to take vague and rare phrases out of context to justify some idea that was not taught by Him. I don't believe that He was so vague as to require commentary that alters the message from "Do this" to "Don't do this". He was not incompetent. If He meant to be descriptive, then he would say so. I do not think that it is wise to take what He has said and make it mean exactly the opposite of what He meant. Whenever He has said "Do this", I believe He really meant it rather than "When I said "Do this", I was merely descriptive, never prescriptive. Please do not do this." sort of thing. IMHO, With best wishes, Alex #116717 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 5:55 am Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 8/11/2011 2:52:02 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ---------------------------------------------- > HCW: > The simple elements of experience DO co-occur and interrelate, and > that integration is the basis for our macroscopic, conventional world view. I am not attached to the idea of the world of form being real or unreal, but more interested in whether the view of mere arising-ness should be the predominant view of the path, or whether one should attend to the qualities of intention and action as a "person-in-the-world" in order to follow the path. ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: Whatever intentional actions we take effect many mind streams, including "our own", and what these are is important. It is the interactions among mind streams that constitute the basis for sila as regards "others". The point of view that rupas are merely physical object-contents of consciousness, and not external, self-existent entities doesn't do away with kamma, and that is because "no mind stream is an island"! ;-) Of *course* we should attend to the qualities of intention and action, and our thinking in terms of "persons in the world" is just that - (convenient) thinking. --------------------------------------------------- My view is that the psychophysical reality as it appears is the vehicle of the path, and that conventional Right Action, Meditation, etc., are the vehicles by which discernment, right understanding, etc., develop, rather than isolated reading, discussing, thinking and mere mental clarification of the Dhamma. I think that psychophysical activities that are kusala and the understanding of theoretical Dhamma form a unified feedback loop that dialectically develop the path. Without understanding, meditation might not have much to it, and without meditation understanding remains theoretical for most people. It is the concrete transformation of the psychophysical nervous system, along with intentional training of the mind, that heightens and clarifies the senses and mind into a state that allows them to discern "reality" more directly, with the guidance of the Dhamma thus applied through concrete development. That is my contention, as opposed to the idea that intellectual clarit y will transform ordinary life-moments, in and of itself, into path moments through a kind of passive mystical development. -------------------------------------------------- HCW: I *think* (LOL!) we are in agreement on this. The defilements come to be uprooted by the intentional practice of sila --> samadhi --> pa~n~na, where the arrows indicate necessary support, and the full picture is not linear, but continues as an ever-widening spiral, with wisdom feeding back, leading to a higher level of behavior, that to a higher level of meditative attentiveness and calm, and that to yet an even higher level of wisdom, and again and again and again until, finally, a super-mundane wisdom of sufficient power arises that uproots defilements. Mere thinking, and that is what Dhamma study is, while very important, is insufficient. --------------------------------------------------- Best, Robert E. ============================= With metta, Howard Silence and Practice Trump Study /All my days I have been raised among the Sages, and I found nothing better for oneself than silence; not study, but practice is the main thing; and one who talks excessively brings on sin./ (Shimon ben Rabban Gamliel, Ethics of the Fathers 1:17) #116718 From: "philip" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:52 am Subject: Re: Smell etc, inseparable rupas philofillet Hi Nina ( and Ann and all) Is the nimitta of these rupas also rupa? It cannot be experuenced through the body sense door but only the mind door, isn't that right., since it represents many kalapas that have fallen away? I think the answer will be that it doesn't matter, just be aware of characteristics, but why isn't nimitta a concept?I remember I heard Sayadaw U Silananda say tgat when there is nimitta the reality has fallen away, but for the purpose of satipatthana we can say it is still present. I remember Ann asked about nimitta at KK, and AS talked about it. Ann, do you remember what she said, I remember you taking lots of notes! Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Phil, > Op 11-aug-2011, om 11:47 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > > I heard this topic mentionned in a talk, it is the nimitta of many > > kalappas that is the object of awareness not just one kalapa, just > > one is too tiny. This nimitta makes it easier to understand how > > there can be awareness of fleeting dhammas. > ------- > N: We do not have to count, Kh Sujin said. Just the characteristic. > But knowing that there are many reminds us that the kalapas are > arising and falling away very rapidly. Which one? We would not know. > The same with naama such as seeing. Which seeing? We do not have to > find out, gone already. But the characteristic can be known little by > little. > ----- > Nina. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > #116719 From: "philip" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 10:41 am Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) philofillet Hi Alex and all I wonder if it can be said that the Buddha didn't teach about whether things and beings have an actual existence or not, but only taught how they are to be insighted for the sake of the liberarion of the mind. For example, doesn'y the chariot simile end with "he who sees in this way has true vision" or words to that effect? So whatever the Buddha taught was for the purpose of guiding the mind towards liberation, not for explaining the world as a scientist would? So for tge purpose of liberation, we are taught that objects and beings can only be experienced as concepts by us, if we bump into a chair, the chair we bump into can only be experienced as a chair rhrough mind door process, right, It is actually elemental rupas tgat we can directly experience through body sense... This sort of thing has been duscussed for years at DSG but I am only now starting to clue in or get hunches about it.., Metta, Phil > Regardless of whether external objects exists or don't exist, pragmatically we have to treat them as existing. One avoids bumping into furniture and walls, no matter how much some can philosophize about their non-existence. Just because wall may be 99% empty of solid matter (as some front line research in physics says), it doesn't mean that one can walk through it as if it was empty space. > "Conventional" actions still matter no matter how much one can disprove them in some abstract way. > > As for the path, the Buddha was clear that it has to be done, and that it is hard work. I believe that the Buddha was the Best Teacher and He knew how to best to explain the Dhamma. IMHO, when it comes to Buddhism, no one can explain it better or equal to the Buddha. At best we can quote directly His statements, but even then it is important not to take vague and rare phrases out of context to justify some idea that was not taught by Him. > > > I don't believe that He was so vague as to require commentary that alters the message from "Do this" to "Don't do this". He was not incompetent. If He meant to be descriptive, then he would say so. I do not think that it is wise to take what He has said and make it mean exactly the opposite of what He meant. Whenever He has said "Do this", I believe He really meant it rather than "When I said "Do this", I was merely descriptive, never prescriptive. Please do not do this." sort of thing. > > IMHO, > > With best wishes, > > Alex #116720 From: "philip" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 11:02 am Subject: Giving to immeasurable beings freedom from fear philofillet Hi all I love this sutta passage, it is referring to abhayadaana, the giving of freedom from danger and fear: "Herein, monks, a noble disciple gives up the taking of life and abstains from iy. By abstaining from (it) (he) gives to immeasurable beings freedom from fear, gives to them freedom from hostility and freedom from oppression. By giving to immeasurable beings freedom from fear, hostility and oppression, he himself will enjoy immeasurable freedom from f, h and o.". (AN 8, 39) The same is said about the other four precepts. I wonder if this is literally true or a stirring concept that supports the samattha subject of recollection of virtues or something like that. I guess it can't be literally true, but believing it is literally true conditions abstaining? Helpful in my case, occasionally, always a different stream(?)of conditioning dhammas at work behind any moment of abstaining Metta, Phil #116721 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 11:40 am Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) truth_aerator Hi Phil, all, >P:I wonder if it can be said that the Buddha didn't teach about >whether things and beings have an actual existence or not, but only >taught how they are to be insighted for the sake of the liberarion >of the mind. >======================================================== There is a difference between what is true and what is actually useful, and at what stage. Some teachings may be true, but how do they actually help you? Think about it. It is possible to say that the intersection, green/red light, pedestrians, cars, etc, do not exist. But how does this change your driving? For some people this teaching can be actually dangerous... If there are no pedestrians, then whom does one run over if there isn't anyone to run over? And what non-existent car can hurt non-existent pedestrian? The Buddha told us that there are inappropriate questions such as: "'Do I exist? Do I not exist?...Or, the view 'I have no self' arises in him really and firmly" (MN2). This is called inappropriate reflection that forms the center piece in some Modern teachings...! Buddha recommended to focus on 4NT instead of talking about existence/non-existence of Self. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.bpit.html Buddha had his scheme of Teaching for stream entry that was successful: "a step-by-step talk, i.e., a talk on giving, a talk on virtue, a talk on heaven; he declared the drawbacks, degradation, & corruption of sensual passions, and the rewards of renunciation. Then when he saw that Suppabuddha the leper's mind was ready, malleable, free from hindrances, elated, & bright, he then gave the Dhamma-talk peculiar to Awakened Ones, i.e., stress, origination, cessation, & path. And just as a clean cloth, free of stains, would properly absorb a dye, in the same way, as Suppabuddha the leper was sitting in that very seat, the dustless, stainless Dhamma eye arose within him, "Whatever is subject to origination is all subject to cessation." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.5.03.than.html Somehow some teachers don't follow such scheme and teach us that awakening takes a long time contrary to frequent statements of the Buddha about Awakening from 12 hours (MN85) to 7 days (MN10)... In 17 suttas in a row to the question of: q: "But, friend, if a bhikkhu is practising in accordance with the Dhamma, would it take him long to become an arahant?" Venerable Sariputta has said to 17 different people: A: "Not long, friend." SN38.16, SN 39.1-16 ... With best wishes, Alex #116722 From: "philip" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 12:30 pm Subject: Degrees of kusala philofillet Hi all There are three degrees of kusala, which are dana, sila and bhavava. Could anyone tell me according to the texts, what is different about kusala of these three degrees, different degrees of accompanying panna? Is kusala of the degree of bhavana achieved only by followers of the Buddha? Thanks Metta, Phil #116723 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:38 pm Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > As for the path, the Buddha was clear that it has to be done, and that it is hard work. I believe that the Buddha was the Best Teacher and He knew how to best to explain the Dhamma. IMHO, when it comes to Buddhism, no one can explain it better or equal to the Buddha. At best we can quote directly His statements, but even then it is important not to take vague and rare phrases out of context to justify some idea that was not taught by Him. That is well put, and I agree. > I don't believe that He was so vague as to require commentary that alters the message from "Do this" to "Don't do this". He was not incompetent. If He meant to be descriptive, then he would say so. I do not think that it is wise to take what He has said and make it mean exactly the opposite of what He meant. Whenever He has said "Do this", I believe He really meant it rather than "When I said "Do this", I was merely descriptive, never prescriptive. Please do not do this." sort of thing. I agree, and I frankly think it is ludicrous to say that Buddha did not mean to engage our volition and our intention when he said "Strive hard," "Do not cease...," "find a secluded place" and other definite admonitions and instructions. I think that we are meant, as you say, to work hard, to take right actions, and to engage in right practices to train the mind and body and take our part in developing the path, not just wait for it arise. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - #116724 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:41 pm Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > The defilements come to be uprooted by the intentional practice of > sila --> samadhi --> pa~n~na, where the arrows indicate necessary support, and > the full picture is not linear, but continues as an ever-widening spiral, > with wisdom feeding back, leading to a higher level of behavior, that to a > higher level of meditative attentiveness and calm, and that to yet an even > higher level of wisdom, and again and again and again until, finally, a > super-mundane wisdom of sufficient power arises that uproots defilements. Mere > thinking, and that is what Dhamma study is, while very important, is > insufficient. > --------------------------------------------------- Strangely, I understand what you are saying, and not-so-strangely, I strongly agree. :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #116725 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 9:02 am Subject: Aware and Settled! bhikkhu5 Friends: Acutely Aware is Aloof, Above, and at Ease! Once the Blessed One was staying at Vesli in Ambapli's grove. There and then, he taught the Bhikkhus in this very way: Bhikkhus a Noble Friend should remain: Aware and Settled! And how does a Noble remain Aware? In this: Such Noble Friend sees any Body as just a frame of materiality - a mere transient physical form - thereby keeping any lust and rejection arised for and of this world under firm control. Aroused, composed, & alert. Such Noble Friend sees any Feeling as just a reaction to sense contact - a mere short-lived mental response - thereby keeping any desire & aversion arised for this world under firm control. Just eager, calm and clear. Such Noble Friend sees any Mentality as just a passing set of moods - a mere ever-changing complex habitual mental formation - thereby keeping any craving and anger arised from this world under firm control, by being keen, balanced and attentive. Such Noble Friend sees any phenomenon as just a fleeting experience - a mere blinking appearance of a momentary mental state - thereby keeping any attraction and repulsion arised from this world under firm control by remaining aloof, above, at ease while acutely aware. Thus is a Noble Aware... And how does a Noble remain Settled? In this: When going out, & when returning such Friend is continuously settled in awareness of exactly that relocation When looking forward, & when gazing backward such Noble Friend is continuously settled in awareness of just exactly that seeing When bending a leg, & when stretching an arm such Noble Friend is continuously settled in awareness of only exactly that movement When wearing a robe, & when bearing a bowl such Noble Friend is continuously settled in awareness of exactly that presence... When eating, when drinking, when chewing, when tasting, and when swallowing such Noble Friend is continuously settled in awareness of exactly that eating process When using the toilet, when walking, standing, sitting, lying, sleeping, waking up, speaking, and when keeping silent such Noble Friend is continuously settled in awareness of exactly that activity... Thus is a Noble Settled... A Bhikkhu should remain Aware and Settled, Bhikkhus. This is our instruction to you. Comments. Unfailing Continuity of clear Awareness is the crucial issue here! That settled unfailing Awareness of all moments as they pass by mind flickering in time, can disable and eliminate the otherwise domineering autopilot and always pleasure-seeking monkey-mind! Black-hole non-awareness should noted in these common daily situations: "Oops where is my keys?", "Ach, I forgot my umbrella there... again!" Illustrative Story: A Zen monk once sought a teacher living in the mountains. When he reached his hut, he quickly entered after leaving his sandals outside. After his reverential bowing, but before he could make any request, this teacher asked him: "To which side of the door did you put your sandals outside?" Stunned by the fact that he could not remember this trivial fact, he realized just there on the very spot, that establishing unfailing continuous awareness was an essential requirement, he yet had to fulfill... He stayed therefore for years on this mountain with that well seeing teacher to do exactly that! Source: Samyutta Nikya - Kindred Sayings V On the four foundations of Awareness. <....> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <....> #116726 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 3:33 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! ptaus1 Hi KenH (Sarah, Phil), > pt: To recap, ultimately it seems we have the following cases that can be conventionally described as abstention: > -akusala citta, concept as object, no panna and virati cetasikas > -kusala citta, concept as object, yes virati, no panna > -kusala citta, concept as object, yes virati and panna > -kusala citta, dhamma as obejct, yes virati and panna. > -------- > > KH: I might add that the first category could include strong akusala. A deluded idea of abstaining from adultery, for example, could involve killing the temptress. :-) pt: Yeah, though I guess that wouldn't be much of abstention :) > KH: In the third category I am not sure about the timing. Does panna arise in the same citta as virati, or not until a closely following citta (that takes a dhamma as its object)? pt: I think in this case virati cetasika accompanies the citta and panna that take a concept as object. So there's no taking of dhamma as object at all, including before and after. > KH: A similar question might be asked about the last category. Can virati take a dhamma as its object? If it can't, how can all the Path factors be said to arise together? > > Panna could take the [just fallen away] virati-dhamma as its object, of course, but I don't that's what is meant by 'arising together.' pt: I think when citta takes a dhamma as object, such as lobha that has just fallen away, then panna, sati, sanna and other cetasikas have the same object as citta, so that should include virati cetasika as well. So that would be an instance of path factors arising together in the case of "abstention". Of course, a bit later citta and panna can take virati cetasika (that has just fallen away) as object, but strictly speaking that wouldn't be a case of abstention I think, like in the case when they take an akusala citta/cetasika that has just fallen away as object. Anyway, I think for our discussion, the most difficult is the case three in my list - when the object of citta is a concept, with panna and virati cetasikas. In the quote that Sarah gave from ACMA (thanks Sarah), that'd be abstention due to undertaking the precepts. In that light, the comments that Phil usually makes in terms of precepts for the sake of precepts, rather than satipatthana, seem correct to me, in that they are still kusala. In other words, if there's abstention due to appreciating pure conduct and knowing the results of mis/deeds, this is still kusala citta, even though there's no satipatthana. In fact, I'd go as far to say that this sort of abstention even develops kusala sijce there's understanding present there, even thoug it is on conceptual level. Of course, it should also be clear that this sort of abstention, though kusala, does not eradicate defilements, and so doesn't really solve the problem. So yes, as friends we should encourage eachother towards satipatthana, since that's the only way to eradicate defilements, as well as warn eachother against taking akusala for kusala (first case in my list), which I think is very easy to do because the first three cases in the list in essence rely on concepts, so it's very easy to fool yourself when thinking about these things or rationalising situations. So only with satipatthana can one be sure what's actually going on - kusala or akusala. Best wishes pt #116727 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 6:12 pm Subject: Re: Anagarika's precepts sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Lukas wrote: > > Dear Dhamma friends, > > How many precepts anagarikas have? Could u explain in more detailed way? The anagarika concept? > > is it possible to Anagarika to smoke cigarets? .... S: "Anagarika: (Pali/Sanskrit) 'Homeless one'. One who enters the homeless life without formally joining the Sangha." See more below from Wikipedia. 