#118400 From: "Christine" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 7:40 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) christine_fo... heheh - sounds like Rob E. is damned if he does and, also, damned if he doesn't. with metta and karuna to all, Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- ---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "For reasons only I know? Are you joking? Do you think this was my idea? You said in two or three posts in a row that you would like me to describe my practice and then Phil said 'Yeah, like Scott said, you really should describe your practice.' With great reluctance, I offered this description because you asked me to..." > > Scott: I agree with your synopsis of the history of events. > > As I said, I don't know why you let Phil and I talk you into offering your practice, apparently against your will. If you didn't want to, you shouldn't have. Since you did, it's fair game and a source of great, to-the-point, essential Dhamma discussion: the sort of discussion this list is known for. > > I'll consider your other points over the next while and be sure to continue the discussion. > > Scott. > #118401 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 7:56 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Chris, C: "heheh - sounds like Rob E. is damned if he does and, also, damned if he doesn't." Scott: Does it? I didn't mind either way. I surprised that he offered anything after being so adamant against doing so. I think that doing so was his own decision. It's not like the devil made him do it. I was clear in my request and am going to consider what he has offered. Please join the discussion if you see anything in this particular description of 'practice' that you feel like commenting on. Why do you think it's about Rob E.? Perhaps you have your own practice to justify as well. Whether or not there is such a thing as a concrete, consciously-pursued, purposefully applied 'practice' - which I do not believe - is a discussion that is worthwhile, and certainly not unknown to this list. Scott. #118402 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 8:47 am Subject: Re: Mindfulness of Death. Life is a fatal disease that always ends in death. kenhowardau Hi Phil, You wrote to Sarah: ---------- > This might just be one of those points, such as "there is no Nina" that understanding hasn't grown into yet. > ---------- KH: How are we to understand the word "understanding" in that context? Is it when you can see the logic of something but somehow it doesn't feel right? Consider this for example: "Given that A is larger than B, and B is larger than C, we can conclude that A must be larger than C." Now that is something we can understand isn't it? We don't worry if A's being larger than C feels right or not; we just understand it. Why is the Dhamma any different? Given that there are only realities (no non-realities) and that all realities are devoid of self, we can conclude that there is no self. Can't we? It might not feel right, but it *is* right (given those parameters). So where's the problem? Ken H #118403 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 2:50 am Subject: RE: [dsg] part 2! Guide to CR/Patthana dhammasaro Good friend Connie, Sincere warm thanks for the reference. You are very correct; it did take some many minutes to download... Questions: 1. Do you have suggestions in studying Part Two? 2. Do I need part One? Warm thanks for your considered assistance. peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: nichicon@... = > dear bookworms, thanks to budaedu! Being a guide to pages 13-141 of CONDITIONAL RELATIONS. Explanations of the First 2 Chapters as given in the Commentary, of the Question Chapter and of the First 6 Chapters of the Faultless Triplet Pa.t.thaana Section. Part 2 of the Guide to Conditional Relations: http://ftp.budaedu.org/ebooks/pdf/EN324.pdf It is a huge file (~140MB) so I can neither upload it to the groups files nor email it. My best offer* if the above link is troublesome is the same file, slightly renamed: http://www.wuala.com/nichicon/chewPatthana/EN324-gcr2.pdf/ <.....> #118404 From: "connie" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 9:19 am Subject: part 2! Guide to CR/Patthana nichiconn hi, Chuck. q1. Do you have suggestions in studying Part Two? q2. Do I need part One? a1. Hold onto Part 2 until after make it through http://patthana.blogspot.com/ {Be sure to check out the rest of Chew's blog list while you're there.} Sooner or later, you'll probably want to add at least "Conditional Relations vol.1" to your GottaHave list. You might get lucky and find a used copy but I don't imagine there'll be a pdf out there any time soon. a2. Part 1 of the Guide to (the first 12 pages of vol.1 of) Conditional Relations would go well with the blog, but you can still hold off (& i'll add the same used copy/no pdf remark as above). Even before you get your feet wet on the blog site, though, it would be good to wade thru some of Nina's books - assuming you haven't already. AFAIC, "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" is a no-excuses-accepted required text -(rave deleted)- archive.org is one download option; if you'd rather listen to it, jump down to the bottom of dhammastudygroup.org/ Once you're done feeding there, wade on out into "The Conditionality of Life" - also available from archive.org, as is "A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas", which is something of an ADL on steroids. Patthana is The great big grand-daddy of all fish, though. I hope i haven't offended you - maybe you have the basics down already. I have to keep going back to them & this past longyear's reading deprivation hasn't helped my memory much. If i can keep my head up long enough, i'll be happy to cheer you on when you pass me on the patthana blog. connie #118405 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 11:10 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Scott - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...paying attention to an experience. Or experiencing an experience without being distracted by something else..." > > Scott: You mean like when I listen to a new cd? As you probably know, the object of sati is not important, as long as it is recognized as such. I suppose if you recognized your new cd as a conventional object - a mental image with associated concepts - you could have sati with a level of panna at that moment. Go for it! > R: "I see mindfulness/sati on a continuum, just like any other mental state that is subject to development...the basic reality of sati is seeing what is before the senses or the mind at the moment that it occurs..." > > Scott: This is where you go wrong. Thinking about sati as on a 'continuum' is the basis of your subsequent thinking that sati is just 'paying attention.' Sati is not 'paying attention.' 'Paying attention' is just you thinking you are 'being mindful.' I think that attention actually does go to this or that object. However you want to describe it, it is a real phenomenon. Are you saying that when you pay attention to your new CD and are not paying any attention to the noise of someone talking to you in the background that the attention is not on the "aural objects" of the CD or whatever you want to call it? You can break such an experience down into rupas, namas and concepts if you wish, and make it technically correct. However you talk about it, it is what takes place with regard to awareness and attention. When I say that sati is a matter of gradual development and that it is developed by meditative practice, *of course* you are going to say that "that's where you go wrong, Rob," because you and I *disagree* about that from the beginning and will continue to disagree about it. So you have not proven that you are right, you are just alleging, claiming, presupposing, that your way of looking at it is right and that my "gradual + conventional" view of how sati and other qualities develop is wrong. What is your evidence? Prove your case! I believe that rupas, namas, concepts, cittas, cetasikas and conditions all take place whether we attend them or not, and that our conventional lives are dotted with moments of understanding those realities and many moments when we don't. This idea comes from Sarah, Jon and Nina, not from some new-age pop fantasy. And when I say that sati develops "gradually" rather than being an all-or-nothing proposition, I mean that as attention develops the skill of apprehending the object of citta at the moment, sati arises more skillfully and more frequently and with greater continuity. You can break it down into dhamma-moments for citta, but development - bhavana - and accumulation of this or that quality or mental factor, works in exactly this way, and it is not contradictory to the Abhidhamma. You just think it is because you're not bothering to listen and discuss and wisely consider and figure it out instead of spouting your prefigured concepts back at me. The argument is about whether these accumulations and development take place in a more accelerated and decisive way through "purposeful practice," eg, meditation, practicing mindfulness in everyday life, etc. My reading of the suttas is that Buddha advocated that and said that is the way to follow the path. Your reading of commentary says that it is not and that one should not do this, because it will develop the illusion of control and self-view. So that is an argument. But you might want to stop talking down about it and thinking that your view is the only view. It is not, and the question may be settled for you, but that does not mean it is settled. Other people disagree with you and have plenty of sutta evidence on their side, as well as large portions of Visudhimagga and other scriptures that describe and advocate meditation practice in great detail. Just because you choose to ignore such absolutely valid descriptions will not make them go away, and it will not change my valid view and experience into pop psychology and new age nonsense as you would like to label it. Too bad. > You think this way because of the concept 'on a continuum.' Try reading the definitions of bhavana in your own cherished scriptures, accumulations, dormant tendencies etc. These *do* undergo development and accumulation over time. The idea that there is only one citta and that nothing takes place in process or over time is actually at odds with Abhidhamma and commentary. > With that in mind you then think that one simply has to access the continuum - the ongoing stream of sati - and 'pay attention' with it. No, not at all what I said. Nope. There is no "ongoing stream of sati." That is why it has to be developed. There are moments of sati and there are moments with scattered, dispersed, unfocused, unclear, unknowing awareness that is dazed, confused and overly conceptualized. That is not what I say. However, having a lot of moments of sati in a row *is* what happens when sati is properly developed. You may read commentaries in which it is described of advanced jhana practitioners that they can "access jhana whenever they choose to" and that they have "many moments in a row of jhana-citta" rather than having occasional moments of jhana arise one at a time. If you don't believe me, ask Nina. You just have a limited view of the "one-moment" nature of citta and are not taking into account the nature of accumulation, bhavana and skillfulness. It means many more moments of kusala qualities *in a row,* so that the particular kusala state of consciousness in question is *maintained* over more mind-moments, and for a longer period of time. Sorry about the time thing - it does exist, formed by conditions and accumulations that bring up more and more kusala cittas and cetasikas. > Is it sati when I 'pay attention' to my new cd? Remember, sati is one of the sobhana mental factors which only arises along with kusala citta. Dhammasa.nganii defines sati as: > > "The mindfulness which on that occasion is recollecting, > calling back to mind; the mindfulness which is > remembering, bearing in mind the opposite of superficiality > and of obliviousness; mindfulness as faculty: mindfulness > as power, right mindfulness." I never said that sati is there all the time. That is why Buddha said we have to *sit down and develop it.