8 precepts including the abstaining from intoxicants. Better to give up cigarettes for one's health anyway, regardless of one's status! Why do you ask? Metta Sarah "In Theravada Buddhism, an anagarika (Pali: anāgārika/ā; lit., "homeless one") is a person who has given up most or all of his worldly possessions and responsibilities to commit fulltime to Buddhist practice. It is a midway status between monk and layperson where one takes on the Eight Precepts for the entire anagarika period, which could be for life. Anagarikas usually wear white clothes or robes, depending on the tradition they follow. Some traditions have special ordination ceremonies for anagarikas, while others simply take the eight precepts with a special intention. In monastic settings, lay attendants for monks or nuns are needed. The monastic rules restrict monks and nuns from many tasks that might be needed, including the use of money, driving, cooking, digging and cutting plants, so lay attendants help bridge this gap. Anagarikas differ from laity by their commitment to Buddhism, to their precepts and to the monastics. There is usually a notable difference in their manner, appearance and attire. In most cases, they are fulltime residents at the monastery where they ordained. Anagarikas often have the intention of becoming a monk or nun at a later point, though not always. In some monasteries a period as an anagarika, often one year, is required in order to take novice ordination. The main difference between the 8 precepts of an Anagarika and the 10 precepts of a novice monk is the rule of not handling money. Therefore, anagarika ordinations usually take place in forest monasteries where the monastic rules, including the one on not handling money, are strictly followed." ======= #116728 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 6:16 pm Subject: Re: Identity crisis: Are Buddhists atheists? sarahprocter... Dear Ven Caine Das, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Caine Das wrote: > > I apologize for the confusion Sarah. I have changed my email to reflect my ordination name. I am a Buddhist Monk. Rodney is my birth name. > > I live in Knoxville, TN currently. Thank you for the welcome to the group, the discussions are enriching. > > Caine Das ... S: It's good you're finding the discussions "enriching". Pls join in any threads anytime. Is there a monastery in Knoxville? May I ask whether you were ordained in the States? Metta Sarah ====== #116729 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 6:22 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Alberto's note sarahprocter... Dear Nina, (Alberto & all), The following is a helpful extract for us all, thx for sharing it: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Acharn Sujin reminded us that no matter what kind of problems arise, we can only solve them by remembering that in the ultimate sense there is no person, only citta, consciousness, cetasika, mental factors which accompany citta, and rpa. <....> When we have more understanding that life is actually citta, cetasika and rpa, we will be less inclined to think of a "self", of this or that person who speaks or acts in a particular way towards "us". We make our life complicated when we think with worry about situations, about problems concerning people, about the way we should act in this or that situation. Instead of thinking of problems we should remember that there are only citta, cetasika and rpa. Thinking and worry are only nmas which arise because of conditions and which are beyond control. By right understanding of citta, cetasika and rpa problems can be solved in a more direct, effective way. > .... S: It's so very true and the more understanding of dhammas, the fewer questions/dilemmas about situations. We never know what result of kamma will be experienced next and all kinds of thinking are conditioned too. Metta Sarah ======= #116730 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 6:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Appreciation of the Group sarahprocter... Dear Kelvin, --- On Fri, 5/8/11, Kelvin wrote: >K: Of course there's no shortage of ways to go wrong and Commentaries are an attempt to prevent that. But you 'chose' to study Theravada and consider and reflect whatever is taught in it. You focus on a certain passage and consider it, you don't jump all around. .... S: It seems that way, but actually just conditioned dhammas which reflect wisely or unwisely on the Teachings. Again, it depends on the conditioned dhammas whether there is a "focus on a certain passage" or a "jump all around". Different accumulations, different conditions at different times. We may start reading a passage or reflecting on a post when the phone rings or we jump up to attend to some household duty. Like now, I have the radio on and I'm thinking about jumping up to turn on the air-con as it's very hot here.....just different dhammas, no rule at all. .... >There are plenty of intentional actions arahants can do. .... S: Again, conditioned cetana and other factors. Just no kilesa. No 'arahat" in an ultimate sense. .... >What I cannot do is have complete control over the arising dhammas and have them be different. But there's so many arising at the present moment so surely it's integral to be able to at least select a particular factor to study. .... S: Dhammas arise and fall away far too fast for any selection and in any case, there's no self to select anyway. Take seeing consciousness now - how can it be selected for study? By the time there's an idea, a concept about seeing, the seeing has long fallen away and there have been countless other sense and mind door processes. So it's just an idea about seeing and a wish to select it. .... >It may very well fail but after sufficient practice and skillful means one can certainly get better at it. It is not making one thing arise instead of another but really understanding the process. Otherwise there would be no hope of really experiencing it and having a clear understanding of anything, dhammas or concepts or what have you. .... S: I understand what you're saying, but what you describe as practice is a thinking about "the process", not a direct understanding of what appears now without any selection at all. This doesn't mean the direct understanding of dhammas is hopeless - there can be awareness right now, by conditions only, when there is no wishing or attempting to make it arise. The craving for and attempting to be aware is a hindrance to the path. ... >I think Buddha's position and teaching is pretty clear on this control, atta and practice. As I said prior, we should realize he's explaining in 3D so really it makes no sense for us to keep arguing in 2D. Recall the description of Abhidhamma's accomplishment to taking the water in the sea and then being able to tell each droplet's source. We are always going to experience in compounded way with all the different sense-doors and factors overlaid upon each other. It's never going to be like each vithi process comes by itself and that's all you observe. Without means to be able to highlight certain parts amidst all that's going on, we cannot even infer the process. .... S: I agree that there's never going to be the Buddha's wisdom which knows each vithi process and each individual dhamma which arises and falls away. However, it's possible to develop satipatthana, attain insight and become enlightened by gradually understanding the characteristics of particular dhammas - particular namas and rupas which appear - without the omniscient powers of a Buddha. This is not a "compunded" whole, but the nature of such dhammas which become more and more familiar as they're understood. Take hardness - it has a characteristic which can be known directly when experienced without being mixed up with a "compound" of sense and mind-door vithis. If we think that this is impossible, then the thinking and the doubt are dhammas which can be directly known too. ... >K: To remove even the seeds of breakage of sila is pretty tough. Direct experience of the dhammas with irrefutable proof is going to be required. .... S: I agree. ... > Even the flash of annoyance or impatience how it can build up and could potentially lead to breakage of sila at a momentary slip. Being able to guard all the sense-doos and remain unswayed was a trait well praised by Buddha but that also does not happen automatically. ... S: right, just gradually through the development of satipatthana. The annoyance/impatience can also be known - again just fleeting dhammas not belonging to a self. ... >As you said I was born in Burma and then grew up in America but mainly came for this purpose. It turns out I need the help of sensations to investigate deeper and without a proper anchor I was floundering. I know this to be my experience but it does not have the truth for others. ... S: By "sensations", do you understand this to refer to namas (vedana) or rupas experienced through the body-sense? I understand the appeal of the technique. I think it's rather like a Chinese Qi gong practice of chi energy and very beneficial for the health, but not sure it has anything to do with satipatthana. Just my thought, of course! .... >Any misunderstanding is due to my own lack of ability and not the fault of the ancient ones. ... S: Likewise and nicely said. A treat to discuss dhamma with you again, Kelvin. I appreciate you careful consideration of all the texts and acceptance of all the Theravada teachings. Metta Sarah p.s and I forgot all about feeling hot and needing the a/c on as I started writing more to you! Conditions..... ===== #116731 From: "philip" Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 9:11 pm Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) philofillet Hi Alex > There is a difference between what is true and what is actually useful, and at what stage. Some teachings may be true, but how do they actually help you? Ph: Yes, the Buddha in his infinite compassion went out into the world to teach Dhamma for the benefit of beings, we know that. So it is impossible that he would teach to all beings in the same direct-to-paramattha way, though that is the deepest and best way for those whose understanding is ripe. (And even for those of us whose understanding is not ripe, it is a good topic to hear and reflect on, as long as we are on sound ground with respect to kusala of the degree of dana and sila.) >>Think about it. It is possible to say that the intersection, green/red light, pedestrians, cars, etc, do not exist. But how does this change your driving? For some people this teaching can be actually dangerous... If there are no pedestrians, then whom does one run over if there isn't anyone to run over? And what non-existent car can hurt non-existent pedestrian? Ph: But you do agree that it is useful and helpful to understand that the car can only be understood as a concept by our understanding, that is the point, I think. When I sat and meditated in Canada, looking a tree reflected in a pond, I understood that from the point of view of my cognition processes, the tree reflected in the pond was no more or less real than the tree standing on solid ground. That was kind of an important understanding for me. The point is the processes that go on in our mind. When you are meditating, or just contemplating or whatever, the telephone pole that is outside your window is no more real than the telephone pole you conjure in your mind, they are both concepts. The physical existence of a telephone pole in the world is not the Buddha's business, it is only what goes on through our sense doors and mind doors that matters. A "telephone pole" could never have actual existence through our sense doors and mind doors, hardness could, colour could, but "pole" couldn't. Does that make sense, I'm just starting to reflect on these sort of topics, baby steps for me here.... Metta, Phil > The Buddha told us that there are inappropriate questions such as: > "'Do I exist? Do I not exist?...Or, the view 'I have no self' arises in him really and firmly" (MN2). > This is called inappropriate reflection that forms the center piece in some Modern teachings...! > > Buddha recommended to focus on 4NT instead of talking about existence/non-existence of Self. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.bpit.html > > Buddha had his scheme of Teaching for stream entry that was successful: > > "a step-by-step talk, i.e., a talk on giving, a talk on virtue, a talk on heaven; he declared the drawbacks, degradation, & corruption of sensual passions, and the rewards of renunciation. Then when he saw that Suppabuddha the leper's mind was ready, malleable, free from hindrances, elated, & bright, he then gave the Dhamma-talk peculiar to Awakened Ones, i.e., stress, origination, cessation, & path. And just as a clean cloth, free of stains, would properly absorb a dye, in the same way, as Suppabuddha the leper was sitting in that very seat, the dustless, stainless Dhamma eye arose within him, "Whatever is subject to origination is all subject to cessation." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.5.03.than.html > > Somehow some teachers don't follow such scheme and teach us that awakening takes a long time contrary to frequent statements of the Buddha about Awakening from 12 hours (MN85) to 7 days (MN10)... > > In 17 suttas in a row to the question of: > q: "But, friend, if a bhikkhu is practising in accordance with the Dhamma, would it take him long to become an arahant?" > > Venerable Sariputta has said to 17 different people: > A: "Not long, friend." > SN38.16, SN 39.1-16 > ... > > With best wishes, > Alex > #116732 From: Caine Das Date: Fri Aug 12, 2011 10:00 pm Subject: Re: Identity crisis: Are Buddhists atheists? hamugbodas Blessings Sarah, Unfortunately, there is no Monastery in TN in my area. Yes, I was ordained in New York. My teacher was trained in Nepal and Sri Lanka. Thank you for the invite to the discussions. They remind me of being trained. Caine Das #116733 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Aug 13, 2011 1:25 am Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) truth_aerator Hi Phil, all, >Ph: Yes, the Buddha in his infinite compassion went out into the >world to teach Dhamma for the benefit of beings, we know that. So it >is impossible that he would teach to all beings in the same direct- >to-paramattha way, though that is the deepest and best way for those >whose understanding is ripe. (And even for those of us whose >understanding is not ripe, it is a good topic to hear and reflect >on, as long as we are on sound ground with respect to kusala of the >degree of dana and sila.) How do we know which teaching suits us better? Maybe we should use both as a tool to let go (but never to accumulate things, even if they are mental theories), but appropriately and at a proper time. Sometimes putting cart in front of a horse is counterproductive. >Ph: But you do agree that it is useful and helpful to understand >that the car can only be understood as a concept by our >understanding, Sometimes "conventional" teaching can be just as effective or even more so to make craving cease. IMHO it can be better for some to contemplate the drawbacks of conventionals. Ex: The hard work involved to get a car and pay for its insurance, gas, maintenance, etc. The worry about keeping the car safe (the more luxurious it is, the more threat of theft). And then very quickly the enjoyment of it will fade, while one is still stuck with bills. Same with many other acquisitions in life. Also, here is another car metaphor when it comes to N8P. In order to use the car to drive from place A to B one doesn't need to know all complex chemistry, physics, electronics, manufacturing, history, etc. One just needs to know how to drive. If one tries to study everything about every transistor and microchip, one will die before sitting in a car and driving just like someone who doesn't have these complex knowledges. Even more so, trying to keep all these sciences in mind can make one to distracted to drive which requires attentive mind that isn't busy thinking about something else. N8P is a car to be used to get to a destination. Time is valuable. The amount of things to study is too much. It is important to cut out all unessential and focus on the essential. IMHO. With metta, Alex #116734 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sat Aug 13, 2011 1:54 am Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) moellerdieter Hi Howard und Robert E , you wrote: Hi, Robert - In a message dated 8/11/2011 2:52:02 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ---------------------------------------------- > HCW: > The simple elements of experience DO co-occur and interrelate, and > that integration is the basis for our macroscopic, conventional world view. snip D: well considered exchange ...if you allow me to say ;-) with Metta Dieter #116735 From: "philip" Date: Sat Aug 13, 2011 1:56 am Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) philofillet Hi Alex > > >Ph: But you do agree that it is useful and helpful to understand >that the car can only be understood as a concept by our >understanding, > > > Sometimes "conventional" teaching can be just as effective or even more so to make craving cease. IMHO it can be better for some to contemplate the drawbacks of conventionals. Ex: The hard work involved to get a car and pay for its insurance, gas, maintenance, etc. The worry about keeping the car safe (the more luxurious it is, the more threat of theft). And then very quickly the enjoyment of it will fade, while one is still stuck with bills. Same with many other acquisitions in life. Ph: True, as we know there are suttas for householders very much like the above, In Samyutta Nikaya, maybe 7, around there, there are discourses addressed to a king who is earnest but dull-witted,according to BB, there are peopke lije that who don't have potential to awaken in this lifetime but the Buddha teaches himabout mundane topics such as not overeating, for health. People want to insisttgatsuchsuttas are actually about satipatthana, and I'mgoing totry to keep my mind open to tgat possibility, but while BB is probably over-estimated, it seems unlikely tgat he is as consistently and thoroughly wrong as he would have to be if AS students were never wrong on occasion. > Also, here is another car metaphor when it comes to N8P. In order to use the car to drive from place A to B one doesn't need to know all complex chemistry, physics, electronics, manufacturing, history, etc. One just needs to know how to drive. Ph: I can't go any further with this car metaphor. Could you pleAse rephrase in Dhamma practice vs theory terms? Thanks. Metta, Phil If one tries to study everything about every transistor and microchip, one will die before sitting in a car and driving just like someone who doesn't have these complex knowledges. Even more so, trying to keep all these sciences in mind can make one to distracted to drive which requires attentive mind that isn't busy thinking about something else. > > N8P is a car to be used to get to a destination. Time is valuable. The amount of things to study is too much. It is important to cut out all unessential and focus on the essential. > > IMHO. > > With metta, > Alex > #116736 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:25 am Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) truth_aerator Hi Phil, all, >A: Also, here is another car metaphor when it comes to N8P. In order >to use the car to drive from place A to B one doesn't need to know all >complex chemistry, physics, electronics, manufacturing, history, etc. >One just needs to know how to drive. >============================================================= >Ph: I can't go any further with this car metaphor. Could you pleAse >rephrase in Dhamma practice vs theory terms? Thanks. >============================================================= It was a modern rephrasing of "Parable of being shot with an arrow". If one tries to answer all questions prior to practice, then one can never come to practice because there can be potentially infinite amount of questions and theory to study. The more one knows, the more questions one can ask. The more answers one gets, the more one knows. Infinite loop. IMHO the behaviour should reflect one's knowledge. It seems that some may know more than Arahants x 100, and yet themselves are not even Stream-enterers. Something is missing from this picture... As long as one has defilements, one can misuse anything, including Theoretic Dhamma knowledge. IMHO, With best wishes, Alex #116737 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 13, 2011 7:13 am Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter (and Robert) - In a message dated 8/12/2011 11:54:09 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard und Robert E , you wrote: Hi, Robert - In a message dated 8/11/2011 2:52:02 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ---------------------------------------------- > HCW: > The simple elements of experience DO co-occur and interrelate, and > that integration is the basis for our macroscopic, conventional world view. snip D: well considered exchange ...if you allow me to say ;-) ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Thanks, Dieter! :-) Yes, I'll allow it! ;-)) --------------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter ============================ With metta, Howard P. S. Good to hear from you. :-) Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #116738 From: "philip" Date: Sat Aug 13, 2011 7:49 am Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) philofillet Hi Alex > It was a modern rephrasing of "Parable of being shot with an arrow". > > If one tries to answer all questions prior to practice, then one can never come to practice because there can be potentially infinite amount of questions and theory to study. The more one knows, the more questions one can ask. The more answers one gets, the more one knows. Infinite loop. Ph: I see. My impression was that the poisoned arrow simile questions are irrelevant ratherthan premature. Having a detailed knowledge of Abhidhammma could never be irrelevant, in my opinion, but the weight one places on the vslue of one's ability to place obe's experience within that framework of theory could be harmful if it prevents folliwing prescribed teachings, for example, because of this belief self view should be absent fron any Dhamma-related activities which is of course putting cart before the horse. > IMHO the behaviour should reflect one's knowledge. It seems that some may know more than Arahants x 100, and yet themselves are not even Stream-enterers. Something is missing from this picture... > > As long as one has defilements, one can misuse anything, including Theoretic Dhamma knowledge. Ph: You may be right. But on the other hand look at the horrid case of peopke who reject even the most basic theory, such as that person at Dhammawheel you tried to help understand that jyst because she couldn't experience tge Hell realm hete and now didn't make the Buddha's teaching wring. In my opinion the "experience first" people are likely to go much further wrong than thise who have great book knowledge. Well, their refusal to benefit from meditation is a mystery ti me, I find meditation makeswhatI have learned from the books clearer, it ceetainly confirms how uncontrollable the mind is. But I am lucky not to ve a devotee of any of the gurus, such as M or G, I thinj thosr peopke risk gettibg locked into a belief that their technique leads to awakening. Ok, over and out on this topic for me, Alex. Thanks. Metta, Phil #116739 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Aug 13, 2011 8:35 am Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) truth_aerator Hi Phil, all, I am all for studying and against ignorant practice. It is just that I believe that there is a fine line between enough study and too much study. It seems to me that there is a point after which to study more would be inefficient use of one's precious time at best to potentially bad (one could misuse knowledge, or get carried away to much by mental ideas). 1)The more one knows, the more questions one can ask. 2) The more questions get answered, the more one knows... Back to step 1. See the self-reinforcing circle? With best wishes, Alex #116740 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Aug 13, 2011 11:51 am Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! kenhowardau Hi Pt, -------- <. . .> > pt: I think in this case virati cetasika accompanies the citta and panna that take a concept as object. So there's no taking of dhamma as object at all, including before and after. -------- KH: That's what I used to think. The trouble with it, however, is that panna knows only dhammas. The panna of samatha knows kusala from akusala, and the panna of vipassana knows the other characteristics of dhammas. Do you remember this coming up in another thread (about jhana)? When a jhana citta takes a concept as its object, how can panna know kusala citta from akusala citta at the same time? If I understood Jon's explanation properly, it was that panna arouse in a separate citta that took a nama-dhamma as its object. ------------------------ > > KH: A similar question might be asked about the last category. Can virati take a dhamma as its object? If it can't, how can all the Path factors be said to arise together? >> >> Panna could take the [just fallen away] virati-dhamma as its object, of course, but I don't that's what is meant by 'arising together.' > pt: I think when citta takes a dhamma as object, such as lobha that has just fallen away, then panna, sati, sanna and other cetasikas have the same object as citta, so that should include virati cetasika as well. So that would be an instance of path factors arising together in the case of "abstention". Of course, a bit later citta and panna can take virati cetasika (that has just fallen away) as object, but strictly speaking that wouldn't be a case of abstention I think, like in the case when they take an akusala citta/cetasika that has just fallen away as object. --------------------- KH: Again that's what I used to think. I still do! :-) But I am not entirely sure. It would mean that virati could take a dhamma as its object. But can it? ---------------------------------- > Pt: Anyway, I think for our discussion, the most difficult is the case three in my list - when the object of citta is a concept, with panna and virati cetasikas. In the quote that Sarah gave from ACMA (thanks Sarah), that'd be abstention due to undertaking the precepts. -------------------- KH: I think that quote was about kusala citta without panna, not with panna. ------------ > Pt: In that light, the comments that Phil usually makes in terms of precepts for the sake of precepts, rather than satipatthana, seem correct to me, in that they are still kusala. ----------- KH: I might delay my comments until we have sorted out the question of panna arising with concepts. I don't think it can. (Unless, of course, they are concepts of dhammas - as in pariyatti.) Ken H #116741 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Aug 13, 2011 8:25 am Subject: Today is 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 this 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 Nibbna: 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 ... <...> Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <...> #116742 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Aug 13, 2011 4:50 pm Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) epsteinrob Hi Dieter. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@ wrote: > > > ---------------------------------------------- > > HCW: > > The simple elements of experience DO co-occur and interrelate, and > > that integration is the basis for our macroscopic, conventional world > view. > > snip > > > D: well considered exchange ...if you allow me to say ;-) :-) Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - #116743 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Aug 13, 2011 7:22 pm Subject: Re: Anagarika's precepts szmicio Dear Sarah, > S: "Anagarika: (Pali/Sanskrit) 'Homeless one'. One who enters the homeless life without formally joining the Sangha." > > See more below from Wikipedia. 8 precepts including the abstaining from intoxicants. Better to give up cigarettes for one's health anyway, regardless of one's status! > > Why do you ask? L: I was anagarika. The Chief monk's attendant. I was witnessing the tradition. Anagarika as Bhante explained this means more 'one who left a household life' not a 'Homeless one'. Another things is that in one tradition it's 8 and in others 10 siilas. It depends, I had 10. I really enjoyed my stay at the monastery. Now I am back Poland. I will write a comprehensive trip raport from my journey and post in on the DSG. Best wishes Lukas #116744 From: "philip" Date: Sat Aug 13, 2011 8:23 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! philofillet Hi Ken and Pt First of all Ken, my apologies for excessive comments earlier. The importance of discussing Dhamma easily overrides that, and I am a big fan of Pt so I want to join in if you don't mind. > > Pt: In that light, the comments that Phil usually makes > in terms of precepts for the sake of precepts, rather than satipatthana, seem correct to me, in that they are still kusala. > ----------- > > KH: I might delay my comments until we have sorted out the question of panna arising with concepts. I don't think it can. (Unless, of course, they are concepts of dhammas - as in pariyatti.) Ph: I would have assumed panna could arise with a concept as object. Isn't there panna accompanying metta, when metta actually arises (rather than lobha) and of course metta has concept as object. Even if there is no panna, metta is kusala of course. So with the Buddha's recommendation against illicit sex as conceptual object, for example, accompanied by panna which sees the value of the Buddha's word, abstention arises, sometimes, and doesn't on other occasions. I don't see any problem with that. I'm certainly not saying that I think abstention can be guaranteed. But we know the value of listening to the Dhamma. At our level of understanding *everything* we listen to are concepts, something concepts about concepts, sometimes concepts about realities, usually the latter in your case, more often the former in my case. Unless there is actual awareness of characteristics of a dhamma, isn't the dhamma by nature a concept as far as we can understand it? So dhammas are concepts, conceptual teaching are concepts, concepts, concepts, thinking, thinking, thinking. And on occasion, very rare occasion, awareness of the characteristics of a dhamma, a dhamma as a dhamma instead of a concept. In Ken's book, awareness of dhammas, awareness of the present moment is enough to condition abstention, it always has, it always will. In my book, the mind is compared by the Buddha to a festering wound (except for the Ariyans, whose minds are compared to flashes of lighting and diamonds, I think, it's an ANguttara NIkaya sutta.) My festering wound of a mind needs more than awareness of dhammas for protection, so the Buddha's conceptual/conventional advice is very valuable, he is like the greatest of friends who gives me advice to get through life in a relatively harmless way, and within that shelter provided by the Buddha, there are better conditions for awareness of Dhammas to be developed. (As seen in the sila>>>samadhi>>>panna dynamic, and also another sutta in which sila>>>freedom from remorse>>>samadhi. I don't know about you, but I know when there is remorse about bad behaviour, the mind does not settle in....oh damn! You guys don't meditate. Never mind! :) Metta, Phil Does that make sense guys? Metta, Phil #116745 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 12:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Degrees of kusala nilovg Dear Philip, Op 12-aug-2011, om 4:30 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > There are three degrees of kusala, which are dana, sila and > bhavava. Could anyone tell me according to the texts, what is > different about kusala of these three degrees, different degrees of > accompanying panna? Is kusala of the degree of bhavana achieved > only by followers of the Buddha? ------ N: Instead of degrees I would prefer: types of kusala. Sati, non-forgetfulness and other sobhana cetasikas such as alobha, adosa, calm, have to accompany each type of kusala. When there is generosity, sati is non-forgetful to be generous in giving. One does not waste this opportunity to be generous. Also the other sobhana cetasikas perform their function in assisting the citta with generosity. Among these is lightness of citta and cetasikas, one is alert, quick to react. When there is an opportunity for siila, be it abstaining from akusala or helping and paying respect to those who deserve it, sati does not waste this opportunity. Also the other sobhana cetasikas perform their function in assisting the citta with siila. Daana and siila can be performed with or without pa~n~naa, but bhaavanaa, which includes study and explanation of the Dhamma, the development of calm and of vipassanaa, has to be accompanied by pa~n~naa. As to the development of samatha, this was also achieved by wise people before the Buddha's time, thus by those who were not followers of the Buddha. ------- Nina. #116746 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 12:33 am Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) nilovg Hi Howard, I just take a few points of your mail. Op 11-aug-2011, om 13:48 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > H (to Rob E): I do not conflate experiencing with the object- > content of experience. > They are not the same! But they are also not independent, inasmuch > as they > are mutually dependent, with neither ever existing without the other. > There is no consciousness without it being the knowing OF some > object-content, and there is no object that exists other than as the > object-content of an act of consciousness. ----- N: Right, each citta that arises must experience an object. The object conditions seeing by way of object-condition. Thus, visible object conditions seeing by being its object. But I do not see any mutual relation. Seeing could not condition visible object. It impinged on the eye-door and after that there is eye-door adverting consciousness and then seeing. Seeing does not do anything with visible object, it just sees. ------ > H: There is, for example, no seeing that is not > the seeing of a sight, and there is no unseen sight floating in a > sea of > sights, each an independent, self-existent entity. To see at all is > to see a > sight, and to be a sight at all is to be an object of visual > consciousness. ------ N: When the ruupa that is visual object is being experienced by seeing, it is object, aaramma.na. I do not know whether you find that ruupas that are not experienced are not there, that they have no functions. I know you do not like the term function. You write: unseen sight floating in a sea of sights. Well, visible object arises in a group, kalapa, consisting of at least the four great elements and three other ruupas. These support visible object. Without solidity or the element of earth there could not be visible object. Ruupas of the body can be produced by kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition and ruupas that are not of the body are produced only by temperature or the element of heat. Visible object is not the only condition for seeing. Also the ruupa that is eyesense is an indispensable condition for seeing, although you do not experience it. At the moment of seeing that experiences visible object the eyesense is the doorway and the physical base for seeing. Eyesense is not object at the moment visible object is object. ------ > #116747 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 12:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Smell etc, inseparable rupas nilovg Dear Philip and Ann, Op 12-aug-2011, om 0:52 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > > Is the nimitta of these rupas also rupa? It cannot be experuenced > through the body sense door but only the mind door, isn't that > right., since it represents many kalapas that have fallen away? > ------ N: If we consider the nimitta of visible object, this is the nimitta of a ruupa. We cannot pinpoint it is exactly this visible object that we are aware of, since they arise and fall away so fast. ------ > PH: I think the answer will be that it doesn't matter, just be > aware of characteristics, but why isn't nimitta a concept? > ------ N: It is the nimitta *of a* reality. Concept can have many meanings and that is why we have to be careful when answering: is it a reality or a concept. ------ > PH: I remember I heard Sayadaw U Silananda say tgat when there is > nimitta the reality has fallen away, but for the purpose of > satipatthana we can say it is still present. > ------ N: Yes, we can still say that there is awareness of the present object although it has just fallen away. ----- > PH: I remember Ann asked about nimitta at KK, and AS talked about > it. Ann, do you remember what she said, I remember you taking lots > of notes! > ----- N: Yes, Ann is very good with notes. Please, Ann. ------ Nina. #116748 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:09 am Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 8/13/2011 10:33:39 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, I just take a few points of your mail. Op 11-aug-2011, om 13:48 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > H (to Rob E): I do not conflate experiencing with the object- > content of experience. > They are not the same! But they are also not independent, inasmuch > as they > are mutually dependent, with neither ever existing without the other. > There is no consciousness without it being the knowing OF some > object-content, and there is no object that exists other than as the > object-content of an act of consciousness. ----- N: Right, each citta that arises must experience an object. The object conditions seeing by way of object-condition. Thus, visible object conditions seeing by being its object. But I do not see any mutual relation. Seeing could not condition visible object. It impinged on the eye-door and after that there is eye-door adverting consciousness and then seeing. Seeing does not do anything with visible object, it just sees. ------ > H: There is, for example, no seeing that is not > the seeing of a sight, and there is no unseen sight floating in a > sea of > sights, each an independent, self-existent entity. To see at all is > to see a > sight, and to be a sight at all is to be an object of visual > consciousness. ------ N: When the ruupa that is visual object is being experienced by seeing, it is object, aaramma.na. I do not know whether you find that ruupas that are not experienced are not there, that they have no functions. ------------------------------------------------ HCW: In the Kalaka Sutta the Buddha teaches "Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer." He doesn't construe a seen entity, nor an unseen one, nor a to-be-seen one. In other words, as I understand the teaching, he does not construe an experience-independent "thing in itself" that may happen to be seen or to be an unseen or to be something to be seen. Sights (or visual forms) exist only in relation to seeing, as the object content of visual consciousness. What else, after all, can it mean for there to be no seen object, no unseen one, and no to-be-seen one? What is being denied here, it seems to me, are not rupas, but rupas that are self-existent entities. --------------------------------------------------- I know you do not like the term function. You write: unseen sight floating in a sea of sights. Well, visible object arises in a group, kalapa, consisting of at least the four great elements and three other ruupas. These support visible object. Without solidity or the element of earth there could not be visible object. Ruupas of the body can be produced by kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition and ruupas that are not of the body are produced only by temperature or the element of heat. Visible object is not the only condition for seeing. Also the ruupa that is eyesense is an indispensable condition for seeing, although you do not experience it. At the moment of seeing that experiences visible object the eyesense is the doorway and the physical base for seeing. Eyesense is not object at the moment visible object is object. ================================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #116749 From: "philip" Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 4:34 am Subject: Nimitta (was [dsg] Re: Smell etc, inseparable rupas philofillet Hi Nina, By coincidence I just heard a very intetesting talk on this subject, you said you were frustrated by this nimitta, it made you feel that we could never experience realities directly, always this nimitta, which felt like always dreaming. But Lodewijk said he felt nimitta helped him understand detachment better, how could there be attachment to that which had already fallen away? Sarah talked about a gradation beteeen concept and reality, nimitta is closer to reality thsn concept but is akin to concept. (Right, Sarah?) I agree with Lodewijk, nimitta makes it easier for me to have confidence about detachment, seems more feasible to have awareness of this nimitta than of one fleeting dhamma, one kalapa, for example and since there is more confidrnce about awareness, more confidence about possibility of detachment. Metta, Phil p.s Thank you for your answer re kinds of kusala, I might ask more later... > of a ruupa. We cannot pinpoint it is exactly this visible object that > we are aware of, since they arise and fall away so fast. > ------ > > PH: I think the answer will be that it doesn't matter, just be > > aware of characteristics, but why isn't nimitta a concept? > > > ------ > N: It is the nimitta *of a* reality. Concept can have many meanings > and that is why we have to be careful when answering: is it a reality > or a concept. > ------ > > PH: I remember I heard Sayadaw U Silananda say tgat when there is > > nimitta the reality has fallen away, but for the purpose of > > satipatthana we can say it is still present. > > > ------ > N: Yes, we can still say that there is awareness of the present > object although it has just fallen away. > ----- > > PH: I remember Ann asked about nimitta at KK, and AS talked about > > it. Ann, do you remember what she said, I remember you taking lots > > of notes! > > > ----- > N: Yes, Ann is very good with notes. Please, Ann. > ------ > Nina. #116750 From: "philip" Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 9:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Degrees of kusala philofillet Hi Nina > ------ > N: Instead of degrees I would prefer: types of kusala Thank you, the summary that followed was crystal clear. I do think, though, that since panna accompanies kusala of bhavana, but not necessarily kusala of dana or sila, kusala of bhavana would be considered of a different degree, don't you think? By the way, in Perfections (p.146) I wonder why Acharn Sujin says "everybody should know for himself what degree of kusala he wants to develop."? Of course I take this to mean that it is good for me to be primarily intetested in dana and sila, which need not always be accompanied by panna, I do not feel aware of presence of panna such as sati-sampajanna which knows characteristics of dhammas, but I still feel there are great opportunities for kusala in daily life. Metta, Phil #116751 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 9:49 am Subject: Re: Smell etc, inseparable rupas glenjohnann Dear Nina and Phil I will check my notes and get back to you. This has always been interesting to me and I recall somehow thinking i was getting a better grasp during the sessions in KK. Will see! Ann --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Philip and Ann, > > PH: I remember Ann asked about nimitta at KK, and AS talked about > > it. Ann, do you remember what she said, I remember you taking lots > > of notes! > > > ----- > N: Yes, Ann is very good with notes. Please, Ann. > ------ > Nina. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > #116752 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 1:16 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! ptaus1 Hi KenH, Phil, Sarah, Jon, > > pt: I think in this case virati cetasika accompanies the citta and panna that take a concept as object. So there's no taking of dhamma as object at all, including before and after. > -------- > > KH: That's what I used to think. The trouble with it, however, is that panna knows only dhammas. The panna of samatha knows kusala from akusala, and the panna of vipassana knows the other characteristics of dhammas. > > Do you remember this coming up in another thread (about jhana)? When a jhana citta takes a concept as its object, how can panna know kusala citta from akusala citta at the same time? If I understood Jon's explanation properly, it was that panna arouse in a separate citta that took a nama-dhamma as its object. pt: Hm, not sure then, my thinking was that panna is a cetasika and can't really choose what object citta will take. E.g. Phil's example of metta which is always with a concept as object, what Sarah also often mentions (let's steer clear of jhana for now). Let's see if Jon or Sarah can clarify. > > pt: I think when citta takes a dhamma as object, such as lobha that has just fallen away, then panna, sati, sanna and other cetasikas have the same object as citta, so that should include virati cetasika as well. So that would be an instance of path factors arising together in the case of "abstention". Of course, a bit later citta and panna can take virati cetasika (that has just fallen away) as object, but strictly speaking that wouldn't be a case of abstention I think, like in the case when they take an akusala citta/cetasika that has just fallen away as object. > --------------------- > > KH: Again that's what I used to think. I still do! :-) But I am not entirely sure. It would mean that virati could take a dhamma as its object. But can it? pt: I think it can be said that virati cetasika "takes" a dhamma as object in the same sense that we can say that sana, sati, panna, etc "take" it. Strictly speaking, I think it's citta that takes the object, while cetasikas perform their functions and help citta "handle" the object. However, to lend support to the issue you raise about the timing of virati cetasika in the sequence of cittas, there's this passage from Nina's Cetasikas, which I don't quite understand (it's from the chapter 33 on Three virati cetasikas, first page of the chapter - page 233 in the pdf version from Alan's site): "When we, for example, abstain from harsh speech, the cetasika which is abstinence from wrong speech accompanies the mahaa-kusala citta and we do not abstain from wrong action at the same time, since there is only one citta at a time." Perhaps Nina can say a bit more about this issue of virati taking objecs, and when does virati actually arises, etc. > > Pt: Anyway, I think for our discussion, the most difficult is the case three in my list - when the object of citta is a concept, with panna and virati cetasikas. > In the quote that Sarah gave from ACMA (thanks Sarah), that'd be abstention due to undertaking the precepts. > -------------------- > > KH: I think that quote was about kusala citta without panna, not with panna. pt: Hm, my understanding was that the last cateogory of the three clearly referred to satipatthana - both by ACMA and Sarah. Perhaps Sarah can say more about the second and third ACMA categories. > KH: I might delay my comments until we have sorted out the question of panna arising with concepts. I don't think it can. (Unless, of course, they are concepts of dhammas - as in pariyatti.) pt: Okay, let's see what Nina, Sarah and Jon say fist. Best wishes pt P.S. Phil, if you're fond of A.S.'s Perfections, I've just re-read A Treatise on the Paramis after a few years, and it's also quite excellent. The link: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/wheel409.html #116753 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 8:35 am Subject: Breakthrough! bhikkhu5 Friends: How does the 7 Links to Awakening induce Breakthrough? The Blessed Buddha once said: And what, bhikkhus, is the way that induce penetration? It is: The Seven Links to Awakening! What seven? 1: The Awareness Link to Awakening: sati-sambojjhanga. 2: The Investigation Link to Awakening: dhammavicaya-sambojjhanga. 3: The Energy Link to Awakening: viriya-sambojjhanga. 4: The Joy Link to Awakening: pti-sambojjhanga. 5: The Tranquillity Link to Awakening: passaddhi-sambojjhanga. 6: The Concentration Link to Awakening: samdhi-sambojjhanga. 7: The Equanimity Link to Awakening: upekkh-sambojjhanga. Then, the Venerable Udayi asked the Blessed Buddha: Venerable Sir, how are the Seven Links to Awakening developed & cultivated so that they lead to, and induce penetration? Udayi, when a Bhikkhu develops the Seven Links to Awakening supported by seclusion, disillusion, and ceasing, it culminates in a mental release, which is vast, exalted, & infinite, without any trace of ill will. With such exalted mind matured and refined by these 7 Links to Awakening, he penetrates, smashes and eliminates the mass of greed, that he has never before penetrated, smashed and eliminated; he penetrates, demolishes and eradicates the heap of hate, that he has never before penetrated, demolished and eradicated; and he penetrates, disintegrates & disperses the accumulation of confusion, that he has never before penetrated, disintegrated & dispersed... It is, Udayi, when these Seven Links to Awakening are developed & cultivated in exactly this way, that they lead to the incisive breakthrough of penetration... <...> Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikya. Book [V: 87-88] section 46: The Links.28: Leading to Penetration... Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <....> #116754 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 4:19 pm Subject: Re: Degrees of kusala szmicio Hi Phil, > By the way, in Perfections (p.146) I wonder why Acharn Sujin says "everybody should know for himself what degree of kusala he wants to develop."? L: It depends on context. I find for myself, each time listening to Acharn, something new, that I wasnt aware before. Pariyatti develops very gradually. > Of course I take this to mean that it is good for me to be primarily intetested in dana and sila, which need not always be accompanied by panna, I do not feel aware of presence of panna such as sati-sampajanna which knows characteristics of dhammas, but I still feel there are great opportunities for kusala in daily life. L: :P It needs a developed panna, bhavana-maya panna to be aware of present dhamma :P No one can have it by will. Instead we need to develop sutta-maya panna and cinta-maya panna. Those two pannas in the context of Buddhist scriptures are called pariyatti. Not mere reading and listening, but with panna. We need to know in our lifes all the suttas and their meaning. Then we know what are the real conditions to develop more panna. Best wishes Lukas #116755 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 6:55 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! kenhowardau Hi Phil and Pt, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Ken and Pt > > First of all Ken, my apologies for excessive comments earlier. > The importance of discussing Dhamma easily overrides that, and I am > a big fan of Pt so I want to join in if you don't mind. ------------- KH: No harm done, Phil, I prefer a strong, sincere disagreement to a polite, insincere agreement. -------------------- >> KH: <. . .> the question of panna arising with concepts. I don't think it can. (Unless, of course, they are concepts of dhammas - as in pariyatti.) > Ph: I would have assumed panna could arise with a concept as object. -------------------- KH: There are two kinds of panna, aren't there? There is the panna that knows kusala from akusala, and there is the panna that knows nama from rupa. I think in both cases the object has to be a dhamma or, at least, a concept of a dhamma. ---------------------------- > Ph: Isn't there panna accompanying metta, when metta actually arises (rather than lobha) and of course metta has concept as object. ---------------------------- KH: Strictly speaking, the term 'metta' refers to a state of jhana absorption (which has a concept as object). And jhana requires the type of panna that knows kusala from akusala. However, the terms 'kusala' and 'akusala' refer to characteristics of dhammas, not of concepts. And so I don't see how panna could ever experience the same concept that metta experiences. I'll leave the next part for Pt: ------------------------------ > Ph: Even if there is no panna, metta is kusala of course. So with the Buddha's recommendation against illicit sex as conceptual object, for example, accompanied by panna which sees the value of the Buddha's word, abstention arises, sometimes, and doesn't on other occasions. I don't see any problem with that <. . .> I don't know about you, but I know when there is remorse about bad behaviour, the mind does not settle in....oh damn! You guys don't meditate. Never mind! :) ------------------------------ KH: I don't, but I believe Pt is quite an accomplished meditator. If that's not a contradiction in terms! :-) Ken H #116756 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 7:06 pm Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) nilovg Hi Howard, Op 13-aug-2011, om 18:09 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > In the Kalaka Sutta the Buddha teaches "Thus, monks, the Tathagata, > when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] > seen. He > doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be- > seen. He > doesn't construe a seer." ------- PTS transl: ------- > > H: He doesn't construe a seen entity, nor an unseen one, nor a to- > be-seen > one. In other words, as I understand the teaching, he does not > construe an > experience-independent "thing in itself" that may happen to be seen > or to > be an unseen or to be something to be seen. Sights (or visual > forms) exist > only in relation to seeing, as the object content of visual > consciousness. > What else, after all, can it mean for there to be no seen object, no > unseen one, and no to-be-seen one? What is being denied here, it > seems to > me, are not rupas, but rupas that are self-existent entities. ------- N: What is denied here is that the Buddha has no clinging, conceit or wrong view about what is seen, nor about the seer. ----- Nina. #116757 From: "philip" Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 7:50 pm Subject: Re: Degrees of kusala philofillet Hu Lujas > L: :P It needs a developed panna, bhavana-maya panna to be aware of present dhamma :P > No one can have it by will. > Instead we need to develop sutta-maya panna and cinta-maya panna. > > Those two pannas in the context of Buddhist scriptures are called pariyatti. Not mere reading and listening, but with panna. We need to know in our lifes all the suttas and their meaning. Then we know what are the real conditions to develop more panna. Ph: Thanks for reminding me, I heard about these three kinds of panna in a talk and wanted to ask about them, can you explain a liitle more, thanks、what is difffetence between cinta mayapanna and sutta maya panna? Metta, Phil #116758 From: "philip" Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 8:14 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! philofillet Hi Ken and Pt and all > -------------------- > >> KH: <. . .> the question of panna arising with concepts. I don't think it can. (Unless, of course, they are concepts of dhammas - as in pariyatti.) > > > Ph: I would have assumed panna could arise with a concept as object. > -------------------- > > KH: There are two kinds of panna, aren't there? There is the panna that knows kusala from akusala, and there is the panna that knows nama from rupa. I think in both cases the object has to be a dhamma or, at least, a concept of a dhamma. Ph: Are you sure "there are two kinds of panna?" iIsn't knowing nama from rupa the first vipassana-nana(?) If abstention was dependant on stages of insight there would a lit less abstainin. The awareness of tge present moment tgat keeps you from bad deeds (I sincerely celebrate such kusala) is not vupassana-nana is it? Surely hiri otappa sometimes functions with a conxept for you, doesn't it? They are phrased in a way that makes it hard to understand tgem without concepts as object, for example Vism XIV,142: "A man rejects evil through hiri out of respect for himself, as the daughter of a good famuky does; he rejects evil through otappa out of resoect for another, as a courtesan does." All definitions I have seen of hiri otappa include aspects of concern about self-respectand respect of others. Surely respect of others must have concept as object, don't you think? > > Ph: Isn't there panna accompanying metta, when metta actually arises (rather than lobha) and of course metta has concept as object. > ---------------------------- > > KH: Strictly speaking, the term 'metta' refers to a state of jhana absorption (which has a concept as object). And jhana requires the type of panna that knows kusala from akusala. Ph: But surely the object of this jhana absorption is a concept, a person? > However, the terms 'kusala' and 'akusala' refer to characteristics of dhammas, not of concepts. And so I don't see how panna could ever experience the same concept that metta experiences. > > I'll leave the next part for Pt: Ph: Ok Ken, the actual content of this thread is of less importance to me (the technically kusalishness of abstention doesn't really concern me to tell the truth, just the abstention) than rhe exercise of friendly and respectful speech towards you, Ken H. And I have decided to longer withhold merit from you! (Haha, just teasing Kelvin.) Metta, Phil Metta, Phil > ------------------------------ > > Ph: Even if there is no panna, metta is kusala of course. So with the Buddha's recommendation against illicit sex as conceptual object, for example, accompanied by panna which sees the value of the > Buddha's word, abstention arises, sometimes, and doesn't on other occasions. I don't see any problem with that > <. . .> > I don't know about you, but I know when there is remorse about bad behaviour, the mind does not settle in....oh damn! You guys don't meditate. Never mind! :) > ------------------------------ > > KH: I don't, but I believe Pt is quite an accomplished meditator. If that's not a contradiction in terms! :-) > > Ken H > #116759 From: Lukas Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 8:50 pm Subject: 3 sources of Panna. To Phil szmicio Hi Phil, > Ph: Thanks for reminding me, I heard about these three kinds of panna in a talk and wanted to ask about them, can you explain a liitle more, thanks、what is difffetence between cinta mayapanna and sutta maya panna? L: Sutta-maya panna, is the knowledge that is produced from listening to the Right Dhamma, it comprises also listening to the Dhamma. Cinta-maya panna is the wisdom gained from considering, reflections upon that what was heared. Bhavana-maya panna is developed panna, that is the experiencing the Truth by wisdom directly. That one can eradicted defilments. When we mention the bhavana, the mental development, this needs to be done by bhavana-maya panna. Acharn Sujin says that 'it is not now bavana-maya panna, that knows directly, but it needs to be developed now, by the panna that comes from listening and considering.' Everyone needs to know for himself that it is only reading and considering Dhamma in our life. She stresses all the time. Then the conditins to right understanding are accumulated. Then if the bhavana is developed by sitting or something else, than this is lobha and the idea of Self that comes in. AS mentiones also that: 'we needs to go against the current of lobha for the whole life.' I think we need to know from the beginning that this is only reading, listening and considering that conditiones direct understanding, then this is really the path of detachment. And the idea of Self will be weaker and weaker. No matter how long the path is, this is a right path. It goes against the current of lobha, and the idea of Self that is trying so hard to do this or that. Best wishes Lukas #116760 From: Lukas Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 8:57 pm Subject: Re: 3 sources of Panna. To Phil szmicio Phil, a typo here. > L: Sutta-maya panna, is the knowledge that is produced from listening to the Right Dhamma, it comprises also listening to the Dhamma. L:Sutta-maya panna...... is produced from listening to the Right Dhamma, it comprises also reading to the Dhamma. Best wishes Lukas #116761 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 8:59 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Robert E Among the many post of yours which I have not got around to answering (apologies for that) are one or two where you ask for verification of the 'orthodox' Theravada position. I'd like to start this round of posting by giving some quotes on those points. (115633) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > > J: As I understand it, it is the orthodox Theravada interpretation of the teaching that the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path are the mental factors that co-arise at path moment. > > [RE:] You have referred to your understanding of orthodox Theravada interpretation here and recently in another post, but you do not cite where that is contained or which teachings or teachers are responsible for the "orthodox" teaching. Can you please specify and give an example? I do not know where the "orthodox" teaching is contained or wherein you are referencing it. Do you mean Abhidhamma and commentary? Is that the orthodox teaching in your view? =============== J: When I refer to the orthodox teaching I'm referring to the Tipitaka and its commentaries and sub-commentaries, down to and include the Abhidhammatta Sangaha and commentaries. In the Guide to paras 17 and 38 of Ch. VII of CMA (translation of the Abhidhammatta Sangaha), Bhikkhu Bodhi summarises the commentary to these paras as follows: ************************** The noble truth of the way to the cessation of suffering is the Noble Eightfold Path. In the teaching of the four truths, this is the collection of eight cetasikas corresponding to the eight path factors arisen in the cittas of the four supramundane paths: - right view is the cetasika of wisdom - right intention, right mindfulness, right effort and right concentration are respectively the cetasikas of initial application, energy, mindfulness and one-pointedness - right speech, right action and right livelihood are the three abstinences (virati) ************************** Just to show I'm not making it up :-)) Jon #116762 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 9:06 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Robert E (115634) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > > [J:] As regards the 4 jhanas as Right Concentration, the orthodox Theravada teaching is that at the moment of supramundane path consciousness the accompanying concentration is of a level equivalent to that one or other of the 4 jhanas (i.e., nothing to do with the development of mundane jhana). > > [RE:] ... You are referring to what you call the "orthodox" interpretation. I would like to know where this orthodox interpretation is contained. Who is responsible for it? =============== J: In the Guide to paras 30 and 31 of Ch. VII of CMA (translation of the Abhidhammatta Sangaha), Bhikkhu Bodhi summarises the commentaries to these paras as follows: ************************ All meditators reach the supramundane paths and fruits through the development of wisdom (pa~n~naa) - insight into the three characteristics of impermanence, suffering, and non-self. However, they differ among themselves in the degree of their development of concentration (samaadhi). - Those who develop insight without a basis of jhaana are called practitioners of bare insight (sukkhavipassaka). When they reach the path and fruit, their path and fruition cittas occur at a level corresponding to the first jhaana. - Those who develop insight on the basis of jhaana attain a path and fruit which corresponds to the level of jhaana they had attained before reaching the path. ... For bare insight meditator and jhaana meditator alike, all path and fruition cittas are considered types of jhaana consciousness. They are so considered because they occur in the mode of closely contemplating their object with full absorption, like the mundane jhaanas, and because they possess the jhaana factors with an intensity corresponding to their counterparts in the mundane jhaanas. ************************ That is the passage that sets out the orthodox Theravada position. The Guide goes on to discuss how the concentration that accompanies a moment of path consciousness differs from the concentration of mundane jhana. ************************ The supramundane jhaanas of the paths and fruits differ from the mundane jhaanas in several important respects. - First, whereas the mundane jhaanas take as their object some concept, such as the sign of the kasina, the supramundane jhaanas take as their object Nibbaana, the unconditioned reality. - Second, whereas the mundane jhaanas merely suppress the defilements while leaving their underlying seeds intact, the supramundane jhaanas of the path eradicate defilements so that they can never again arise. - Third, while the mundane jhaanas lead to rebirth in the fine-material world and thus sustain existence in the round of rebirths, the jhaanas of the path cut off the fetters binding one to the cycle and thus issue in liberation from the round of birth and death. - 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, with concentration fixing the mind on the unconditioned element and wisdom fathoming the deep significance of the Four Noble Truths. ************************ Note that, according to this, "mundane jhaanas lead to rebirth in the fine-material world and thus sustain existence in the round of rebirths". Jon #116763 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 9:12 pm Subject: Satipatthana Sutta - Cemetary Contemplation (was, Re: A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Robert E (115632) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > Here is what the Buddha says: > The monk "generates desire." > He "endeavors." > He "activates persistence." > He "exerts his intent." > > These are quotes, as you requested, not paraphrases. Please show some direct evidence that he is not saying that the monk's right effort actually consists of "generating desire," "endeavoring," "activating persistence" and "exerting intent," all volitional actions, not paramatha dhammas, which Buddha says the monk does in practicing right effort. =============== J: I know you will not consider this to be 'direct evidence', but in the Guide to para 25 of Ch. VII of CMA (translation of the Abhidhammatta Sangaha) on the Four Supreme Efforts, Bhikkhu Bodhi summarises the commentaries to this para as follows: "Here one mental factor, energy, performs four separate functions. This fourfold effort is identical with right effort, the sixth factor of the Noble Eightfold Path." Just putting this forward as the (long-standing) orthodox position. Jon #116764 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 10:18 pm Subject: A Question and Possible Answer (Re: [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some ...) upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and pt & Nina & all) - In a message dated 8/12/2011 9:51:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: KH: That's what I used to think. The trouble with it, however, is that panna knows only dhammas. The panna of samatha knows kusala from akusala, and the panna of vipassana knows the other characteristics of dhammas. ================================= That pa~n~na knows only paramattha dhammas seems to be the understanding here. I have one question about this: If it is so, how does wisdom ever come to see through the illusion of mere concept seeming to be reality? How are concepts seen to be merely concepts? (And known not just by deduction from premisses but as a direct seeing through of illusion? Is it not wisdom that cuts through illusion?) A possible answer-by-analogy to my own question - Wisdom DOES cut through the illusion of "concepts as reality," and it does so as follows: 1) When one seems to see a snake at twilight, but looking more carefully sees instead a coiled rope, at the moment of seeing the rope, the illusion of snake disappears (and a "snake" is no longer perceived). Analogously, when one seems to observe a body or tree or building or concerto, but then attending more carefully, observes instead a mere flow of physical qualities (rupas), at that moment, the illusion of body or tree or building or concerto disappears and is no longer perceived. 