* You are contradicting what I said and not understanding it correctly. > Scott: 'On that occasion' refers to the moment of the arising of the accompanying citta, and to it's falling away. Not a continuum in any way. See the above and check it out in commentary. You are wrong. It's not a preexisting continuum, but a continuous stream of kusala cittas is one of the results of skillful practice, after a certain point of development. There are breaks, but less of them. The kusala qualities become more present over time and better organized. They start "running the show" of the mind [cittas] rather than the akusala ones. That is a "process" and it gradually forms a "continuum" though not a monolithic one. > Note that the function of sati is described as 'remembering.' Nothing about 'paying attention.' You 'paying attention' is not sati. Remembering is one of the functions of sati and it supports sati through coordination with sanna and other factors, but sati is mindful awareness. Check out other definitions. When Buddha trains mindfulness by paying attention to the "long breath" and the "short breath" with direct awareness of each, he's not confused. Sati is not just remembering. Sati does many things including being aware of what exists in the moment, then allowing panna to "know it," guarding the senses, distinguishing kusala from akusala, and to do so, remembering what is kusala and what is akusala. Sati has all those qualities, not just one of them. Look it up! > R: "...it is 'paying attention to what is perceived.' Awareness of visual object and how it is apprehended. Awareness of mental object and how it is experienced..." > > Scott: Compare this with the definition above. Go look at a better expanded definition or you will be missing a lot. Here's Nyanatiloka, everyone's favorite dictionarian: A bit from the satipatthana section: "He beholds how the body arises and how it passes away, beholds the arising and passing away of the body." Rob Note: Please note this is not a function of 'memory' but of awareness of what is arising in the moment. " 'A body is there' but no living being, no individual, no woman, no man, no self, nothing that belongs to a self; neither a person, nor anything belonging to a person; Com.: thus he has established his attentiveness as far as it serves his knowledge and awareness or mindfulness, and he lives independent, unattached to anything in the world.'' Rob Note: Please note that the com. on the above section acknowledges mindfulness as "attentiveness," not memory. "In the same way he contemplates feeling, mind and mental-objects." "In M. 118 it is shown how these four foundations of awareness or mindfulness may be brought about by the exercise of awareness or mindfulness on in-and-out breathing ānāpāna-sati." Rob Note: Please note the reference to awareness of in-and-out breathing as vehicle for the 4 foundations. > R: "...I was talking about insight in general above, that's why I said 'whatever insight is gained...' without defining it. It was a general statement in order to make the point that it is not based on conceptualization, but on continued attention..." > > Scott: 'Continued attention' is a concept. Call it recurrent attention if you like that better. > By 'insight' you clearly mean something other than pa~n~na since you have stated that 'continued attention' leads to 'insight.' Panna is wisdom or clear knowing, not insight. Insight is vipassana. It is a different cetasika. Here is Nyanatiloka on vipassana/insight: "Vipassanā: 'insight', is the intuitive light flashing forth and exposing the truth of the impermanency, the suffering and the impersonal and unsubstantial nature of all material and mental phenomena of existence." There is also vipassana-panna, insight that culminates correct knowledge: "It is insight-understanding vipassanā-paā that is the decisive liberating factor in Buddhism, though it has to be developed along with the 2 other trainings in morality and concentration." > This is not how sati and pa~n~na function together. This is your very own idea. See above - no it's not. You are speaking out of ignorance. Go educate yourself. > R: "...How is it objective? it is objective to the extent that it is correct, which is to say staying with what arises..." > > Scott: Like when I listen to my new cd all the way through? No like when you understand the Dhamma with wise comprehension instead of ignorance. Give it a try, and some day you may even know what you are talking about. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #118406 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 11:12 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "For reasons only I know? Are you joking? Do you think this was my idea? You said in two or three posts in a row that you would like me to describe my practice and then Phil said 'Yeah, like Scott said, you really should describe your practice.' With great reluctance, I offered this description because you asked me to..." > > Scott: I agree with your synopsis of the history of events. > > As I said, I don't know why you let Phil and I talk you into offering your practice, apparently against your will. If you didn't want to, you shouldn't have. Since you did, it's fair game and a source of great, to-the-point, essential Dhamma discussion: the sort of discussion this list is known for. > > I'll consider your other points over the next while and be sure to continue the discussion. Got it. No problem. Yes, I decided to go ahead and offer a preliminary description despite the surrounding factors. My choice, but not for 'reasons only I know.' Thanks for the acknowledgment of the sequence of events. Carry on as you wish... Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #118407 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 11:15 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Chris. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine" wrote: > > heheh - sounds like Rob E. is damned if he does and, also, damned if he doesn't. > > with metta and karuna to all, > > Chris No problem. I'm only damned to the extent I continue running around and around on the wheel of samsara like a jogging hamster. We're all on the same wheel. :-) But thanks for the acknowledgment of my sticky situation here on dsg. I knew it was a mistake to open up that topic, but what the heck! Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #118408 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 1:34 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) kenhowardau Hi Robert E, Chris, Scott and all, --------- <. . .> > RE: But thanks for the acknowledgment of my sticky situation here on dsg. I knew it was a mistake to open up that topic, but what the heck! --------- KH: What a strange situation we have when practice is a difficult subject and one to be avoided. I wonder if the same anomaly exists in other interest groups. Would members of a knitting circle, for example, be reluctant to describe how they knit? Perhaps they would if they didn't know what they are talking about: "Exactly how do you produce a knitted garment?" "I poke myself in the eye with a burnt stick." "And has that produced any knitted garments?" "No but I'm working on it." "Exactly how do you follow the Buddha's teaching?" "I sit very still and try not to think about anything." "Is that what the Buddha taught?" "Who cares? It's what I do." The true Buddhist practice, on the other hand, is easy to talk about: "When the conditions for a dhamma to arise are present, that dhamma arises. When the conditions for a dhamma to arise are not present, that dhamma does not arise. . . and so on." Ken H #118409 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 3:24 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Robert E, Chris, Scott and all, > > --------- > <. . .> > > RE: But thanks for the acknowledgment of my sticky situation here on dsg. I knew it was a mistake to open up that topic, but what the heck! > --------- > > KH: What a strange situation we have when practice is a difficult subject and one to be avoided. I wonder if the same anomaly exists in other interest groups. Would members of a knitting circle, for example, be reluctant to describe how they knit? > > Perhaps they would if they didn't know what they are talking about: Or if the other people in the group used their knitting needles to stab other group members. Hmmm...? > "Exactly how do you produce a knitted garment?" "I poke myself in the eye with a burnt stick." "And has that produced any knitted garments?" "No but I'm working on it." And the other people in the group say: "I've been reading the manual on knitting for years, and I've come to the conclusion that the knitting knits itself. If you pick up a needle to actually practice knitting, you are engaging in "wrong knitting." But if you don't knit at all but just congratulate yourself with your eyes closed on what a clever knitter you are, you are known as a "Master Knitter," worthy of great praise!" > "Exactly how do you follow the Buddha's teaching?" "I sit very still and try not to think about anything." "Is that what the Buddha taught?" "Who cares? It's what I do." And the other group members say "Oh I know how to interpret the knitting manual. Everywhere it says "black" I read it as "white." If it says "left" I go "right" and if it says to do something, I read that as *not* to do that thing. In that way everything comes out right, because nothing ever gets done! But in a future lifetime I will come out perfectly knit, and everything will be beautiful in knitting heaven!" > The true Buddhist practice, on the other hand, is easy to talk about: "When the conditions for a dhamma to arise are present, that dhamma arises. When the conditions for a dhamma to arise are not present, that dhamma does not arise. . . and so on." And the Buddha never said that, but who cares? Who cares what the Buddha said? After all, it's called "Buddhism," not "Buddha-ism," right...? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #118410 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 3:51 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi again, dear Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > The true Buddhist practice, on the other hand, is easy to talk about: "When the conditions for a dhamma to arise are present, that dhamma arises. When the conditions for a dhamma to arise are not present, that dhamma does not arise. . . and so on." > > And the Buddha never said that, but who cares? Who cares what the Buddha said? After all, it's called "Buddhism," not "Buddha-ism," right...? Just to clarify, of course the Buddha said that dhammas arise due to conditions. What he never said, was that this truth constituted *practice,* or that one should not practice. Find one sutta where he said that directly, and I'll be happy to acknowledge it. In fact, he said the opposite over and over again, but you ignore him. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #118411 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 2:18 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] part 2! Guide to CR/Patthana dhammasaro Good friend Connie, et al Sincere warm thanks for your help and suggestions. peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: nichicon@... <...> q1. Do you have suggestions in studying Part Two? q2. Do I need part One? a1. Hold onto Part 2 until after make it through http://patthana.blogspot.com/ {Be sure to check out the rest of Chew's blog list while you're there.} Sooner or later, you'll probably want to add at least "Conditional Relations vol.1" to your GottaHave list. You might get lucky and find a used copy but I don't imagine there'll be a pdf out there any time soon. a2. Part 1 of the Guide to (the first 12 pages of vol.1 of) Conditional Relations would go well with the blog, but you can still hold off (& i'll add the same used copy/no pdf remark as above). Even before you get your feet wet on the blog site, though, it would be good to wade thru some of Nina's books - assuming you haven't already. AFAIC, "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" is a no-excuses-accepted required text -(rave deleted)- archive.org is one download option; if you'd rather listen to it, jump down to the bottom of dhammastudygroup.org/ Once you're done feeding there, wade on out into "The Conditionality of Life" - also available from archive.org, as is "A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas", which is something of an ADL on steroids. Patthana is The great big grand-daddy of all fish, though. <....> #118412 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 9:04 am Subject: The inevitable Transience! bhikkhu5 Friends: Seeing the Transience in all Constructions Releases Mind! The Blessed Buddha once said: What, Ānanda , is the experience of the transience in all constructions? It is when the Bhikkhu feels horror, disgust, and repulsing repugnance with all formations, with all constructions, with all phenomena, with all states... This itself is the very experience of the transience of all constructions... Instantly, Inevitably and Invariably: All States break up, fade away & vanish... <...> Source (edited extract): The Numerical Discourses of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikāya AN 10:60, AN V 108ff. Girimananda Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.060.than.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * <....> #118413 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 5:44 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) kenhowardau Hi Robert E, Thanks for the reply: glad to know we are still speaking. :-) ------------ <. . .> > RE: Just to clarify, of course the Buddha said that dhammas arise due to conditions. What he never said, was that this truth constituted *practice,* ------------ KH: But wouldn't that be a necessary implication? Conditioned dhammas constitute everything that is real. Right practice, wrong practice, functional practice it's all just dhammas arising by conditions. -------------------- > RE: or that one should not practice. -------------------- KH: To what extent can the words "should" and "should not" apply to a Dhamma that teaches there is no self? The conditioned dhammas sati and panna know why good kamma is preferable to evil. They know why effort, for example, should be right effort and not wrong effort. That's a kind of "should" I suppose. ----------------------------- >RE: Find one sutta where he said that directly, and I'll be happy to acknowledge it. ----------------------------- KH: I've got to hand it to you Rob; you and Alex know how to get out of a tight corner. Just make a baseless accusation and all unwelcome attention is deflected. For the millionth time: we are not saying there is a self that has control. We don't see the Dhamma as a Do this, *Do not do that* kind of teaching. It's all a matter of right understanding of the present reality. And right understanding is either present or it isn't. There is no control. ------------------- > RE: In fact, he said the opposite over and over again, ------------------- KH: The opposite of "do not do this" is "do this" and the Buddha's Middle Way is neither of those extremes. When the conditions for path consciousness are present there is right practice. Otherwise there isn't. -------------- > RE: but you ignore him. -------------- KH: I advise you to ignore anyone who tries to tell you the Buddha taught a conventional path. He did teach a path but "no traveller on it is seen" (Vism.) and so it is profoundly different from any other kind of path. Ken H #118414 From: "philip" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 7:52 pm Subject: Re: A few issues philofillet HI Sarah > S: So what you are saying above then reads: "Having said that, I still sometimes think if we are habitually breaking a precept, exercising of self, i.e *a lot of wrong view about being able to control things*, might be necessary to put a stop to it" > ... > S: So you "still sometimes think" that "exercising" *a lot of wrong view about being able to control things* might "be necessary" to stop breaking the precepts???? Ph: No, I wouldn't place myself in that company anymore, for the time being at least. For one thing, I don't constantly break a precept. If I did, I might have to reconsider about how to stop. Anybody who constantly, consistently, regularly breaks a precept, well, they (panna) will know what to do, hopefully. But I'm not really interested in that topic anymore, not for the time being at least. Because managing to stop breaking precepts in this one lifetime has no direct impact on lifetimes to come. Why should I be concerned about lifetimes to come, because *I* am concerned about lifetimes to come whether I say I am or not. I honestly don't believe (sorry!) that anyone here has eliminated that concern, whether they know it or not. Anyways, now I understand that only panna, understanding, does anything of import to move towards liberation from all those lifetimes full of immeasurable dukkha. Metta, Phil #118415 From: "philip" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 8:32 pm Subject: Re: Mindfulness of Death. Life is a fatal disease that always ends in death. philofillet Hi Ken H > > This might just be one of those points, such as "there is no Nina" that understanding hasn't grown into yet. > > ---------- > > KH: How are we to understand the word "understanding" in that context? Is it when you can see the logic of something but somehow it doesn't feel right? Ph: Or more likely in my case because I can't see the logic in something so it doesn't feel right. Or maybe you're right. But the kind of understanding we're talking about here, almost always talking about at DSG, is all about thinking wrapping itself around and through and in between concepts,even when the discussion topic is paramattha dhamma. The only understanding that really wears away at sakkaya ditthi is satipatthana. Our discussing it here can serve as a conditional support for it to arise, as long as we stick to texts as much as possible and don't form our own opinions/theories/interpretations. Abhidhamma helps us there. > Why is the Dhamma any different? Given that there are only realities (no non-realities) and that all realities are devoid of self, we can conclude that there is no self. Can't we? Ph: I remember in those cassettes that you were kind enough to send me some years back (and which I eventually sent on to Scott) A.Sujin said "seeing is not self, hearing is not self (and with a conclusive tone) there is no self." And someone edited the tape so it was repeated. I've always thought it was you, wanting to stress that pointed. I don't have trouble saying and believing "there is no self", or persons, when I say "there is no Nina" is difficult for me, it is my lack of understanding that would eliminate belief in a physiological being that has come to be known as Nina or a block of plastic glass and little bets of stuff inside that has come to be known as "i phone." But I say again that inability to get rid of belief in beings is not an obstacle, as far as I can see. Let me repost part of this post from Jon (90655) In those days I still had belief in beings but went further and said belief in beings was helpful and necessary. And argued for it. (Again, to repeat, I don't currenly insist that there are beings, only that I haven't yet understood that there aren't.) I wrote to Jon, and he answered: >> I can't recall any others than this one short sutta in the >> bhikkuni section of SN that do so. > > I mean, any other suttas that tear down "beings" into components for > the purpose of denying the existence of beings. > Jon: A fair comment. I think it's true to say that "denial of the existence of beings" (or of conventional objects) is not a particular focus of the suttas. What *is* a focus of the suttas is those things (i.e., dhammas) concerning which awareness and understanding are to be developed, and what is to be understood about them (their characteristics, conditioned nature, etc). According to the teachings, it is these dhammas (aka khandhas, ayatanas, dhatus, etc) that constitute what we know as the world, and that are the proper object of insight development. This assertion underlies the whole of the teachings. It is these dhammas that have existence (albeit momentary) in the ultimate sense. The "non-existence" of anything other than these dhammas is a necessary corollary of that. (Ph: so Jon is agreeing with you, it can logically be understood that if there are only dhammas, there is a non-existence of anything else.) However, that non-existence is not something to be directly known as part of the development of the path. The focus of the teachings is understandably on those things that are to be directly known by insight. (end of quote) Ph: Understanding dhammas. That's the point. Oh, your other post, asking if saying "the point of the teaching" suggests wrong view of a self having a Dhamma goal, absolutely, right you are. I think it is there for all of us. Even if we say "there is no self" there is still sakkaya ditthi. But a difference for me is that in the past I would have added "therefore let's not worry about it, it is inevitable, so let's use it to perfect sila and make better conditions for liberating panna to develop" or something like that, but those days are gone. We have to go after self-view, not worry about perfect sila, in any case the idea of perfect sila is a little absurd if sakkaya ditthi isn't eradicated because who knows what conditions will arise in lifetimes to come? Sorry but I'd rather not keep writing about this sort of topic. I'm very interested in the study of dhammas these days. Metta, Phil #118416 From: "philip" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 8:34 pm Subject: Re: Sakkaya ditthi vs atta ditthi philofillet Hi Sarah > ... > S: Yes, same 20 Thank you for your feedback here, and in the thread featuring the ill cetana. Will put them in my Very Deep Posts From Sarah file. . Metta, Phil #118417 From: "philip" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 10:26 pm Subject: Re: Mindfulness of Death. Life is a fatal disease that always ends in death. philofillet Hi again all As a testimony to Mr Jobs, and kusala virya, and mana, I postt from tye exercise. bike at my gym, maintaining a heart rate of at least 130/minute as I do. I wrote: > We have to go after self-view, not worry about perfect sila, in any case the idea of perfect sila is a little absurd if sakkaya ditthi isn't eradicated because who knows what conditions will arise in lifetimes to come Ph: Just heard Jon say that he used to think panna was more important than sila, but he realized panna supports sila, or vice-versa. Sila is always involved when there is kusala, so in the above i'm not saying panna replaces the need to consider sipa, thanks jon for timely reminder... metta, phil #118418 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 11:37 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Just checking re concepts and panna sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > S: In the context of this sutta or any other sutta or non-sutta, >viriya, vayama that 'ought to be done' is right effort arising with >right understanding which knows dhammas as conditioned and anatta. >Whenever there is an idea of Self making an intention to strive >hard, it indicates not only that there is no understanding, but >worse, there is wrong view arising. > >============================= > > >A: And the only way the right effort arises, if one actual does it. ..... S: What do you mean by "one" here? Metta Sarah ====== #118419 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 11:45 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E & Chris, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > >C: heheh - sounds like Rob E. is damned if he does and, also, damned if he doesn't. > > <....> >R: No problem. I'm only damned to the extent I continue running around and around on the wheel of samsara like a jogging hamster. We're all on the same wheel. :-) But thanks for the acknowledgment of my sticky situation here on dsg. I knew it was a mistake to open up that topic, but what the heck! ..... S: :-) I thought the same as Chris and appreciate the good humour. As you say, Rob, we're all "damned" whilst "running around and around on the wheel of samsara like a jogging hamster". I like the way you put that. Conditions, conditions...... And, yes, the "For reasons only I know? Are you joking?....." was very funny too!! It all comes back to the citta now, regardless, whichever way life turns by conditions from moment to moment. Metta Sarah ===== #118420 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 12:53 am Subject: Re: Futility of sorting kusala moments from akusala by thinking jonoabb Hi Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon > > Heard an interesting talk (2006 2/6 pt.2) which you asked " if dosa arises, and we are aware in the ordinary sense tgat tgere is dosa, and we think about that dosa, how it's not self, it's just a conditioned dhamma, is that thinking likely to be kusala?" Later in the same section you return to this point and say it is akusala. I've raised thus talk with you before, saying if thinking in this way is not kusala, how can we say tgat developing correct intellectuall understanding, which must surely involve thinking in this way, be kusala? But yesterday I better understoodA. Sujin's response (at around the 3:00 mark) "It is impossible to touch what is akusala and what is kusala by thoughts, but there must be awareness right then to understand the chaeacteristic as just a reality before we can know better and better what is there, because it arises and falls away so fast." > > So I feel I am understanding beter why it is said that it is more important to understand that all dhammas are anatta than it is to try to sort out by futile thinking kusala from akusala. > =============== Glad to hear it is all making more sense to you these days :-)) As you say, thinking cannot sort out kusala from akusala (it can only think about which of the 2 might be the case). And thinking also cannot know anything about the characteristic of dhammas. Both require understanding. And of the 2, it's the understanding of the true nature of dhammas that must be developed if there is to be release from the cycle of birth and death. While the understanding that knows the difference between kusala and akusala is also to be developed, that understanding is subsumed within the understanding that knows the true nature of dhammas. Jon #118423 From: "philip" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2011 8:38 pm Subject: Re: Mindfulness of Death. Life is a fatal disease that always ends in death. philofillet Hi again Ken > > Ph: Understanding dhammas. That's the point. I forgot to reference something I heard A Sujin say in a talk - we don't really understand what concepts are until we understand realities, or words to that effect. My impression is that we sometimes think it is the other way around! Metta, Phil #118424 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 3:05 am Subject: Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view moellerdieter Hi Phil, something went wrong twice with my mail ..I deleted , but it may still have reached members, sorry you wrote: Ph: Your post also fell in range of my bad mood the other day so my apologies. D: never mind, Phil. This happened to me too.. PH (> D: what you should know, Phil , is : as long there is delusion , as long as the fetters ( including one of the most stubborn ones , mana ) aren't abolished , there is indeed a person , which lives by its attachments, identifications. > The delusion is a personal reality although without substance. By penetration of anatta , i.e. recognizing the process of rising and ceasing dhammas within the stream of the law of dependent origination, its conditioning can be recognized . But still there is suffering and this individual being needs 'to walk' the Path.) I know what you mean, but in my opinion this approach attributes too much independent reality to the person and it seems doomed to set up reliance on practices motivated by the person and the person's interests and this could be a trap that understanding enters thinking that it will eventually find the way out of, but never does. D: we start with this reality , don't we? Beginning of Right Understanding is the first link of the Noble Path. You will remember this often quoted extract from DN 16 (Sister V. translation): Ananda, be islands unto yourselves, refuges unto yourselves, seeking no external refuge; with the Dhamma as your island, the Dhamma as your refuge, seeking no other refuge." snip ..35. "Those bhikkhus of mine, Ananda, who now or after I am gone, abide as an island unto themselves, as a refuge unto themselves, seeking no other refuge; having the Dhamma as their island and refuge, seeking no other refuge: it is they who will become the highest, 20 if they have the desire to learn." As I see it , the trap occurs when anatta is assumed by the intellect (though far from being realized , i.e. abolishment of the identification / attachment /delusion). Thus the mind may conclude : there is nothing to do , because there is no person, no self . Of course we have to work with this identification. Ph: (D> One needs to keep both realities in mind : puggala and the supramundane world of mental and bodily phenomena. ) To me supramundane means realities that can only be enlightened by deep degrees of panna. What is supramundane about seeing and visible object? At a monent of seeing visible object does the person exist? D: in pure awareness there is nothing else than seeing, or hearing etc. The being , the 5 khanda compound, exists , but does not appear in that awareness Ph: Instead of a person walking tge path, why not start with such understanding that can be developed here and now and leads to the path developing without people involved? (Except, of course. as conceptual objects of metta, dosa etc.) D: motivation and effort are needed for the Path training, which has been emphasized over and over again by the Buddha. To let go of this identification/ego , one needs to penetrate the attachments ( e.g. the four references as in detail described by the Maha Satipatthana Sutta) in order to develop disentchantment and so dispassion and detachment. Otherwise you put the cart before the horse. Ph: (D: my point was that he provides a good review of this lasting controversy. I have noted some interpretations of T.B. , which indeed can be subject for debate , not excluding to be dismissed. But picking up this single statement to reject his rendering on the topic at all , is a bit pettyminded. ) I gave listened to hundreds of hours of TB talks (shhh! Don't tell Ken H) His tradition is based on a style of meditation that was developed by Ajahn Lee after he had a heart attack during a rains retreat and had to (as TB puts it) fix his body to get out aluve. The meditatiin is very effective in this way, as a kind of yoga to help tge physically suffering being. D: yes, this is a wellknown fact , supported by suttas , example (D.N.16):"Now I am frail, Ananda, old, aged, far gone in years. This is my eightieth year, and my life is spent. Even as an old cart, Ananda, is held together with much difficulty, so the body of the Tathagata is kept going only with supports. It is, Ananda, only when the Tathagata, disregarding external objects, with the cessation of certain feelings, attains to and abides in the signless concentration of mind, 19 that his body is more comfortable." Ph: But al hus ciuntless references to intentionally using self to develop the path - he makes such references in nearly every talk - means tgat he disqualifies himself as being trustworthy on the pugg??? issue. D: see above . Who else than you, the person Phil, can work on the development of sila, samadhi and panna ? Replace, if you like , the understanding of yourself by the process of dependent origination , but still the Path needs to be approached . Ph: (D> Phil , by all means , do as you announce and find us a good , i.e. better , review ... ) I'll pass, present moment calls. Sorry again for my harsh tone the other day. D: that is good , Phil ..motivate yourself to contemplate body, feeling, mind and mindobjects.. ;-) with Metta Dieter #118425 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 4:40 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "As you probably know, the object of sati is not important, as long as it is recognized as such. I suppose if you recognized your new cd as a conventional object - a mental image with associated concepts - you could have sati with a level of panna at that moment..." Scott: Who or what does the recognizing? Remember, we are discussing a 'practice' wherein one sits with the purpose to 'have mindfulness.' This 'mindfulness' is automatically not sati. If you are suggesting that one could 'practice' mindfulness by sitting and listening to music, I'd like to hear more about how this would actually work. The characteristic of sati is as described by the Dhammasa.nganii quote. When sati arises, there is automatically an object and sati is the 'recognition,' is that is the world you wish to use. Sati then falls away immediately. As far as the new cd, the object would be 'sound' but not 'music.' As far as I know, neither sati nor pa~n~na take concepts or wholes as objects. Scott. #118426 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 4:45 am Subject: Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view moellerdieter Hi Sarah (all), you wrote: Thx for adding your comments. I hope you won't mind if I respond directly. D: appreciated ;-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > " We've had lots of discussion on this sutta before. See "Burden" in U.P. where the commentaries clarify exactly what is meant." > I think that Bhikkhu Thanissaro's comment to the sutta ( http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.022.than.html ) provides a good review of this lasting controversy. I copy for convenience , see below.. .... S: I think his review shows: a) use of "stress" for dukkha indicates a lack of understanding of the what sankhara dukkha is. D: why ? I think stress is as much fitting as suffering or dissatisfaction for (the 3 types of ) dukkha . All only an approach to the Pali.. b) By referring to the Mahanama Theras as "Buddhist scolastics", a "camp" that "refused to rank the concept of person as a turth on the ultimate level" who "accused the second group of denying the concept of anatta", suggests a complete lack of understanding of dhammas as anatta. Anatta is not a concept. c) Suggesting that "both groups" including the ancient Theras, "found their positions entangled them in philosphical difficulties that have never been successfully resolved" indicates a complete lack of respect for and confidence in the Teachings as passed down to us with the assistance of these Theras. For them, there was no entanglement, no lack of resolution. All wrong view was eradicated. D: T.B. tried in his footnote to describe in simple terms the conflict : 'One camp refused to rank the concept of person as a truth on the ultimate level. This group inspired what eventually became the classic Theravada position on this issue: that the "person" was simply a conventional designation for the five aggregates. However, the other camp - who developed into the Pudgalavadin (Personalist) school - said that the person was neither a ultimate truth nor a mere conventional designation, neither identical with nor totally separate from the five aggregates.' 