2) Another analogy: When examining the pointillist painting of a woman, if, perhaps by magnification, there could be seen merely an arrangement of dots, would not the mentally constructed woman-image no longer appear? Any thoughts on this, folks? With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #116765 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 10:42 pm Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 8/14/2011 5:07:05 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 13-aug-2011, om 18:09 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > In the Kalaka Sutta the Buddha teaches "Thus, monks, the Tathagata, > when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] > seen. He > doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be- > seen. He > doesn't construe a seer." ------- PTS transl: ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: That translation doesn't cast any light for me. I do understand that this is the commentarial approach. However, I've studied this sutta a bit, and I understand it differently. Bhikkhu Nanananda wrote amonograph, The Magic of the Mind, about this sutta, and his perspective makes sense to me. ----------------------------------------------- ------- > > H: He doesn't construe a seen entity, nor an unseen one, nor a to- > be-seen > one. In other words, as I understand the teaching, he does not > construe an > experience-independent "thing in itself" that may happen to be seen > or to > be an unseen or to be something to be seen. Sights (or visual > forms) exist > only in relation to seeing, as the object content of visual > consciousness. > What else, after all, can it mean for there to be no seen object, no > unseen one, and no to-be-seen one? What is being denied here, it > seems to > me, are not rupas, but rupas that are self-existent entities. ------- N: What is denied here is that the Buddha has no clinging, conceit or wrong view about what is seen, nor about the seer. --------------------------------------------------------- HCW: That interpretation seems to me to go against the simple wording of the sutta itself. -------------------------------------------------------------- > Nina. =================================== With metta, Howard Mere Content of Consciousness /In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself./ (From the Bahiya Sutta) #116766 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 10:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana Sutta - Cemetary Contemplation (was, Re: A lovely drea... upasaka_howard Hi, Jon (and Robert) - In a message dated 8/14/2011 7:12:59 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Robert E (115632) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > Here is what the Buddha says: > The monk "generates desire." > He "endeavors." > He "activates persistence." > He "exerts his intent." > > These are quotes, as you requested, not paraphrases. Please show some direct evidence that he is not saying that the monk's right effort actually consists of "generating desire," "endeavoring," "activating persistence" and "exerting intent," all volitional actions, not paramatha dhammas, which Buddha says the monk does in practicing right effort. =============== J: I know you will not consider this to be 'direct evidence', but in the Guide to para 25 of Ch. VII of CMA (translation of the Abhidhammatta Sangaha) on the Four Supreme Efforts, Bhikkhu Bodhi summarises the commentaries to this para as follows: "Here one mental factor, energy, performs four separate functions. This fourfold effort is identical with right effort, the sixth factor of the Noble Eightfold Path." Just putting this forward as the (long-standing) orthodox position. Jon ================================= Robert, the Buddha, in saying that the monk "generates desire" and "endeavors" and "activates persistence" and "exerts his intent", is certainly describing intentional actions. But why do you say they are "not paramattha dhammas"? What else are they? I don't follow you in that. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #116767 From: "philip" Date: Sun Aug 14, 2011 10:55 pm Subject: Re: 3 sources of Panna. To Phil philofillet Hi Lukas, wow you explained the different kinds of panna really well! You are really lucky to be so sensitive to the Dhamma at such a young age, what a great treasure, it didn't really click with me until I was 40 or something like that. That's just a number, a concept? Not really, because according to Vism, I think, the 40s are the best time for wisdom to develop. Think of how deep your panna will be developing by the time you hit your 40s! Well, could be developing, who knows? The only objection - predictable - is that I am not convinced bhavana cannot happen through sitting and watching the mind at work. For example, in Perfections Acharn Sujin refers to a teaching that the monk should check three times a day, or two, or only one if more is not possible, he should check to see what defilements are still present. I think sitting meditation is the best way to do something like that. When I sit and meditate, it is like the defilements set out on a parade, I can see which ones are most prevalent, I think it is very useful, particularly drives home about nutriments, it is so consistent that bad mental nutriment from the night before will appear in the meditation the next morning. For example, if I used porn one night, it is 100% guaranteed that that the lust defilement would be strong the next day. If I had a fight with someone, almost guaranteed that aversion towards that person will arise. When behaviour has been good, when transgression level defilements have been quiet, the meditation will be placid. I think this is the "when a monk behaves well in the morning, he will have a happy morning" sutta (paraphrase, I think you know the one) It's interesting to take stock of the mind and see the effects of what nutriments have been going into the system and what defilements are arising. I don't know how we could follow that advice quoted in Perfections without sitting and watching the mind at work. But, yes, absolutely, moments of satipatthana conditioned by listening, and reflecting, moments of detachment arising conditioned in that way, I believe it happens, and is valuable. It is great that we appreciate Acharan Sujin, but I disagree that listening to her and meditating are mutually exclusive. Well, it doesn't matter. I will continue listening to her, and meditating. I feel good about the way Dhamma is sinking deeper and deeper into my life. Anyways, off topic. You explained the three kinds of panna very clearly, thanks again. Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Lukas wrote: > > Hi Phil, > > > Ph: Thanks for reminding me, I heard about these three kinds of panna in a talk and wanted to ask about them, can you explain a liitle more, thanks、what is difffetence between cinta mayapanna and sutta maya panna? > > L: Sutta-maya panna, is the knowledge that is produced from listening to the Right Dhamma, it comprises also listening to the Dhamma. > > Cinta-maya panna is the wisdom gained from considering, reflections upon that what was heared. > > Bhavana-maya panna is developed panna, that is the experiencing the Truth by wisdom directly. That one can eradicted defilments. > > When we mention the bhavana, the mental development, this needs to be done by bhavana-maya panna. Acharn Sujin says that 'it is not now bavana-maya panna, that knows directly, but it needs to be developed now, by the panna that comes from listening and considering.' > > Everyone needs to know for himself that it is only reading and considering Dhamma in our life. She stresses all the time. > Then the conditins to right understanding are accumulated. Then if the bhavana is developed by sitting or something else, than this is lobha and the idea of Self that comes in. > > AS mentiones also that: 'we needs to go against the current of lobha for the whole life.' > > I think we need to know from the beginning that this is only reading, listening and considering that conditiones direct understanding, then this is really the path of detachment. And the idea of Self will be weaker and weaker. No matter how long the path is, this is a right path. It goes against the current of lobha, and the idea of Self that is trying so hard to do this or that. > > > Best wishes > Lukas > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > #116768 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:28 am Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) nilovg Hi Howard, Op 14-aug-2011, om 14:42 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > That translation doesn't cast any light for me. I do understand that > this is the commentarial approach. ----- N: It is just the PTS translation. But translations can differ. What you quote I find very difficult to get. Too difficult for me! Nina. #116769 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 1:10 am Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 8/14/2011 10:28:22 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 14-aug-2011, om 14:42 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > That translation doesn't cast any light for me. I do understand that > this is the commentarial approach. ----- N: It is just the PTS translation. But translations can differ. What you quote I find very difficult to get. Too difficult for me! -------------------------------------------------- HCW: Then the fault must be mine in not communicating better. ------------------------------------------------ Nina. =============================== With much metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #116770 From: Ken O Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 1:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] 3 sources of Panna. To Phil ashkenn2k Dear Phil and Lukas as according to the text In the Commentary to The All Embracing Net of Views translated by B Bohdi, pg 141 <> A treatise of paramis http://www.abhidhamma.org/Paramis-%20perfections%20of%20insight.htm <> L: Bhavana-maya panna is developed panna, that is the experiencing the Truth by wisdom directly. That one can eradicted defilments KO: According to the text, it can mundane and supramundane, so not necessary it can eradicate defilements unless it is supramundane. If it not necessary just by following the path of vipassana bhavana, it can be done through samantha bhavana and using it as a basis of insight. Usually in the suttas, the direct knowledges are after jhanas and using it as a basis of insight. So it can be both and not just vipassana bhavana alone. Ken O > >Hi Phil, > >> Ph: Thanks for reminding me, I heard about these three kinds of panna in a talk >> >>and wanted to ask about them, can you explain a liitle more, thanks、what > >>is difffetence between cinta mayapanna and sutta maya panna? >> > >L: Sutta-maya panna, is the knowledge that is produced from listening to the >Right Dhamma, it comprises also listening to the Dhamma. > >Cinta-maya panna is the wisdom gained from considering, reflections upon that >what was heared. > >Bhavana-maya panna is developed panna, that is the experiencing the Truth by >wisdom directly. That one can eradicted defilments. > >When we mention the bhavana, the mental development, this needs to be done by >bhavana-maya panna. Acharn Sujin says that 'it is not now bavana-maya panna, >that knows directly, but it needs to be developed now, by the panna that comes >from listening and considering.' > >Everyone needs to know for himself that it is only reading and considering >Dhamma in our life. She stresses all the time. >Then the conditins to right understanding are accumulated. Then if the bhavana >is developed by sitting or something else, than this is lobha and the idea of >Self that comes in. > > >AS mentiones also that: 'we needs to go against the current of lobha for the >whole life.' > > >I think we need to know from the beginning that this is only reading, listening >and considering that conditiones direct understanding, then this is really the >path of detachment. And the idea of Self will be weaker and weaker. No matter >how long the path is, this is a right path. It goes against the current of >lobha, and the idea of Self that is trying so hard to do this or that. > > >Best wishes >Lukas > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > #116771 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 2:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] 3 sources of Panna. To Phil szmicio Hi Ken O, Phil I was thinking what the specific nature(sabhavalakkhana) and general characteristics(samannalakkhana) means? Also the meaning of direct experiental knowledge(paccakkanana) and inferential knowledge(anumanana). Is it a paccakka ~nana and anuma ~nana? This is all not easy. Best wishes Lukas > In the Commentary to The All Embracing Net of Views translated by B Bohdi, pg > 141 > < dhammas (paramathadhamma) (1) the characteristics of the specific nature > (sabhavalakkhana) and (2) the general characteristics (samannalakkhana). The > comprehension of the characteristics of specific nature is direct experiential > knowledge (paccakkanana); the compreshension of the general characteristics is > inferential knowledge (anumananana). #116772 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 3:22 am Subject: Re: 3 sources of Panna. To Phil szmicio Hi Phil, > Hi Lukas, wow you explained the different kinds of panna really well! You are really lucky to be so sensitive to the Dhamma at such a young age, what a great treasure, it didn't really click with me until I was 40 or something like that. That's just a number, a concept? Not really, because according to Vism, I think, the 40s are the best time for wisdom to develop. Think of how deep your panna will be developing by the time you hit your 40s! Well, could be developing, who knows? L: Who knows. There is a moment of vipaka. I still understand it on a level of intelectual understanding, considering kamma and vipaka in my life. Acharn Sujin says that the eye and visible object, that are ruupas and seeing that is nama, can only be known by developed panna. And this is not yet, but gradually this will develop. My job is to read and study Dhamma, as is stated in Commentaries Ken O gave. And no expectations. See the commentaries of bodhisatta, he knows it for himself, so that he can help others, even at the intelectual level. I like it. Now we can also help others. > The only objection - predictable - is that I am not convinced bhavana cannot happen through sitting and watching the mind at work. For example, in Perfections Acharn Sujin refers to a teaching that the monk should check three times a day, or two, or only one if more is not possible, he should check to see what defilements are still present. I think sitting meditation is the best way to do something like that. When I sit and meditate, it is like the defilements set out on a parade, I can see which ones are most prevalent, I think it is very useful, particularly drives home about nutriments, it is so consistent that bad mental nutriment from the night before will appear in the meditation the next morning. For example, if I used porn one night, it is 100% guaranteed that that the lust defilement would be strong the next day. If I had a fight with someone, almost guaranteed that aversion towards that person will arise. When behaviour has been good, when transgression level defilements have been quiet, the meditation will be placid. I think this is the "when a monk behaves well in the morning, he will have a happy morning" sutta (paraphrase, I think you know the one) > It's interesting to take stock of the mind and see the effects of what nutriments have been going into the system and what defilements are arising. I don't know how we could follow that advice quoted in Perfections without sitting and watching the mind at work. > > But, yes, absolutely, moments of satipatthana conditioned by listening, and reflecting, moments of detachment arising conditioned in that way, I believe it happens, and is valuable. It is great that we appreciate Acharan Sujin, but I disagree that listening to her and meditating are mutually exclusive. Well, it doesn't matter. I will continue listening to her, and meditating. I feel good about the way Dhamma is sinking deeper and deeper into my life. > > > Anyways, off topic. You explained the three kinds of panna very clearly, thanks again. L: I need to be more careful when explaining something. I need to check commentaries first. Best wishes Lukas P.s this is nice to here from you that I understand. But I remember what Sarah wrote on 8 wordly things. The two of them are praise and blame. When you told me about my understanding, I recall what Sarah mentioned praise and blame just wordly things. See, wise reflection. If I would never heard this reminder from Sarah I could take your words for true. Oh Lukas that understands. But this learns me that this is only a praise and after that will be blame, this is natural way as things happens. This is only unimportant wordly thing. So even such a small teaching from Buddha but it happend to develop more right understanding. #116773 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 3:35 am Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) nilovg Hi Howard, Op 14-aug-2011, om 17:10 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > N: It is just the PTS translation. But translations can differ. What > you quote I find very difficult to get. Too difficult for me! > -------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Then the fault must be mine in not communicating better. ----- N: wanting to add something. A long time ago I mentioned to you Ven. Dhammanando's post about seven different sutta translations (here it was the Yamakasutta). I searched, could not find his post, but I remember: Ven. Thanissaro's translations are mystical, Ven. Bodhi more academical, etc. Everyone according to his character. Thus, one should compare several translations. Can anybody find this interesting post for me? What I quoted between < > is strictly sutta. I added from the commentary only: clinging, conceit, wrong view. You quoted but the quote you used should have continued on: the passage that the Tathaagata had no conceit on account of seeing, etc. Otherwise there is the danger of taking the whole matter out of context. Nina. #116774 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 4:00 am Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 8/14/2011 1:35:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 14-aug-2011, om 17:10 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > N: It is just the PTS translation. But translations can differ. What > you quote I find very difficult to get. Too difficult for me! > -------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Then the fault must be mine in not communicating better. ----- N: wanting to add something. A long time ago I mentioned to you Ven. Dhammanando's post about seven different sutta translations (here it was the Yamakasutta). I searched, could not find his post, but I remember: Ven. Thanissaro's translations are mystical, Ven. Bodhi more academical, etc. Everyone according to his character. Thus, one should compare several translations. --------------------------------------------------- HCW: That is a very good point, Nina. ------------------------------------------------- Can anybody find this interesting post for me? What I quoted between < > is strictly sutta. I added from the commentary only: clinging, conceit, wrong view. ------------------------------------------------ HCW: Yes, I know. ------------------------------------------------ You quoted but the quote you used should have continued on: the passage that the Tathaagata had no conceit on account of seeing, etc. Otherwise there is the danger of taking the whole matter out of context. ------------------------------------------------- HCW: What I find remaining in Ven T's translation on ATI is the following: (And Bhikkhu Nananandin his monograph renders it quite similarly.) ------------------------------------------------- Nina. ================================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #116775 From: Ken O Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 4:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] 3 sources of Panna. To Phil ashkenn2k Dear Lukas specific nature means understanding the characteristics of a dhamma for example understanding feeling feels while general characteristics are anatta, anicca and dukkha. Direct experiental knowledge is at the nama and rupa level of vipassana while inferiential knowledge is the conventional understanding. Reflective knowledge is through the constant thinking, investigating and relfecting the nature of nama and rupa until one reach direct experiential knowledge. that is my take :-) Ken O > >Hi Ken O, Phil > >I was thinking what the specific nature(sabhavalakkhana) and general >characteristics(samannalakkhana) means? Also the meaning of direct experiental >knowledge(paccakkanana) and inferential knowledge(anumanana). Is it a paccakka >~nana and anuma ~nana? >This is all not easy. > >Best wishes >Lukas > >> In the Commentary to The All Embracing Net of Views translated by B Bohdi, pg >> 141 >> <>real >> dhammas (paramathadhamma) (1) the characteristics of the specific nature >> (sabhavalakkhana) and (2) the general characteristics (samannalakkhana). The >> comprehension of the characteristics of specific nature is direct experiential >> knowledge (paccakkanana); the compreshension of the general characteristics is >> inferential knowledge (anumananana). > > #116776 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 4:04 am Subject: TYPO Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) upasaka_howard Hi again, Nina - In a message dated 8/14/2011 2:00:43 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: (And Bhikkhu Nananandin his monograph renders it quite similarly.) I intended to write "And Bhikkhu Nanananda in his monograph renders it quite similarly." With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #116777 From: Ken O Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 4:12 am Subject: Re: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) ashkenn2k Dear Howard and Nina >------- >PTS transl: >and so forth," it would be a falsehood to me. If I were to say: "I >both know it and know it not," it would be a falsehood to me. If I >were to say: "I neither know it nor am ignorant of it," it would be a >falsehood to me, that would be afault in me. KO: Buddha knows all, there is nothing that Buddha does not know within his ominscience wisdom. So it would be falsehood if Buddha will to say I both know and know it not because he knows every dhamma. It would be impossible for him not to know dhamma >Thus, monks, a Tathaagata is a seer of what is to be seen, but he has no conceitof what is seen: he has no conceit of what has not been seen, he has no cenceit of what is to be seen, he has no conceit about the seer> KO: again Buddha is a seer of what is to be seen, is talking about his ominscience wisdwom. A Buddha has no conciet so whatever dhamma that arise to him, to be arise, or yet arise, or have yet arise, all such dhamma has no conceit in it with Buddha Ken O #116778 From: Ken O Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 4:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! ashkenn2k Dear Phil I have been quoting this a few times, maybe one more time from the commentary of right view <> Another quote, pg 159, Dispeller of Delusion, PTS <<2084 But through being included in the above-mentioned text too, knowledge of ownership of kamma is called understanding (panna). For that comes to be both the Tathagatas have arisen adn when they have not. When one has not arisen, it arises through the giving of Velama, the giving of Vessantara and so on. When one has arisen, there no measure of those who undertake great given (mahadana) by means of that knowledge. But the understanding of patha and knowledge exceeds all [other kinds] of understanding. They occure widesly only when a Tathagata has arisen, not when one has not. So because the understanding of the path is the higher understanding , therefore catusu maggesu ("regarding the four paths") and so on is said in order to show understanding as extreme understanding.