'As might be imagined, the first group accused the second group of denying the concept of anatta, or not-self; whereas the second group accused the first of being unable to account for the truths that they said their concept of person explained. Both groups, however, found that their positions entangled them in philosophical difficulties that have never been successfully resolved' I do not see the 'complete lack of respect' you mention . Unfortunately the difficulties lasted /last . I recall e.g. the 'anatta controversy ' (Grimm-Dahlke) here in Germany first half of the previous century , which lead to a split of the Theravada community. And our present (and former DSG) discussion (s) shows the difficulty .. d) His drawing on MN 72 where the Buddha "refuses to get involved in questions of whether a person has a live essence separate from or identical to his/her body etc, completely misunderstands the point of such suttas. The point of such suttas is that dhammas as anatta is a given, so therefore, any speculation about whether people have any characteristics is a waste of time. It's akin to discussions here about the characteristics of cars crashing into trees and the qualities of knives and forks. e) "The strategy of the practice..." Enough said. D: whether MN 72 or SN 22.22 is a suitable reference here , needs further analyses. But MN 72 : 'Of course you're befuddled, Vaccha. Of course you're confused. Deep, Vaccha, is this phenomenon, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. For those with other views, other practices, other satisfactions, other aims, other teachers, it is difficult to know' is a nice passage to quote: Speaking of Anatta , it is indeed hard to realize . The rest of Mana to be abolished just before Arahantship only . The point of chacteristics of people has been taken even by the Abhidhamma Pitaka (Puggala Pannatti). S: (D: > Indeed both sides are right : of course there is a person from the mundane point of view (finally the Buddha stated that he taught for this suffering individual) .... S: No, there isn't a person period. The concept of a person or an individual is used for convenience, that's all. Vohaara sacca, D: says Sarah ,from the classical camp ;-) A delusion is true until it is revealed as such .. ... S: (D: > and it is as well correct to speak from the supramundane point of view of conditioned dhammas, like described by D.O. , in which the khandas are 'embedded'.).... From the mundane or supramundane "point of view" there are only conditioned dhammas. D: since when is D.O. and with that conditioned dhammas, part of the mundane right understanding ? S: thhe truth about realities now is the same whether there is mundane, supramundane or zero understanding. Just dhammas, just khandhas regardless. This is true whether or not a Buddha ever appears in the world. D: see above what the Buddha told Vacca.. S: ( D: the point of the other ..and that seems to be the case with the lots of discussion you mentioned. ) ... The wrong starts with wrong view at this very moment when the visible object or hardness which appears now is taken for something or someone. If what we read and hear conforms with the Buddha Dhamma it is the Buddha's Teachings. If it doesn't, it should be rejected as wrong view. D: there are 2 kinds of right understanding (see MN 117) better to start with S: I'll be glad to hear your further feedback. I appreciate that you won't agree with my comments:) D: controversies are the moisture of discussions ;-) with Metta Dieter #118427 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 4:55 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...I think that attention actually does go to this or that object...Are you saying that when you pay attention to your new CD and are not paying any attention to the noise of someone talking to you in the background that the attention is not on the 'aural objects' of the CD or whatever you want to call it?..." Scott: 'Attention' is not sati, as I've noted previously. 'Attention' is manasikaara, and arises with every citta. And, yes, takes the same object as citta. What are 'aural objects?' They must differ from 'sound' since you didn't use the word 'sound.' Sound is not 'music.' Remember that a 'continuum' is not the same as the 'stream' of cittas to which you refer. This term 'stream' is always erroneously used to infer 'continuum' but this is not the case since when citta and concomitant mental factors fall away they are gone completely. Note this definition of 'continuum:' "A continuous extent, succession, or whole, no part of which can be distinguished from neighboring parts except by arbitrary division." This is your insubstantialist notion of 'process' and is not at all the same as the Abhidhamma descriptions of dhammas. In a 'stream' consciousness and it's mental factors fall away completely, which is condition for the arising of the next moment of conscious, 'without a gap,' as the wording has it. The falling away is not an 'arbitrary division.' Sati does not have, say, music as object, but it could have sound. Scott. #118428 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 5:12 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...I believe that rupas, namas, concepts, cittas, cetasikas and conditions all take place whether we attend them or not, and that our conventional lives are dotted with moments of understanding those realities and many moments when we don't...when I say that sati develops 'gradually' rather than being an all-or-nothing proposition, I mean that as attention develops the skill of apprehending the object of citta at the moment, sati arises more skillfully and more frequently and with greater continuity. You can break it down into dhamma-moments for citta, but development - bhavana - and accumulation of this or that quality or mental factor, works in exactly this way, and it is not contradictory to the Abhidhamma..." Scott: Again you'll need to clarify your terms. Here it sounds as if you are not using 'attention' as being synonymous with sati. I'm not sure what you mean by 'skill' and 'skillfully.' This is often a notion caused by a mistranslation of the term 'kusala.' Sati only arises with kusala, hence it is kusala and can't get any more 'kusala.' Manasikaara, on the other hand, arises with either kusala or akusala citta. Sati can develop as a function of more frequent arising. When you sit and try to be mindful, are you making sati more 'skillful?' Are you becoming 'more skillful' at 'mindfulness?' Scott. #118429 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 5:15 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...The argument is about whether these accumulations and development take place in a more accelerated and decisive way through 'purposeful practice,'..." Scott: Correct. #118430 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 5:33 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...the definitions of bhavana..." Scott: From the PTS PED: Bhaavanaa (f.) [fr. bhaaveti, or fr. bhaava in meaning of bhaava...producing, dwelling on something, putting one's thoughts to, application, developing by means of thought or meditation, cultivation by mind, culture" Scott: The dictionary includes the modern-day, erroneous translations of the term, which you can ignore, but 'producing' and 'developing' are best because they do not interpolate the conscious actions of a person to muddy the water. R: "These *do* undergo development and accumulation over time. The idea that there is only one citta and that nothing takes place in process or over time is actually at odds with Abhidhamma and commentary." Scott: There is always the next moment of consciousness arising. 'Process' is concept. Please elaborate your exact meaning of the term. Scott. #118431 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 5:43 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...There is no 'ongoing stream of sati.' That is why it has to be developed. There are moments of sati and there are moments with scattered, dispersed, unfocused, unclear, unknowing awareness that is dazed, confused and overly conceptualized..." Scott: This latter phrase: "...moments with scattered, dispersed, unfocused, unclear, unknowing awareness that is dazed, confused and overly conceptualized..." is rather contentious. In what sense do you mean 'awareness' here? Do you mean to describe moments without sati? Citta with ignorance? Thoughts? This is too prosaic to hold much meaning. Please clarify. Scott. #118432 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 9:16 am Subject: Friendly is Mettaah :-) bhikkhu5 Friends: The Buddha's Speech on Friendliness: What should the clever one advantageously do: To attain this State called Peace, is this: He should be intelligent, straight, honest, Humble, gentle and never proud, Contented, and easy to support, Not busy, careful, and silenced In abilities & senses, cautious, and modest, Neither flattering families, nor be demanding. He should not do even a minor trifle at all, That other wise men might criticize! Then he should think: May all beings be joyous and safe! Let every creature's mind rejoice. Whatever breathing beings there are, No matter whether feeble or firm, With none excepted, whether long; Tall, big, medium, short or small; Whether seen or unseen, visible or not; Whether living far away or near, here or there; Whether existing or just about to come into being; Let every living being's mind be exultantly jubilant! Let no one ever kill or another one undo, Nor ever harm anyone anywhere at all... Let no one wish for another any even minor evil, neither from provocation, nor from revenge. Thus, as a mother with her own life Might guard her son, her only baby child, thus Should he maintain an infinite friendliness :-) for every living being, in gentle sympathy for this entire universe, unlimited, endless and vast! Above, below, and all around, unimpeded, without any hatred, purged of all enmity! Whether standing, walking, seated or lying down while slumbering, he should always maintain such Awareness of gentle and benevolent kindness... This is the Divine Abiding here, they say! He that do not traffic with various views, Perfected in seeing what is right and wrong, Purged of lust for sense-pleasures, he will surely not come back here to any womb... <....