>> here higher understanding is adhipanna Ken O > >From: philip >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Sunday, 14 August 2011 18:14:10 >Subject: [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! > > > > >Hi Ken and Pt and all > > >> -------------------- >> >> KH: <. . .> the question of panna arising with concepts. I don't think it >>can. (Unless, of course, they are concepts of dhammas - as in pariyatti.) >> >> > Ph: I would have assumed panna could arise with a concept as object. >> -------------------- >> >> KH: There are two kinds of panna, aren't there? There is the panna that knows >>kusala from akusala, and there is the panna that knows nama from rupa. I think >>in both cases the object has to be a dhamma or, at least, a concept of a dhamma. > >Ph: Are you sure "there are two kinds of panna?" iIsn't knowing nama from rupa >the first vipassana-nana(?) If abstention was dependant on stages of insight >there would a lit less abstainin. The awareness of tge present moment tgat keeps >you from bad deeds (I sincerely celebrate such kusala) is not vupassana-nana is >it? Surely hiri otappa sometimes functions with a conxept for you, doesn't it? >They are phrased in a way that makes it hard to understand tgem without concepts >as object, for example Vism XIV,142: "A man rejects evil through hiri out of >respect for himself, as the daughter of a good famuky does; he rejects evil >through otappa out of resoect for another, as a courtesan does." All definitions >I have seen of hiri otappa include aspects of concern about self-respectand >respect of others. Surely respect of others must have concept as object, don't >you think? > > >> > Ph: Isn't there panna accompanying metta, when metta actually arises (rather >>than lobha) and of course metta has concept as object. >> ---------------------------- >> > >> KH: Strictly speaking, the term 'metta' refers to a state of jhana absorption >>(which has a concept as object). And jhana requires the type of panna that knows >>kusala from akusala. > >Ph: But surely the object of this jhana absorption is a concept, a person? > >> However, the terms 'kusala' and 'akusala' refer to characteristics of dhammas, >>not of concepts. And so I don't see how panna could ever experience the same >>concept that metta experiences. >> >> I'll leave the next part for Pt: > >Ph: Ok Ken, the actual content of this thread is of less importance to me (the >technically kusalishness of abstention doesn't really concern me to tell the >truth, just the abstention) than rhe exercise of friendly and respectful speech >towards you, Ken H. And I have decided to longer withhold merit from you! (Haha, >just teasing Kelvin.) > > >Metta, >Phil > >Metta, >Phil >> ------------------------------ >> > Ph: Even if there is no panna, metta is kusala of course. So with the >>Buddha's recommendation against illicit sex as conceptual object, for example, >>accompanied by panna which sees the value of the >> Buddha's word, abstention arises, sometimes, and doesn't on other occasions. I >>don't see any problem with that >> <. . .> >> I don't know about you, but I know when there is remorse about bad behaviour, >>the mind does not settle in....oh damn! You guys don't meditate. Never mind! :) >> ------------------------------ >> >> KH: I don't, but I believe Pt is quite an accomplished meditator. If that's not >>a contradiction in terms! :-) >> >> Ken H >> > > > #116779 From: Ken O Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 4:55 am Subject: Re: Nimitta (was [dsg] Re: Smell etc, inseparable rupas ashkenn2k Dear Phil there is nothing wrong about nimitta, we need them to understand dhamma. Even if our understanding is still full of nimattas, it is still understanding. Panna cannot choose what type of object that arise with cittas, it's function is to help the citta to develop understanding of the object. the object can be full of nimittas. Ken O >Hi Nina, > >By coincidence I just heard a very intetesting talk on this subject, you said >you were frustrated by this nimitta, it made you feel that we could never >experience realities directly, always this nimitta, which felt like always >dreaming. But Lodewijk said he felt nimitta helped him understand detachment >better, how could there be attachment to that which had already fallen away? >Sarah talked about a gradation beteeen concept and reality, nimitta is closer to >reality thsn concept but is akin to concept. (Right, Sarah?) > >I agree with Lodewijk, nimitta makes it easier for me to have confidence about >detachment, seems more feasible to have awareness of this nimitta than of one >fleeting dhamma, one kalapa, for example and since there is more confidrnce >about awareness, more confidence about possibility of detachment. > > >Metta, >Phil >p.s Thank you for your answer re kinds of kusala, I might ask more later... > >> of a ruupa. We cannot pinpoint it is exactly this visible object that >> we are aware of, since they arise and fall away so fast. >> ------ >> > PH: I think the answer will be that it doesn't matter, just be >> > aware of characteristics, but why isn't nimitta a concept? >> > >> ------ >> N: It is the nimitta *of a* reality. Concept can have many meanings >> and that is why we have to be careful when answering: is it a reality >> or a concept. >> ------ >> > PH: I remember I heard Sayadaw U Silananda say tgat when there is >> > nimitta the reality has fallen away, but for the purpose of >> > satipatthana we can say it is still present. >> > >> ------ >> N: Yes, we can still say that there is awareness of the present >> object although it has just fallen away. >> ----- >> > PH: I remember Ann asked about nimitta at KK, and AS talked about >> > it. Ann, do you remember what she said, I remember you taking lots >> > of notes! >> > >> ----- >> N: Yes, Ann is very good with notes. Please, Ann. >> ------ >> Nina. >> #116780 From: "philip" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 5:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! philofillet Hi Ken O Thanks for that passage, I will bookmark it. ))Herein, the worldling is of two kinds: one outside the > Dispensation and one within the Dispensation. Herein, one outside the > Dispensation who believes in kamma is one of right view on account of the view > of kamma as one's own, but not on account of that which is in conformity with > the truths, because he holds to the view of self. One within the Dispensation is > of right view on account of both. Ph: Does "holding to view of self" mean having an explicit, elaborated view that there is an eternal self or could it mean having a lingering, not-yet fully extinguished belief in some kind of self? I don't profess a belief in etetnal self but I am surs the belief is lying latent, still, there is something deeply rooted in us that wants to believe in it no matter how easily we say "there is no eternal self." And so often in the suttas the Buddha speaks of having "an eye to the future" (those words are used only once as far as I know, but the same meaning is often found elsewhere) which means a concern for or interest in future destination. Other suttas tell us how for example. the monk who aspires for rebirth in deva realm should reflect, "may these beings be free from harm" etc. I feel sonetimes there are suttas wbich have implicit wrong view in them, almost like they were remnants from Brahmanic views, for example, the sutta that says that a couple of perfectly harmonized virtue will rejoice in each other's company in a future life. It sometimes feels the Buddha taught to people "outside the dispensation" by the above definition in terms that would attract them so that eventually the deeper truth could reach them but ascribing what sounds like a marketing strategy to the Buddha is not good. Anyways, my point is that it is maybe not as easy as we think to say we are within tge dispensation by the above definition, at least it isn't easy for me... Metta, Phil The disciple in higher training is one of > right view on account of fixed right view,[4] the one beyond training on account > of (the right view) that is beyond training.[5]>> > Another quote, pg 159, Dispeller of Delusion, PTS > <<2084 But through being included in the above-mentioned text too, knowledge of > ownership of kamma is called understanding (panna). For that comes to be both > the Tathagatas have arisen adn when they have not. When one has not arisen, it > arises through the giving of Velama, the giving of Vessantara and so on. When > one has arisen, there no measure of those who undertake great given (mahadana) > by means of that knowledge. But the understanding of patha and knowledge > exceeds all [other kinds] of understanding. They occure widesly only when a > Tathagata has arisen, not when one has not. So because the understanding of the > path is the higher understanding , therefore catusu maggesu ("regarding the four > paths") and so on is said in order to show understanding as extreme > understanding.>> > here higher understanding is adhipanna > Ken O > > > > > > > > >From: philip > >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > >Sent: Sunday, 14 August 2011 18:14:10 > >Subject: [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! > > > > > > > > > >Hi Ken and Pt and all > > > > > >> -------------------- > >> >> KH: <. . .> the question of panna arising with concepts. I don't think it > >>can. (Unless, of course, they are concepts of dhammas - as in pariyatti.) > >> > >> > Ph: I would have assumed panna could arise with a concept as object. > >> -------------------- > >> > >> KH: There are two kinds of panna, aren't there? There is the panna that knows > >>kusala from akusala, and there is the panna that knows nama from rupa. I think > >>in both cases the object has to be a dhamma or, at least, a concept of a dhamma. > > > >Ph: Are you sure "there are two kinds of panna?" iIsn't knowing nama from rupa > >the first vipassana-nana(?) If abstention was dependant on stages of insight > >there would a lit less abstainin. The awareness of tge present moment tgat keeps > >you from bad deeds (I sincerely celebrate such kusala) is not vupassana-nana is > >it? Surely hiri otappa sometimes functions with a conxept for you, doesn't it? > >They are phrased in a way that makes it hard to understand tgem without concepts > >as object, for example Vism XIV,142: "A man rejects evil through hiri out of > >respect for himself, as the daughter of a good famuky does; he rejects evil > >through otappa out of resoect for another, as a courtesan does." All definitions > >I have seen of hiri otappa include aspects of concern about self-respectand > >respect of others. Surely respect of others must have concept as object, don't > >you think? > > > > > >> > Ph: Isn't there panna accompanying metta, when metta actually arises (rather > >>than lobha) and of course metta has concept as object. > >> ---------------------------- > >> > > > >> KH: Strictly speaking, the term 'metta' refers to a state of jhana absorption > >>(which has a concept as object). And jhana requires the type of panna that knows > >>kusala from akusala. > > > >Ph: But surely the object of this jhana absorption is a concept, a person? > > > >> However, the terms 'kusala' and 'akusala' refer to characteristics of dhammas, > >>not of concepts. And so I don't see how panna could ever experience the same > >>concept that metta experiences. > >> > >> I'll leave the next part for Pt: > > > >Ph: Ok Ken, the actual content of this thread is of less importance to me (the > >technically kusalishness of abstention doesn't really concern me to tell the > >truth, just the abstention) than rhe exercise of friendly and respectful speech > >towards you, Ken H. And I have decided to longer withhold merit from you! (Haha, > >just teasing Kelvin.) > > > > > >Metta, > >Phil > > > >Metta, > >Phil > >> ------------------------------ > >> > Ph: Even if there is no panna, metta is kusala of course. So with the > >>Buddha's recommendation against illicit sex as conceptual object, for example, > >>accompanied by panna which sees the value of the > >> Buddha's word, abstention arises, sometimes, and doesn't on other occasions. I > >>don't see any problem with that > >> <. . .> > >> I don't know about you, but I know when there is remorse about bad behaviour, > >>the mind does not settle in....oh damn! You guys don't meditate. Never mind! :) > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> KH: I don't, but I believe Pt is quite an accomplished meditator. If that's not > >>a contradiction in terms! :-) > >> > >> Ken H > >> > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > #116781 From: "philip" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 5:45 am Subject: Nimitta (was [dsg] Re: Smell etc, inseparable rupas philofillet Hi Ken O > > there is nothing wrong about nimitta, we need them to understand dhamma. Even > if our understanding is still full of nimattas, it is still understanding. Thanks, I agree, how else could fleeting dhammas reach our awareness except as nimitta? If the lightning flash mind of the Ariyan can have more direct awareness, great for him or her... Metta, Phil > >> of a ruupa. We cannot pinpoint it is exactly this visible object that > >> we are aware of, since they arise and fall away so fast. > >> ------ > >> > PH: I think the answer will be that it doesn't matter, just be > >> > aware of characteristics, but why isn't nimitta a concept? > >> > > >> ------ > >> N: It is the nimitta *of a* reality. Concept can have many meanings > >> and that is why we have to be careful when answering: is it a reality > >> or a concept. > >> ------ > >> > PH: I remember I heard Sayadaw U Silananda say tgat when there is > >> > nimitta the reality has fallen away, but for the purpose of > >> > satipatthana we can say it is still present. > >> > > >> ------ > >> N: Yes, we can still say that there is awareness of the present > >> object although it has just fallen away. > >> ----- > >> > PH: I remember Ann asked about nimitta at KK, and AS talked about > >> > it. Ann, do you remember what she said, I remember you taking lots > >> > of notes! > >> > > >> ----- > >> N: Yes, Ann is very good with notes. Please, Ann. > >> ------ > >> Nina. > >> > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > >> > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > #116782 From: "philip" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 5:57 am Subject: Re: 3 sources of Panna. To Phil philofillet Hi Lukas > > Anyways, off topic. You explained the three kinds of panna very clearly, thanks again. > > L: I need to be more careful when explaining something. I need to check commentaries first. > > Best wishes > Lukas > > P.s > this is nice to here from you that I understand. But I remember what Sarah wrote on 8 wordly things. The two of them are praise and blame. > When you told me about my understanding, I recall what Sarah mentioned praise and blame just wordly things. See, wise reflection. If I would never heard this reminder from Sarah I could take your words for true. Oh Lukas that understands. But this learns me that this is only a praise and after that will be blame, this is natural way as things happens. This is only unimportant wordly thing. So even such a small teaching from Buddha but it happend to develop more right understanding. Ph: Yes, good to remember tge 8WCs as I call them, the worldly conditions. When I get a lot of praise as a teacher (at work) I always remember them. But I think when we praise someone for helping us to understand Dhamma it is a bit different because explaining Dhamma is a deed of merit so we are rejoicing in their kusala, your interest in Dhamma at an age when drugs and wild parties are so easily available is to be celebrated, no flattery intended! :) Metta, Phil p.s off for a few days, catch you later. #116783 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 6:01 am Subject: Uncertainty about clinging to Views truth_aerator Dear All, I was reading a lot about different philosophical views. Some say that world outside exists, some deny its existence, some are skeptical at all. One smart thinker can write a very convincing argument for "X". Another smart thinker can write a very good rebutal and prove Not-X. I've read how some scientists claim that 99% of matter is empty space. But what does this change? Can one walk through wall that is 99% empty space? Can one drive through a tree at 100 km/h? Some say that concepts don't exist and don't have their own function. Ok, rather than putting sugar into your cup of tea, put salt and see if function of salt is the same as of sugar... Concepts don't exist? Then drive into a tree at 100 km/h. It should be impossible because there is no car, no tree, no driver... Obviously we do not live in such a world and all the talk about non-existence is not actually followed. Also what about jumping from the window on 10th floor rather than walking down the stairs. If external world of concepts doesn't exist, there should be no difference... But there is... So at best this position seems to be at odds with the actual day to day experiences. I've read a bit of very advanced book about how we cannot know anything for certain... This book had good reviews from very famous universities... But no matter how well argued the thesis is, it seems to be useless at best, dangerous at worst. In any case one does not live fully skeptical lifestyle.... If one doesn't know what is safer to jump from 10th floor or to take the stairs.... It is possible to create an argument that is un-falsifiable and dogmatically cling to it. For example: An idealist may say that "everything, including all your proofs to the contrary are just series of perceptions that occur in such and such a way". A materialist may say that "everything, including all your proofs to the contrary are just series of material events that occur in such and such a way to cause such and such a perception to arise". A solipsist may say that "It is all my perception, no matter what I imagine you, who doesn't exist, to say. What a strange thoughts that disprove solipsism I have today!" A theist can say that "all this is sent by God Almighty for his purpose", and when asked about why God was never proven, why there is so much evidence to the contrary, etc, a theist can reply "God creates and sends evidence that refutes His existence and He hides himself from us to test our faith, to develop us in such and such a way". A skeptic may say that. Imagine that there is this Evil scientist who created a brain and put it into a vat. Through the means of super technology attached to that brain, the scientist can make the brain hallucinate things like: that the brain lives in the world populated be other people. That the brain is a person with arms and legs. That brain thinks about this or that by what seems to be his/her own free will, including thoughts about this scientist, brain-in-the-vat, and all ontological, epistemological, soteorological and religious thoughts, etc. Or a skeptic may say that phenomena randomly occur, and it is just a randomly arisen thought that something can be known, that idea of "cause-effect" is simply a randomly arisen idea that can be false, etc, etc. So to say it briefly, it is possible to question any kind of ontological position and it is possible to create unfalsifiable arguments that are based due to faith. IMHO what is much better is to focus on pragmatic truths taught by the Buddha and not cling and speculate about any ultimate realities for they can only be object of unprovable faith. "What should be done" is, IMHO, more fruitful than "what ontological is" . But at least one can be peaceful and calm Buddha was wise in a practical sense to reject ultimately unprovable views such as "everything is one, everything is plurality, everything is, everything is not, etc". With best wishes, Alex #116784 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 6:08 am Subject: Re: 3 sources of Panna. To Phil szmicio Hi Phil, > > P.s > > this is nice to here from you that I understand. But I remember what Sarah wrote on 8 wordly things. The two of them are praise and blame. > > When you told me about my understanding, I recall what Sarah mentioned praise and blame just wordly things. See, wise reflection. If I would never heard this reminder from Sarah I could take your words for true. Oh Lukas that understands. But this learns me that this is only a praise and after that will be blame, this is natural way as things happens. This is only unimportant wordly thing. So even such a small teaching from Buddha but it happend to develop more right understanding. > > > Ph: Yes, good to remember tge 8WCs as I call them, the worldly conditions. When I get a lot of praise as a teacher (at work) I always remember them. But I think when we praise someone for helping us to understand Dhamma it is a bit different because explaining Dhamma is a deed of merit so we are rejoicing in their kusala, your interest in Dhamma at an age when drugs and wild parties are so easily available is to be