> Source: Minor Readings and the Illustrator http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=130231 Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <....> #118433 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 10:12 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...You just have a limited view of the 'one-moment' nature of citta and are not taking into account the nature of accumulation, bhavana and skillfulness. It means many more moments of kusala qualities *in a row,* so that the particular kusala state of consciousness in question is *maintained* over more mind-moments, and for a longer period of time..." Scott: When you say 'bhaavaana' do you refer to the modern mistranslation of 'meditation?' Do you mean other than 'kusala' when you use the term 'skillfulness?' If by 'state' you refer to the repeated arising and falling away of the same constellation of kusala dhammas then fine. Scott. #118434 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 10:23 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...It's not a preexisting continuum, but a continuous stream of kusala cittas is one of the results of skillful practice, after a certain point of development. There are breaks, but less of them. The kusala qualities become more present over time and better organized. They start 'running the show' of the mind [cittas] rather than the akusala ones. That is a 'process' and it gradually forms a 'continuum' though not a monolithic one..." Scott: This notion of 'skillful practice' remains contentious. How do you actually know that the practice is skillful? I'll have to wait until you clarify 'skillful.' It doesn't seem to make sense. With 'skillful' meaning 'kusala,' then it would have to be 'kusala' to be skillful. I don't see how just sitting down to be 'mindful' is kusala from the beginning. It seems so entirely arbitrary. Scott. #118435 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 10:31 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...Remembering is one of the functions of sati and it supports sati through coordination with sanna and other factors, but sati is mindful awareness..." Scott: This is the definition of sati: Dhammasa.nganii defines sati as: "The mindfulness which on that occasion is recollecting, calling back to mind; the mindfulness which is remembering, bearing in mind the opposite of superficiality and of obliviousness; mindfulness as faculty: mindfulness as power, right mindfulness." Scott: Recollecting is the only function of sati. How can the function of sati 'support sati?' Yes, there are other mental factors supporting each other. R: "...Check out other definitions..." Scott: Please offer some. R: "...Sati is not just remembering. Sati does many things including being aware of what exists in the moment, then allowing panna to 'know it,' guarding the senses, distinguishing kusala from akusala, and to do so, remembering what is kusala and what is akusala. Sati has all those qualities, not just one of them..." Scott: See Dhammasa.nganii. Please offer these other definitions. You are talking about a concept known to modern Buddhists as 'mindfulness' which is not sati. Scott. #118436 From: "philip" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 10:36 am Subject: Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view philofillet Hi Dieter Thank you for your further comments, many of which I would have agreed with a few months ago and, knowing the vagaries of my view swings, may again! But for now I will back away from this topic. Metta, Phil #118437 From: "philip" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 11:02 am Subject: Re: Futility of sorting kusala moments from akusala by thinking philofillet Hi Jon > Glad to hear it is all making more sense to you these days :-)) > > As you say, thinking cannot sort out kusala from akusala (it can only think about which of the 2 might be the case). And thinking also cannot know anything about the characteristic of dhammas. Both require understanding. Ph: Of course thinking must be involved in understanding, at least at the level of intellectual understanding. But it seems that when we have confidence about the value of listening to the teaching, there is a kind of bridle placed on the kind of thinking we do, we don't let it run wild, it becomes a patient workhorse for panna. keeping well in line with what we have heard... J: And of the 2, it's the understanding of the true nature of dhammas that must be developed if there is to be release from the cycle of birth and death. > > While the understanding that knows the difference between kusala and akusala is also to be developed, that understanding is subsumed within the understanding that knows the true nature of dhammas. Ph: Bingo! Metta, Phil #118438 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 11:07 am Subject: Re: meditation (anapanasati) truth_aerator Hello Pt, all, I do not believe that it is wise approach to say that one should not follow what is said because one would make some mistake. It seems like too much doubt and implying that suttas are incompetent, the VsM is incompetent, the teachers for the last 2,500 are incompetent at teaching Dhamma, (and yet only the one lay teacher has figured it all out). >pt: a much more fundamental issue is the lack of experiential >understanding of the difference between a moment with sati and a >moment without it. [cut] >========================= Only one way to find out is to actually do it, and if it doesn't work, keep trying different approached based on what is said in the suttas and VsM. I do not like the implication that the Buddha was such an inept teacher that He couldn't clearly say what He has meant. >pt: I think you have completely misused the toddler analogy in this >case - imo, it would be more like this: > > If a toddler is trying to learn to walk (trying to do anapanasati, >satipatthana, etc) but is instead poking himself in the eye with a >spoon believing that that is what walking is all about (mistaking >=========================================== Sounds like too much doubt. We have the suttas and VsM. While errors are almost certain, for many the errors will not be fatal. If there was no Dhamma books, then we could speak about what you are saying. Your analogue can be used even for studying the books. With best wishes, Alex #118439 From: "philip" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 11:26 am Subject: Fussy ( was Re: Phra Dhammadaro on rupa) philofillet Hi all, re thinking too much, I found this in the UPs, all by itself under "fussy." The talks referred to are Ven Dhammadaro's: > Hi all > > Another bit from the 1979 talks: > > "There are realities appearing now - it doesn't matter what they > are - we're not fussy. What's the point of being fussy. It's > appeared already." > > (Ph: I don't know if I'd say "it doesn't matter what they are" - > there are consequences, of course. But it can't be changed, once > they have arisen. There can be wise attention - that there can be.) Ph 2011: Now I understand better that it doesn't matter what they are, the consequences come from subsequent kamma and understanding that it doesn't matter what vipaka arises makes for less bad kamma in response) > "It's only when you think about it that fussiness sets in. It's a > certain shape, and that shape conditions unpleasant feeling. And you > don't like unpleasant feeling. So you'd like to see a different > shape.So you think about the different shape. Or the same with > sounds. At those moments it's just thinking, but there's no > awareness. We're so caught up in the idea of the shape, or the > sound. The idea of it. But there's no awareness of thinking at that > moment. There can't be. We want to know all the details of what we > see, and what we hear. And wanting to know the details, is not being > aware." > > a bit later - "In fact we don't know rupa as well as we think we > do, because we open our eyes and we say "oh that's rupa" but > already there's thinking, already we know the shape, already we like > or we don't like, already we are mixing up rupa with concepts - but > still it is right to say when you open your eyes, rupa appears, only > we haven't separated that rupa from all the other events, all the > other realities." > > Ph: All so fast, all the accumulated ignorance. But knowing this is > the first necessary step on the very long journey to knowing nama > from rupa, the first vipasanna-nana. > > Phil > #118440 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 11:26 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...Here's Nyanatiloka, everyone's favorite dictionarian...:" Scott: Not always correct. R: "...A bit from the satipatthana section: 'He beholds how the body arises and how it passes away, beholds the arising and passing away of the body.' Rob Note: Please note this is not a function of 'memory' but of awareness of what is arising in the moment." Scott: Which dhammas are functioning here? This statement does not make this clear yet you make inferences therefrom. R: "...Rob Note: Please note that the com. on the above section acknowledges mindfulness as 'attentiveness,' not memory." Scott: Please provide a quote. Scott. #118441 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 11:40 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., "...Rob Note: Please note that the com. on the above section acknowledges mindfulness as 'attentiveness,' not memory." Scott: 'Sa~n~naa' is 'memory.' Sati has a different function. I wonder if the Paa.li is available for this Comy. Scott. #118442 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 11:49 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...Panna is wisdom or clear knowing, not insight. Insight is vipassana. It is a different cetasika..." Scott: I think this is incorrect. Wisdom and insight are synonyms and pa~n~naa is vipassana. This is pa~n~naa cetasika. Scott. #118443 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 11:55 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > Hi Robert E, > > Thanks for the reply: glad to know we are still speaking. :-) > > ------------ > <. . .