celebrated, no flattery intended! :) L: Yes, I understand you. I didn't think bad of you, that you flatter me or something, I meant akusalas that arouse in me. Best wishes Lukas #116785 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 6:12 am Subject: Re: Uncertainty about clinging to Views szmicio Hi Alex, Here I also ask about how many views there are? Is it 20 or something? Can anyone give me a comprehensive description of all views? I used to take understanding for my understanding. What kind of wrong view is involved in it? Best wishes Lukas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Dear All, > > I was reading a lot about different philosophical views. Some say that world outside exists, some deny its existence, some are skeptical at all. One smart thinker can write a very convincing argument for "X". Another smart thinker can write a very good rebutal and prove Not-X. I've read how some scientists claim that 99% of matter is empty space. But what does this change? Can one walk through wall that is 99% empty space? Can one drive through a tree at 100 km/h? > > Some say that concepts don't exist and don't have their own function. Ok, rather than putting sugar into your cup of tea, put salt and see if function of salt is the same as of sugar... Concepts don't exist? Then drive into a tree at 100 km/h. It should be impossible because there is no car, no tree, no driver... Obviously we do not live in such a world and all the talk about non-existence is not actually followed. Also what about jumping from the window on 10th floor rather than walking down the stairs. If external world of concepts doesn't exist, there should be no difference... But there is... > So at best this position seems to be at odds with the actual day to day experiences. > > I've read a bit of very advanced book about how we cannot know anything for certain... This book had good reviews from very famous universities... But no matter how well argued the thesis is, it seems to be useless at best, dangerous at worst. In any case one does not live fully skeptical lifestyle.... If one doesn't know what is safer > to jump from 10th floor or to take the stairs.... > > It is possible to create an argument that is un-falsifiable and dogmatically cling to it. > > For example: > An idealist may say that "everything, including all your proofs to the contrary are just series of perceptions that occur in such and such a way". > > A materialist may say that "everything, including all your proofs to the contrary are just series of material events that occur in such and such a way to cause such and such a perception to arise". > > A solipsist may say that "It is all my perception, no matter what I imagine you, who doesn't exist, to say. What a strange thoughts that disprove solipsism I have today!" > > A theist can say that "all this is sent by God Almighty for his purpose", and when asked about why God was never proven, why there is so much evidence to the contrary, etc, a theist can reply "God creates and sends evidence that refutes His existence and He hides himself from us to test our faith, to develop us in such and such a way". > > A skeptic may say that. Imagine that there is this Evil scientist who created a brain and put it into a vat. Through the means of super technology attached to that brain, the scientist can make the brain hallucinate things like: that the brain lives in the world populated be other people. That the brain is a person with arms and legs. That brain thinks about this or that by what seems to be his/her own free will, including thoughts about this scientist, brain-in-the-vat, and all ontological, epistemological, soteorological and religious thoughts, etc. > > Or a skeptic may say that phenomena randomly occur, and it is just a randomly arisen thought that something can be known, that idea of "cause-effect" is simply a randomly arisen idea that can be false, etc, etc. > > So to say it briefly, it is possible to question any kind of ontological position and it is possible to create unfalsifiable arguments that are based due to faith. > > IMHO what is much better is to focus on pragmatic truths taught by the Buddha and not cling and speculate about any ultimate realities for they can only be object of unprovable faith. "What should be done" is, IMHO, more fruitful than "what ontological is" . > > But at least one can be peaceful and calm Buddha was wise in a practical sense to reject ultimately unprovable views such as "everything is one, everything is plurality, everything is, everything is not, etc". > > > With best wishes, > > Alex > #116786 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:20 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > Among the many post of yours which I have not got around to answering (apologies for that) are one or two where you ask for verification of the 'orthodox' Theravada position. I'd like to start this round of posting by giving some quotes on those points. > > (115633) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > > J: As I understand it, it is the orthodox Theravada interpretation of the teaching that the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path are the mental factors that co-arise at path moment. > > > > [RE:] You have referred to your understanding of orthodox Theravada interpretation here and recently in another post, but you do not cite where that is contained or which teachings or teachers are responsible for the "orthodox" teaching. Can you please specify and give an example? I do not know where the "orthodox" teaching is contained or wherein you are referencing it. Do you mean Abhidhamma and commentary? Is that the orthodox teaching in your view? > =============== > > J: When I refer to the orthodox teaching I'm referring to the Tipitaka and its commentaries and sub-commentaries, down to and include the Abhidhammatta Sangaha and commentaries. > > In the Guide to paras 17 and 38 of Ch. VII of CMA (translation of the Abhidhammatta Sangaha), Bhikkhu Bodhi summarises the commentary to these paras as follows: > > ************************** > The noble truth of the way to the cessation of suffering is the Noble Eightfold Path. In the teaching of the four truths, this is the collection of eight cetasikas corresponding to the eight path factors arisen in the cittas of the four supramundane paths: > - right view is the cetasika of wisdom > - right intention, right mindfulness, right effort and right concentration are respectively the cetasikas of initial application, energy, mindfulness and one-pointedness > - right speech, right action and right livelihood are the three abstinences (virati) > ************************** > > Just to show I'm not making it up :-)) Thanks, Jon. I would not think you were making it up, however, it of course clarifies things to see where a view actually appears, as opposed to being some sort of conglomerate of an interpretation of the entire Tipitaka. When one says that this is "orthodox" and that it is a result of the "entire Tipitaka including commentaries..." I think that in a sense obscures the actuality of where this view comes from, and likewise obscures how universal it is, or whether it is indeed the logical conclusion of the entirety of the Tipitaka, which it is not. Buddha, as I suspected, never gave any pronouncement of the eight-fold path existing as a momentary occurrence of a short series of cittas and accompanying cetasikas, and never implied that this was the case. The idea that the path consists of a culmination of brief experienced moments is a grand departure, in my opinion, not an interpretation of, the way in which Buddha defined the Noble Eight-fold Path. This view only appears in commentary and/or sub-commentary, and cannot be derived from any other source in the Tipitaka, in my understanding, limited though it may be. It is not in sutta, it is not in Visudhimagga, and I am fairly certain - though not totally certain by any means - that it does not appear in the body of the Abhidhamma itself, which would lead it to be a very restricted interpretation of the Tipitaka, and not "orthodox" in the sense of being ubiquitous within the scriptures or universally understood and accepted by the tradition of serious adherents and practitioners of Buddhism, which is the only meaningful use of the word "orthodox." That is why it think it is very useful to identify the actual sources of our views. Rather than saying that such a view is orthodox, which somewhat optimistically universalizes it beyond its actual scope for the sake of those who adopt such a view, it would be much more precise and correct to say that it is a "commentarial" view, as many of such view are, and that those who hold such a view are "commentary-based" in their views, and that those who hold such a view could very well be called the "Commentarialist" wing of the Theravadin tradition. The views of the Commentaries are *not* the views that are expressed in the suttas by the Buddha himself. Rather, they are an esoteric, not orthodox, interpretation of the Tipitaka, by way of one branch of the Tipitaka, that being the Abhidhamma and the commentaries that likewise see the Tipitaka as the veiled or conventional expression of the single-citta approach to the path. This is certainly not the only valid interpretation of the Tipitaka, and is in fact controversial and always has been. It is not Orthodox; it is an alternate interpretation of the Buddha's teachings. I will stop for now, but I will be very glad to see any other illuminating quotes you can provide, especially if any exist outside of the radical views of the commentaries that interpret Buddha's words into single-citta Abhidhamma terms, rather than working with the terms the Buddha actually used to express the manner in which the path is to be followed. Happy to join you in this "next round" of our talks. :-) Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - #116787 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:20 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > Among the many post of yours which I have not got around to answering (apologies for that) are one or two where you ask for verification of the 'orthodox' Theravada position. I'd like to start this round of posting by giving some quotes on those points. > > (115633) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > > J: As I understand it, it is the orthodox Theravada interpretation of the teaching that the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path are the mental factors that co-arise at path moment. > > > > [RE:] You have referred to your understanding of orthodox Theravada interpretation here and recently in another post, but you do not cite where that is contained or which teachings or teachers are responsible for the "orthodox" teaching. Can you please specify and give an example? I do not know where the "orthodox" teaching is contained or wherein you are referencing it. Do you mean Abhidhamma and commentary? Is that the orthodox teaching in your view? > =============== > > J: When I refer to the orthodox teaching I'm referring to the Tipitaka and its commentaries and sub-commentaries, down to and include the Abhidhammatta Sangaha and commentaries. > > In the Guide to paras 17 and 38 of Ch. VII of CMA (translation of the Abhidhammatta Sangaha), Bhikkhu Bodhi summarises the commentary to these paras as follows: > > ************************** > The noble truth of the way to the cessation of suffering is the Noble Eightfold Path. In the teaching of the four truths, this is the collection of eight cetasikas corresponding to the eight path factors arisen in the cittas of the four supramundane paths: > - right view is the cetasika of wisdom > - right intention, right mindfulness, right effort and right concentration are respectively the cetasikas of initial application, energy, mindfulness and one-pointedness > - right speech, right action and right livelihood are the three abstinences (virati) > ************************** > > Just to show I'm not making it up :-)) Thanks, Jon. I would not think you were making it up, however, it of course clarifies things to see where a view actually appears, as opposed to being some sort of conglomerate of an interpretation of the entire Tipitaka. When one says that this is "orthodox" and that it is a result of the "entire Tipitaka including commentaries..." I think that in a sense obscures the actuality of where this view comes from, and likewise obscures how universal it is, or whether it is indeed the logical conclusion of the entirety of the Tipitaka, which it is not. Buddha, as I suspected, never gave any pronouncement of the eight-fold path existing as a momentary occurrence of a short series of cittas and accompanying cetasikas, and never implied that this was the case. The idea that the path consists of a culmination of brief experienced moments is a grand departure, in my opinion, not an interpretation of, the way in which Buddha defined the Noble Eight-fold Path. This view only appears in commentary and/or sub-commentary, and cannot be derived from any other source in the Tipitaka, in my understanding, limited though it may be. It is not in sutta, it is not in Visudhimagga, and I am fairly certain - though not totally certain by any means - that it does not appear in the body of the Abhidhamma itself, which would lead it to be a very restricted interpretation of the Tipitaka, and not "orthodox" in the sense of being ubiquitous within the scriptures or universally understood and accepted by the tradition of serious adherents and practitioners of Buddhism, which is the only meaningful use of the word "orthodox." That is why it think it is very useful to identify the actual sources of our views. Rather than saying that such a view is orthodox, which somewhat optimistically universalizes it beyond its actual scope for the sake of those who adopt such a view, it would be much more precise and correct to say that it is a "commentarial" view, as many of such view are, and that those who hold such a view are "commentary-based" in their views, and that those who hold such a view could very well be called the "Commentarialist" wing of the Theravadin tradition. The views of the Commentaries are *not* the views that are expressed in the suttas by the Buddha himself. Rather, they are an esoteric, not orthodox, interpretation of the Tipitaka, by way of one branch of the Tipitaka, that being the Abhidhamma and the commentaries that likewise see the Tipitaka as the veiled or conventional expression of the single-citta approach to the path. This is certainly not the only valid interpretation of the Tipitaka, and is in fact controversial and always has been. It is not Orthodox; it is an alternate interpretation of the Buddha's teachings. I will stop for now, but I will be very glad to see any other illuminating quotes you can provide, especially if any exist outside of the radical views of the commentaries that interpret Buddha's words into single-citta Abhidhamma terms, rather than working with the terms the Buddha actually used to express the manner in which the path is to be followed. Happy to join you in this "next round" of our talks. :-) Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - #116788 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:31 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (115634) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > > [J:] As regards the 4 jhanas as Right Concentration, the orthodox Theravada teaching is that at the moment of supramundane path consciousness the accompanying concentration is of a level equivalent to that one or other of the 4 jhanas (i.e., nothing to do with the development of mundane jhana). > > > > [RE:] ... You are referring to what you call the "orthodox" interpretation. I would like to know where this orthodox interpretation is contained. Who is responsible for it? > =============== > > J: In the Guide to paras 30 and 31 of Ch. VII of CMA (translation of the Abhidhammatta Sangaha), Bhikkhu Bodhi summarises the commentaries to these paras as follows: > > ************************ > All meditators reach the supramundane paths and fruits through the development of wisdom (pa~n~naa) - insight into the three characteristics of impermanence, suffering, and non-self. However, they differ among themselves in the degree of their development of concentration (samaadhi). > > - Those who develop insight without a basis of jhaana are called practitioners of bare insight (sukkhavipassaka). When they reach the path and fruit, their path and fruition cittas occur at a level corresponding to the first jhaana. > > - Those who develop insight on the basis of jhaana attain a path and fruit which corresponds to the level of jhaana they had attained before reaching the path. ... > > For bare insight meditator and jhaana meditator alike, all path and fruition cittas are considered types of jhaana consciousness. They are so considered because they occur in the mode of closely contemplating their object with full absorption, like the mundane jhaanas, and because they possess the jhaana factors with an intensity corresponding to their counterparts in the mundane jhaanas. > ************************ > > That is the passage that sets out the orthodox Theravada position. > > The Guide goes on to discuss how the concentration that accompanies a moment of path consciousness differs from the concentration of mundane jhana. > > ************************ > The supramundane jhaanas of the paths and fruits differ from the mundane jhaanas in several important respects. > > - First, whereas the mundane jhaanas take as their object some concept, such as the sign of the kasina, the supramundane jhaanas take as their object Nibbaana, the unconditioned reality. > > - Second, whereas the mundane jhaanas merely suppress the defilements while leaving their underlying seeds intact, the supramundane jhaanas of the path eradicate defilements so that they can never again arise. > > - Third, while the mundane jhaanas lead to rebirth in the fine-material world and thus sustain existence in the round of rebirths, the jhaanas of the path cut off the fetters binding one to the cycle and thus issue in liberation from the round of birth and death. > > - 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, with concentration fixing the mind on the unconditioned element and wisdom fathoming the deep significance of the Four Noble Truths. > ************************ > > Note that, according to this, "mundane jhaanas lead to rebirth in the fine-material world and thus sustain existence in the round of rebirths". I agree that the mundane jhanas without corresponding insight development would only suppress defilements and lead to continued rebirth. I also agree that jhana or the equivalent is part of the concentration of enlightened awareness of the level that contemplates nibbana as its object. However, I disagree that it is established that such concentration can be automatically attained through dry insight, except in cases where such concentration is achieved through the natural propensity and accumulations of a gifted practitioner, and I also don't think that Buddha meant for jhana to be practiced without the necessary insight practice, so that jhana, accompanied by such practice, would indeed lead to the achievement of full enlightenment. In fact, that is the main path to enlightenment that the Buddha espoused. The path of dry insight is inferior, and leads to an inferior fruit, even according to those who espouse it. In addition, I believe that these commentaries that announce the happy news that dry insight can be used as a main vehicle of the path without the bother of attaining jhana, were written for the purpose of adapting the path to an epoch in which the occurrence of jhana was less possible, and was done so after the time of the Buddha in which he clearly demonstrated and stated that jhana was the path to enlightenment, with only a few notable exceptions. Buddha's use of jhana as a pathway to enlightenment does not resemble its use by those who did not understanding satipatthana. On this, I think we can all agree. However, I think it is very clear that Buddha meant jhana to be employed in conjunction with satipatthana, and did not promote the use of one part of the path without the other, but both developed together to form the full path. Can dry insight develop the full path, with jhana factors occurring as part of the fulfillment of the path at the end of high insight attainment? I am not sure, but I am fairly certain that such a pathway was not set out by the Buddha, taking into account those notable exceptions. Any contrary quotes that are not from commentary? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #116789 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:49 am Subject: Satipatthana Sutta - Cemetary Contemplation (was, Re: A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (115632) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > Here is what the Buddha says: > > The monk "generates desire." > > He "endeavors." > > He "activates persistence." > > He "exerts his intent." > > > > These are quotes, as you requested, not paraphrases. Please show some direct evidence that he is not saying that the monk's right effort actually consists of "generating desire," "endeavoring," "activating persistence" and "exerting intent," all volitional actions, not paramatha dhammas, which Buddha says the monk does in practicing right effort. > =============== > > J: I know you will not consider this to be 'direct evidence', but in the Guide to para 25 of Ch. VII of CMA (translation of the Abhidhammatta Sangaha) on the Four Supreme Efforts, Bhikkhu Bodhi summarises the commentaries to this para as follows: > > "Here one mental factor, energy, performs four separate functions. This fourfold effort is identical with right effort, the sixth factor of the Noble Eightfold Path." > > Just putting this forward as the (long-standing) orthodox position. It may be long-standing, but it is not orthodox. Orthodoxy comes from the *main body* of a teaching, not its fringe. A commentary on a summary of one part of a teaching that is distinct from the original teaching [the suttas] is not "orthodox" or the "main body" of the teaching. It has been pointed out by a number of students of Abhidhamma that the Sangaha does itself change and reconstrue a number of the teachings of the Abhidhamma, and of course the Abhdhamma is itself a secondary breakdown and interpretation of the path as expressed in the suttas. In addition this statement that neatly expresses right effort as a "mental factor" in *direct contradiction* to the quotes I gave you from the Buddha's own mouth. It's not an interpretation, but a contradiction to say that the Buddha's words mean the opposite of what he stated. He said "do this" and the commentary says "it is a function of a mental factor" rather than something to do. That's a direct contradiction. They are at odds with each other. Only one can be correct, not both. In addition, this not even from the Sangaha, but from a commentary on the Sangaha. So what you are calling the "longstanding orthodox" position is in fact a commentary on a summary [the Sangaha] which itself is an interpretationof an interpretation [the Abhidhamma] of the Buddha's original teachings [the suttas.] To summarize: it is a commentary on a summary of an interpretation of the original teachings of the Buddha, and is therefore a fourth-hand interpretation of the teachings. If you had a fourth-hand piece of testimony in a courtroom, what status would you afford it as evidence? Even if I agreed to consider the Abhidhamma part of the original teachings of the Buddha, which is not generally accepted in the "orthodox" Theravadin view, it would still be a third-hand teaching - a commentary on the Sangaha, which is a summary with interpretive changes of the Abhidhamma, the original teaching. If you had a physics professor giving evidence on Einstein, and he started out his testimony by saying, "I would like to give you the Orthodox teaching of Einstein, which comes from a book that was written about an interpretation of another book that was written about the Theory of Relativity," would you challenge the orthodoxy of such a view? I would give the same challenge to the orthodoxy of a view that translates the Buddha's direct teaching on "Right Effort" into a cetasika, by way of a fourth-hand commentary. You are entitled to what is a serious interpretive view of the teachings, shared by serious followers of the commentaries and Abhidhamma, but I don't think you are entitled to call it an "orthodox" or "traditional" view. It is not shared by the large majority of serious Theravadin practitioners, which is how orthodoxy and tradition are defined. It may turn out to be the correct view, but it is a radical view. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - #116790 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:55 am Subject: [dsg] Satipatthana Sutta - Cemetary Contemplation (was, Re: A lovely drea... epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Jon (and Robert) - > > In a message dated 8/14/2011 7:12:59 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > jonabbott@... writes: > > Hi Robert E > > (115632) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > Here is what the Buddha says: > > The monk "generates desire." > > He "endeavors." > > He "activates persistence." > > He "exerts his intent." > > > > These are quotes, as you requested, not paraphrases. Please show some > direct evidence that he is not saying that the monk's right effort actually > consists of "generating desire," "endeavoring," "activating persistence" > and "exerting intent," all volitional actions, not paramatha dhammas, which > Buddha says the monk does in practicing right effort. > =============== > > J: I know you will not consider this to be 'direct evidence', but in the > Guide to para 25 of Ch. VII of CMA (translation of the Abhidhammatta > Sangaha) on the Four Supreme Efforts, Bhikkhu Bodhi summarises the commentaries > to this para as follows: > > "Here one mental factor, energy, performs four separate functions. This > fourfold effort is identical with right effort, the sixth factor of the > Noble Eightfold Path." > > Just putting this forward as the (long-standing) orthodox position. > > Jon > ================================= > Robert, the Buddha, in saying that the monk "generates desire" and > "endeavors" and "activates persistence" and "exerts his intent", is certainly > describing intentional actions. But why do you say they are "not paramattha > dhammas"? What else are they? I don't follow you in that. What I mean to say is that they are not merely passive objects of experience, which is how I understand "paramatha dhammas" to be defined by the commentarial view. I certainly think that every intentional action is experienced as an arising dhamma by an apprehending citta, but I don't think that right action or right effort are merely such experiences, but that actions exist in their own right and that the action, not just the experience of the action, is part of the path. I don't believe that action per se has any significance in the commentarial view. It is difficult to split such a distinction between the paramatha terminology the way it is used, and the way that I understand it. The idea of absolute realities has implications of single isolated bounded experiential that have clear static existences for brief moments of existence and are thoroughly passive in nature that I don't accept as a correct understanding of action and experience. My understanding of the way in which paramatha dhammas is used explicitly denies the existence of volitional actions. That is the distinction I am trying to make, and it's a difficult one to discuss clearly. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #116791 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 9:02 am Subject: A Question and Possible Answer (Re: [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some ...) kenhowardau Hi Howard, ------------- <. . .> > HCW: That pa~n~na knows only paramattha dhammas seems to be the understanding here. I have one question about this: If it is so, how does wisdom ever come to see through the illusion of mere concept seeming to be reality? -------------- KH: At one level it is obvious; even a child knows there is always a greater reality behind a lesser facade. So a child knows, for example, that actions 'speak louder than words.' And even actions are not the end of it. We all know, for example, that a person who makes a display of being honest and generous can actually be devious and mean. So I think it is obvious to everyone that there are always many fleeting, ultimate realiies behind every lasting, conventional reality. ------------------------ > HCW: How are concepts seen to be merely concepts? (And known not just by deduction from premisses but as a direct seeing through of illusion? Is it not wisdom that cuts through illusion?) A possible answer-by-analogy to my own question - Wisdom DOES cut through the illusion of "concepts as reality," and it does so as follows: 1) When one seems to see a snake at twilight, but looking more carefully sees instead a coiled rope, at the moment of seeing the rope, the illusion of snake disappears (and a "snake" is no longer perceived). Analogously, when one seems to observe a body or tree or building or concerto, but then attending more carefully, observes instead a mere flow of physical qualities (rupas), at that moment, the illusion of body or tree or building or concerto disappears and is no longer perceived. ------------------------- KH: The answer is fine, but I disagree with your take on it. There is no "flow of rupas" to be observed; only one rupa at a time can ever be observed. The experience of that rupa can trigger a memory of concepts. -------------------------------- HCW: 2) Another analogy: When examining the pointillist painting of a woman, if, perhaps by magnification, there could be seen merely an arrangement of dots, would not the mentally constructed woman-image no longer appear? Any thoughts on this, folks? ----------------------- KH: Yes! Tell us about those dots. Are they in turn made up of littler dots? (Are there dots "all the way down"?) Or are those dots ultimate realities (paramattha dhammas)? And if so, what are their inherent characteristics? :-) Ken H #116792 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 9:47 am Subject: Re: Uncertainty about clinging to Views truth_aerator Dear Lukas, all, >Hi Alex, >Here I also ask about how many views there are? Is it 20 or >something? >================================================================== 20 views that you are probably talking about are self views. 5 aggregates x 4 modes of relation to posited Self. There is also additional Self View about self being the entire world or Self being annihilated. 4 modes = Self as aggregate, Self as possesing aggregate, aggregate as in the self... self as in aggregate. What I was talking about views regarding the world. Is everything multiplicity or one? Does the world exist or not? Do the dhammas exist or not. Is matter cause of mind and all perceptions, or is there just mind and everything is mental. Can anything be known about the external ontological world (or dhammas) for certain? It is possible to create a non-refutable argument and cling to it. But there are multiple such dogmas. Who is right, if anyone. Who knows. Some skeptics can say that maybe we are all limbless fish in pre-Cambrian, swimming in LSD ocean, and hallucinating this world to be humans with arms and legs, thinking maybe even these thoughts, and perceiving other people, animals, trees, and technological progress, etc. This viewpoint cannot be argued for any argument to the contrary can be rebuked with "the fish is hallucinating these thoughts, arguments and counterarguments..." I believe in pragmatic usage of Buddha's teaching. At least we can experience the pragmatic results... With best wishes, Alex #116793 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 10:34 am Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! kenhowardau Hi Pt, --------- <. . .> > pt: Hm, not sure then, my thinking was that panna is a cetasika and can't really choose what object citta will take. E.g. Phil's example of metta which is always with a concept as object, what Sarah also often mentions (let's steer clear of jhana for now). Let's see if Jon or Sarah can clarify. --------- KH: Yes, let's see. But it is always useful to have a stab at these things ourselves - while we are waiting for someone to come to our rescue. When you say panna can't choose, you mean it simply understands whatever object comes up, don't you? So, if I asked you which horse won the third at Rosehill, could panna have a view on that? --------------------- > pt: I think it can be said that virati cetasika "takes" a dhamma as object in the same sense that we can say that sana, sati, panna, etc "take" it. Strictly speaking, I think it's citta that takes the object, while cetasikas perform their functions and help citta "handle" the object. ---------------------- KH: I think it's better to say that all namas experience an object. But the question I am asking is, can all namas experience dhammas, or can some only experience concepts? The function of virati is to abstain from any speech or action that might harm a sentient being, isn't it? So would there have to be a concept of a sentient being at the time? At this stage in my Dhamma studies I could easily be persuaded either way. I don't see any vital distinction involved. ----------------- <. . .> >>> Pt: Anyway, I think for our discussion, the most difficult is the case three in my list - when the object of citta is a concept, with panna and virati cetasikas. > > > In the quote that Sarah gave from ACMA (thanks Sarah), that'd be abstention due to undertaking the precepts. > > > > > KH: I think that quote was about kusala citta without panna, not with panna. > > > pt: Hm, my understanding was that the last cateogory of the three clearly referred to satipatthana - both by ACMA and Sarah. Perhaps Sarah can say more about the second and third ACMA categories. ------------ KH: OK, I will wait for that. I would have thought the kusala conditioned by precept-taking was ordinary, run of the mill kusala. But I've been wrong before! :-) Ken H #116794 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 10:45 am Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! kenhowardau Hi Phil, ------------- <. . .> >> KH: There are two kinds of panna, aren't there? There is the panna that knows kusala from akusala, and there is the panna that knows nama from rupa. I think in both cases the object has to be a dhamma or, at least, a concept of a dhamma. > Ph: Are you sure "there are two kinds of panna?" iIsn't knowing nama from rupa the first vipassana-nana(?) ------------- KH: Yes, it is the first stage, and so all the other stages can be seen as refinements that follow on from that first stage. So I was using "knowing nama from rupa" as shorthand for all of satipatthana. I was also thinking of K Sujin's famous, controversial, statement when she said it was better to know nama from rupa than to know kusala from akusala. ------------------------- > Ph: If abstention was dependant on stages of insight there would a lot less abstainin. ------------------------- KH: Yes, but we were talking about the various instances in which abstention could be said to arise. Two out of four suggested instances contained panna. ---------------------------------- > Ph: The awareness of tge present moment tgat keeps you from bad deeds (I sincerely celebrate such kusala) is not vupassana-nana is it? Surely hiri otappa sometimes functions with a conxept for you, doesn't it? --------------------------------- KH: Yes, they would be in three of the four instances Pt was referring to. The three kuslala cittas. ------------------------ > Ph: They are phrased in a way that makes it hard to understand tgem without concepts as object, for example Vism XIV,142: "A man rejects evil through hiri out of respect for himself, as the daughter of a good famuky does; he rejects evil through otappa out of resoect for another, as a courtesan does." All definitions I have seen of hiri otappa include aspects of concern about self-respectand respect of others. Surely respect of others must have concept as object, don't you think? ------------------------ KH: You say it is hard to understand them not having concepts as objects. So what? Try harder! :-) That is why the simile was given: so you would see the ultimate reality. Not just the simile. --------------------------------- Ph: Ok Ken, the actual content of this thread is of less importance to me (the technically kusalishness of abstention doesn't really concern me to tell the truth, just the abstention) ---------------------------------- KH: Wash your mouth out, Phil! :-) You are ignoring satipatthana in favour of conventional principles. That's your right, I suppose, but don't confuse the two. The Buddha taught ultimate reality, not conventional reality. ------------------- > Ph: than rhe exercise of friendly and respectful speech towards you, Ken H. And I have decided to longer withhold merit from you! (Haha, just teasing Kelvin.) ------------------- KH: Thank you, I'll be looking forward to merit from both of you. :-) Ken H #116795 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana Sutta - Cemetary Contemplation (was, Re: A lovely drea... upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - > Robert, the Buddha, in saying that the monk "generates desire" and > "endeavors" and "activates persistence" and "exerts his intent", is certainly > describing intentional actions. But why do you say they are "not paramattha > dhammas"? What else are they? I don't follow you in that. What I mean to say is that they are not merely passive objects of experience, which is how I understand "paramatha dhammas" to be defined by the commentarial view. ----------------------------------------------------- HCW: I don't think that is the Abhidhammic or commentarial view of paramattha dhammas. That has not been my impression. They are namas and rupas, and namas include not only mental qualities but also mental *activities*. Mental activities can, of course, be objects of consciousness, but as regards themselves, they are not merely passive objects. As regards themselves, they, for example consciousness, thinking, intention, wisdom, fear, love, worry, attention, mindfulness, etc, etc, are "modes of mental functioning and "encountering," and they are quite active. ----------------------------------------------- I certainly think that every intentional action is experienced as an arising dhamma by an apprehending citta, but I don't think that right action or right effort are merely such experiences, but that actions exist in their own right and that the action, not just the experience of the action, is part of the path. ---------------------------------------------- HCW: Physical actions, intended or not, are rupas or aggregations of rupas. What else could they be? ----------------------------------------------- I don't believe that action per se has any significance in the commentarial view. ----------------------------------------------- HCW: As I understand it, a physical action in the kammic sense, is any collection 0f interrelated rupas that follow upon one or more instances of intention/willing. That, perhaps, is what (physical) kammapatha is. ---------------------------------------------- It is difficult to split such a distinction between the paramatha terminology the way it is used, and the way that I understand it. The idea of absolute realities has implications of single isolated bounded experiential that have clear static existences for brief moments of existence and are thoroughly passive in nature that I don't accept as a correct understanding of action and experience. My understanding of the way in which paramatha dhammas is used explicitly denies the existence of volitional actions. ------------------------------------------------ HCW: I think that if someone views namas only as objects that is just an error. But do the commentaries do that? In any case, volitions are explicit mental actions. Do the Abhidhamma or the commentaries say otherwise? ---------------------------------------------- That is the distinction I am trying to make, and it's a difficult one to dis cuss clearly. Best, Robert E. ================================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #116796 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:29 am Subject: Exquisite is Equanimity! bhikkhu5 Friends: Equanimity gives delicate Peace & Happiness! Equanimity (Upekkhā ) entails a composed equipoise of solid mental balance! It is Tatra-majjhattatā = keeping to the moderate middle of all phenomena. Equanimity balances consciousness so it prevents both all excessiveness and any deficiency. In equanimity mind is neither attracted by attractive things, nor repelled by repulsive things. The cause of equanimity is seeing the law of kamma: All beings are born and created by their kamma, they are owners of their kamma, inherit their kamma, whatever they do, whether good or bad, the effects of that will be theirs only, following them like a shadow of past! The effect of Equanimity is threefold: Exquisite, relaxed & subtle peace felt as calm happiness is instantly gained. Equanimity purifies and completes all the 7 crucial Links to Awakening... Equanimity is the proximate cause of knowledge and vision (ñānadassana )! <....> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * <....> #116797 From: "philip" Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 3:35 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! philofillet Hi Ken H and all > > I was also thinking of K Sujin's famous, controversial, statement when she said it was better to know nama from rupa than to know kusala from akusala. Ph: The controversual one thatI remember and still can't agree with is "what good is it to know kusala from akusala if it is not known that all dhammas are not-self", way toi Aryan for this dusty-eyed fellow. As for the above if knowing n ftom r is vip nana and knowing a from k isn't i guess she's right. If knowing a from k is also vip nana I vote for it. As for what I wrote below and accidentally erased because an insanely sexy woman walked by and there wete not conditions for panna to separate her rupa from my nama, I take it back. about not being as intetested in the actual content of this thread as in the affability aspect, this is one I'll want to go back and read from the beginning. If you are saying (haven't read enough to know yet) that abstention according to the Buddha only occurswith vip nana, and it's true, well, I guess the illicit sex that is wirh great struggle not taking place is, as you say, nothing to do with Dhamma. Which is fine with me. Dhamma for me is a) to be happy abd b) to be as harmlessas possible, I am not out achieve some path of perfection, that ain't me babe. Back in a week or so to catch up on this thread. metta, phil #116798 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 3:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Degrees of kusala nilovg Dear Phil, Op 14-aug-2011, om 1:35 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > I do think, though, that since panna accompanies kusala of bhavana, > but not necessarily kusala of dana or sila, kusala of bhavana would > be considered of a different degree, don't you think? ------ N: Any kusala accompanied by pa~n~naa is of a higher degree. Especially when one does not take kusala for self it is of a higher degree. I heard on a recording: when one thinks: this is kusala, this is akusala, one still thinks of names and forgets: it is only naama dhamma. The first stage of insight is knowing naama as naama and ruupa as ruupa. There is not yet precise understading of kusala and akusala. It is important first to know these as just dhammas, naama dhammas, otherwise we always think of self having kusala or akusala. -------- > > Ph: By the way, in Perfections (p.146) I wonder why Acharn Sujin > says "everybody should know for himself what degree of kusala he > wants to develop."? > Of course I take this to mean that it is good for me to be > primarily intetested in dana and sila, which need not always be > accompanied by panna, I do not feel aware of presence of panna such > as sati-sampajanna which knows characteristics of dhammas, but I > still feel there are great opportunities for kusala in daily life. ------ N: It depends on someone's accumulated inclinations, nothing can be forced. ----- Nina. #116799 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 15, 2011 3:58 pm Subject: Re: A Question and Possible Answer (Re: [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some ...) nilovg Hi Howard, Op 14-aug-2011, om 14:18 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > 1) When one seems to see a snake at twilight, but looking more > carefully sees instead a coiled rope, at the moment of seeing the > rope, the > illusion of snake disappears (and a "snake" is no longer > perceived). Analogously, > when one seems to observe a body or tree or building or concerto, > but then > attending more carefully, observes instead a mere flow of physical > qualities (rupas), at that moment, the illusion of body or tree or > building or > concerto disappears and is no longer perceived. ------- N: I know these are just similes, but even seeing a rope is not seeing visible object. There is still some 'thing'. But again, you just used it as a simile. ------- Nina.