> > > RE: Just to clarify, of course the Buddha said that dhammas arise due to conditions. > What he never said, was that this truth constituted *practice,* > ------------ > > KH: But wouldn't that be a necessary implication? Conditioned dhammas constitute everything that is real. Right practice, wrong practice, functional practice it's all just dhammas arising by conditions. The way in which this is looked at and acted upon is pretty critical. I think the above is a form of false logic. Everything that is real breaks down into conditioned dhammas, is constituted by conditioned dhammas. That does not mean there is no such thing as action, no such thing as organisms, no such thing as cars or houses. It is one thing to say that we experience dhammas one moment at a time, and one dhamma at a time, but it is another to say that there is no world, no bodies and no practice. I realize that is a widely-held view on this list, but I think it's the wrong conclusion. If we listen to the Buddha's words, which is a conventional act, we get the meaning through concepts. If we only experienced heard object, and no concept, there would be no Dhamma. The Dhamma is conceptual in nature. Same with action. If we took no action, did nothing, didn't bother to eat, stayed in bed because there are "only dhammas" we would die without ever realizing the path or understanding Dhamma. Following the path and experiencing the reality of momentary dhammas is completely dependent on having a body, living a conventional life, doing physical and mental activities that last for more than a moment, and engaging in forms of practice to develop the path. It doesn't happen by itself. If we take volitional action and enagage in practice to develop the path, all that is saying is that different namas and rupas arise than would otherwise, and that means that practice is taking place. To say there is no practice, nothing to do and that dhammas arise by themselves does not account for the difference between kusala and akusala intentions and actions. And it doesn't account for the arising of cetana and the rupas of action that arise from cetana. So I think we should acknowledge the conventional action that is necessary to follow the path, from reading Dhamma and understanding it conceptually and conventionally to engaging in right action in the world and doing conventional practices that develop the path, to the realization of paramatha dhammas when development reaches the appropriate point. We can't control what arises, but we do make choices about what to do and how to regard the path. > -------------------- > > RE: or that one should not practice. > -------------------- > > KH: To what extent can the words "should" and "should not" apply to a > Dhamma that teaches there is no self? I find that those who use this kind of either/or argument do not correctly distinguish intention and action from the presence or absence of a self. Action and intention do not necessitate a self. If a self were necessary to practice, then no practice would take place, because there is no self. But intention does arise, and action does take place, and practice does develop the path, all without a self. The other false idea is that by engaging in practice we are promoting self-view. Again, a self is not necessary to practice. What is necessary is just to practice, and doing so is not controlled by a self. It's only going to take place if the right intentions and conditions arise, but when they do arise we shouldn't fight those conditions and try to stop practice from taking place. The Buddha's teaching is one direct cause of the intention to practice and if that takes place, those cittas should be encouraged, not discouraged. > The conditioned dhammas sati and panna know why good kamma is preferable to evil. They know why effort, for example, should be right effort and not wrong effort. That's a kind of "should" I suppose. Yes, but the question whether intentional development via formal practice can be right effort. And I don't agree with the arguments that it is always wrong effort. > ----------------------------- > >RE: Find one sutta where he said that directly, and I'll be happy to acknowledge it. > ----------------------------- > > KH: I've got to hand it to you Rob; you and Alex know how to get out of a tight corner. Just make a baseless accusation and all unwelcome attention is deflected. > > For the millionth time: we are not saying there is a self that has control. We don't see the Dhamma as a Do this, *Do not do that* kind of teaching. Well then why do so many folks around here say *it is wrong to meditate,* don't meditate, it is dangerous to meditate? That semes like 'Do this/Do not do that' to me. > It's all a matter of right understanding of the present reality. And right understanding is either present or it isn't. There is no control. In that case you should happily engage in whatever activities the Buddha suggested and let the right understanding develop as and when it does. But to say that the Buddha's teachings on right action, livelihood, mindfulness and concentration do not entail anything on our part - that they don't refer to our actual work, words, deeds and meditation - I think is a great mistake. The conventional teaching creates the conditions for the path to develop. > ------------------- > > RE: In fact, he said the opposite over and over again, > ------------------- > > KH: The opposite of "do not do this" is "do this" and the Buddha's Middle Way is neither of those extremes. When the conditions for path consciousness are present there is right practice. Otherwise there isn't. > > -------------- > > RE: but you ignore him. > -------------- > > KH: I advise you to ignore anyone who tries to tell you the Buddha taught a conventional path. > > He did teach a path but "no traveller on it is seen" (Vism.) and so it is profoundly different from any other kind of path. That is ultimately fine, except for all the things the Buddha actually said, such as "strive with all your might like your hair is on fire." How do you interpret such an instruction in the light of what you just said above? I agree that the path as a whole is not ordinary in any sense, and its fruits are extraordinary, but that does not mean it excludes important, consistent and pertinent ordinary and extraordinary practices and activities that are prescribed by the Buddha. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #118444 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 11:57 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > S: :-) I thought the same as Chris and appreciate the good humour. As you say, Rob, we're all "damned" whilst "running around and around on the wheel of samsara like a jogging hamster". I like the way you put that. Conditions, conditions...... And, yes, the "For reasons only I know? Are you joking?....." was very funny too!! It all comes back to the citta now, regardless, whichever way life turns by conditions from moment to moment. Thanks, Sarah! I hope that the moments of good humour create some kusala kamma for those involved, even though I'm not sure if it's on the official list of kusala cetasikas... :-) Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #118445 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 12:08 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "As you probably know, the object of sati is not important, as long as it is recognized as such. I suppose if you recognized your new cd as a conventional object - a mental image with associated concepts - you could have sati with a level of panna at that moment..." > > Scott: Who or what does the recognizing? No one, it's just citta, as we agree. > Remember, we are discussing a 'practice' wherein one sits with the purpose to 'have mindfulness.' That's not exactly how I'd put it. I don't think that practicing mindfulness is the same thing as trying to "have it." You put things a little more in "self" terms when describing this, and that's not the intent. I just have faith that this practice will create conditions for sati to arise, as taught by the Buddha. I don't see that as "self-motivated" but "Dhamma-motivated." > This 'mindfulness' is automatically not sati. I don't see how you can say that, without knowing how this does or does not occur in actual experience. Either sati arises or it doesn't, but it's not ruled out by focusing on the breath with that intention. That's just opposite-itis. Again, if it arises it arises, when it doesn't, at worst you've wasted that moment breathing, and another moment will arise immediately after. No big deal. > If you are suggesting that one could 'practice' mindfulness by sitting and listening to music, I'd like to hear more about how this would actually work. My suggestion was more along the lines of seeing your CD as a concept and that this acknowledgment might allow a moment of panna. I don't know if a concept or whole can be the object of panna - there's been some confusion and dispute about this lately on dsg - but I do think that panna can arise in relation to the understanding that a concept is a concept. That has been verified recently by one of the knowledgeable ones here, but I don't remember the thread. I think it had something to do with the nama that had been entertaining the concept being taken and seen clearly by the subsequent citta, or something like that. > The characteristic of sati is as described by the Dhammasa.nganii quote. When sati arises, there is automatically an object and sati is the 'recognition,' is that is the world you wish to use. Recognition is not bad as another way of saying mindfulness. It has several attributes of that kind that can be described as I currently understand it. > Sati then falls away immediately. As I suggested, sati rises and falls away like everything else, but someone who has developed skill in sati has many more moments of sati in a row, or more frequently with less conceptual interruptions, and that is what makes that person "mindful" in a more general way, someone more advanced as opposed to a beginner. So there are developmental gradations of how often an how uninterruptedly moments of sati or other enlightenment factors will arise, as one becomes more skillful. That is still occurring because of individual moments of citta arising, but it does make a difference. Cittas arise one moment at a time but they pass on accumulations and so they are not isolated in the sense of being one-time independent events. They are part of the chain of causal conditions that cause one or another citta to arise at any given moment. > As far as the new cd, the object would be 'sound' but not 'music.' As far as I know, neither sati nor pa~n~na take concepts or wholes as objects. See above. Maybe this can be clarified. There has to be a way for panna to know concepts as concepts, otherwise it would not be able to distinguish them from dhammas. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #118446 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 12:08 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "As you probably know, the object of sati is not important, as long as it is recognized as such. I suppose if you recognized your new cd as a conventional object - a mental image with associated concepts - you could have sati with a level of panna at that moment..." > > Scott: Who or what does the recognizing? No one, it's just citta, as we agree. > Remember, we are discussing a 'practice' wherein one sits with the purpose to 'have mindfulness.' That's not exactly how I'd put it. I don't think that practicing mindfulness is the same thing as trying to "have it." You put things a little more in "self" terms when describing this, and that's not the intent. I just have faith that this practice will create conditions for sati to arise, as taught by the Buddha. I don't see that as "self-motivated" but "Dhamma-motivated." > This 'mindfulness' is automatically not sati. I don't see how you can say that, without knowing how this does or does not occur in actual experience. Either sati arises or it doesn't, but it's not ruled out by focusing on the breath with that intention. That's just opposite-itis. Again, if it arises it arises, when it doesn't, at worst you've wasted that moment breathing, and another moment will arise immediately after. No big deal. > If you are suggesting that one could 'practice' mindfulness by sitting and listening to music, I'd like to hear more about how this would actually work. My suggestion was more along the lines of seeing your CD as a concept and that this acknowledgment might allow a moment of panna. I don't know if a concept or whole can be the object of panna - there's been some confusion and dispute about this lately on dsg - but I do think that panna can arise in relation to the understanding that a concept is a concept. That has been verified recently by one of the knowledgeable ones here, but I don't remember the thread. I think it had something to do with the nama that had been entertaining the concept being taken and seen clearly by the subsequent citta, or something like that. > The characteristic of sati is as described by the Dhammasa.nganii quote. When sati arises, there is automatically an object and sati is the 'recognition,' is that is the world you wish to use. Recognition is not bad as another way of saying mindfulness. It has several attributes of that kind that can be described as I currently understand it. > Sati then falls away immediately. As I suggested, sati rises and falls away like everything else, but someone who has developed skill in sati has many more moments of sati in a row, or more frequently with less conceptual interruptions, and that is what makes that person "mindful" in a more general way, someone more advanced as opposed to a beginner. So there are developmental gradations of how often an how uninterruptedly moments of sati or other enlightenment factors will arise, as one becomes more skillful. That is still occurring because of individual moments of citta arising, but it does make a difference. Cittas arise one moment at a time but they pass on accumulations and so they are not isolated in the sense of being one-time independent events. They are part of the chain of causal conditions that cause one or another citta to arise at any given moment. > As far as the new cd, the object would be 'sound' but not 'music.' As far as I know, neither sati nor pa~n~na take concepts or wholes as objects. See above. Maybe this can be clarified. There has to be a way for panna to know concepts as concepts, otherwise it would not be able to distinguish them from dhammas. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #118447 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 12:27 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...I think that attention actually does go to this or that object...Are you saying that when you pay attention to your new CD and are not paying any attention to the noise of someone talking to you in the background that the attention is not on the 'aural objects' of the CD or whatever you want to call it?..." > > Scott: 'Attention' is not sati, as I've noted previously. 'Attention' is manasikaara, and arises with every citta. And, yes, takes the same object as citta. I am suggesting that for sati to arise, it can only do so in relation to the object of attention, that is masnasikaara - thanks for the term. Sati is given credit for a lot of different attributes, and working a lot of other qualities. Sati is "mindful attention" or as you said "recognition" which can only happen to an object that is being attended to, as opposed to casual or unknowing attention, just as sati combines with sampajanna to create 'clear knowing awareness.' But it's my understanding that the root characteristic of sati is 'aware conscious attention to the actual presence of the object.' I suppose that 'attention' could see the object and distort or misunderstand it, and sati never does that. It sees the object just as it is. > What are 'aural objects?' They must differ from 'sound' since you didn't use the word 'sound.' Sound is not 'music.' An aural object is merely an 'object of hearing' like visual object is for seeing. It's the same as "sound," just that "sound object" sounds clunky to me. > Remember that a 'continuum' is not the same as the 'stream' of cittas to which you refer. This term 'stream' is always erroneously used to infer 'continuum' but this is not the case since when citta and concomitant mental factors fall away they are gone completely. I always have a problem with people saying that the citta falls away completely, because it's really not the way the rise and fall of cittas is correctly described in Abhidhamma terms. If you want to be accurate, you have to include the critical importance of the "passing on" of accumulations and characteristics and cetasikas from one citta to the next *before* or *as* it is falling away. This handoff really does keep the individual citta from having a complete an independent existence apart from the "stream of cittas." Without this "handing off" there would be no accumulations and no path, so it's not a minor factor. When you say the citta falls away completely with all its elements, that is simply not true. It falls away, hands off all its stuff, and then falls away completely, so you are leaving out the most important thing in the process, and what *makes it* an ongoing process. The citta falls away in the same sense that a domino falls away, knocing down the next domino while it is at it, and so on. Its very much a connected and continuous stream, even to the extent that bhavanga cittas make sure that there is not a single moment that does not carry on the continuity of cittas arising and falling in sequence. So I think the "single citta" understanding, while important, is only half the story, and the other half is *equally* important. I believe the Abhidhamma and commentaries fully acknowledge the sequential nature of conditionality from citta to citta. In that sense it really *is* a continuum. A continuum made up *of* single cittas that do fall away completely, but only after they've "done their job." > Note this definition of 'continuum:' > > "A continuous extent, succession, or whole, no part of which can be distinguished from neighboring parts except by arbitrary division." Well I agree with you that the 'distinguished from neighboring parts' part of the definition is not right. Guess I'll have to find a better dictionary. It is however, a "continuous succession," as above, and that's the sense in which I mean it. > This is your insubstantialist notion of 'process' and is not at all the same as the Abhidhamma descriptions of dhammas. In a 'stream' consciousness and it's mental factors fall away completely, which is condition for the arising of the next moment of conscious, 'without a gap,' as the wording has it. Right - without a gap. Well think about how something "falls away completely" without a gap. That means it is doing something to get the next citta going before it falls away completely. Otherwise there would be a gap. So that's that. > The falling away is not an 'arbitrary division.' Sati does not have, say, music as object, but it could have sound. I think I agree with that, and it doesn't ruin my understanding of 'continuous succession,' which is the important point to combine with the falling-away citta. What's important to me is that a skillful state like someone who is "well learned, well trained" in mindfulness, does not have the same pattern of cittas as someone who has no such skill. The skilled person will have many more cittas with sati and in much more spates of continuous succession, with less interruptions of concept. Someone who is 'skilled in jhana,' as has been acknowledged here a number of times and quoted from commentary, will have 'many many moments of jhana-citta in a row' without interruption. It is good to see these "patterns" and that they are different, so we don't fall into the silly idea that each arising and falling citta is so independent and arising from who-knows-what that the pattern of cittas is totally arbitrary and doesn't represent the development level of skill, kusala or enlightenment factors that have been developed or accumulated. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #118448 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 12:52 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > When you sit and try to be mindful, are you making sati more 'skillful?' Are you becoming 'more skillful' at 'mindfulness?' I wouldn't put it that way. Yeah, sometimes I use my terms loosely/descriptively, to try to get at what I want to communicate. I would say that one becomes more skillful with regard to mindfulness and that mindfulness develops through practice, but the way you put it makes it sound more forceful and that is not what I mean to suggest. There's no "making sati more skillful." That does not compute. This breaks down into cittas and dhammas, but I don't always find it completely useful to speak in that language, particularly when talking about the use of conventional activities. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #118449 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 12:53 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...The argument is about whether these accumulations and development take place in a more accelerated and decisive way through 'purposeful practice,'..." > > Scott: Correct. Glad we've got that settled. :-) Best, Rob E. = = = = = #118450 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 1:02 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...I just have faith that this practice will create conditions for sati to arise, as taught by the Buddha. I don't see that as 'self-motivated' but 'Dhamma-motivated...'" Scott: Many points of Abhidhamma to clarify but this above goes right to the heart of the problem I see with your (or anyone's) 'practice.' This, to me, is the loosest of justifications for the efficacy of a consciously-chosen 'practice.' What is this 'faith?' Where is it said that 'faith' is a condition for sati? This, to me, is like saying that sati will arise because you are wishing it will. I've not read anywhere that this is the case. I think this is a major problem. Scott. #118451 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 1:18 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > Scott: There is always the next moment of consciousness arising. 'Process' is concept. Please elaborate your exact meaning of the term. A sense of how I mean the term: A series of related events that affect each other and that cause a traceable or logical result over time, such as, the passing on of accumulations/tendencies/elements from one citta to the next and so on. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = #118452 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 1:20 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > "...moments with scattered, dispersed, unfocused, unclear, unknowing awareness that is dazed, confused and overly conceptualized..." > > is rather contentious. In what sense do you mean 'awareness' here? Do you mean to describe moments without sati? Citta with ignorance? Thoughts? This is too prosaic to hold much meaning. Please clarify. The opposite of sati, yeah. And substitute "consciousness" for "awareness" above. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #118453 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 1:24 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...You just have a limited view of the 'one-moment' nature of citta and are not taking into account the nature of accumulation, bhavana and skillfulness. It means many more moments of kusala qualities *in a row,* so that the particular kusala state of consciousness in question is *maintained* over more mind-moments, and for a longer period of time..." > > Scott: When you say 'bhaavaana' do you refer to the modern mistranslation of 'meditation?' Not in this case. But I don't consider it a mistranslation. Meditation is the traditional means of development of kusala cittas in Buddhism. > Do you mean other than 'kusala' when you use the term 'skillfulness?' What I mean by skillfulness is the development of more skillful states, and not sure if I am using that as per kusala, which I usually translate to myself as "wholesome." Skillful means something that is pertinent, well performed, well understood, etc., so I don't think it's opposed to kusala. > If by 'state' you refer to the repeated arising and falling away of the same constellation of kusala dhammas then fine. Yup, in this context that's what I meant. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #118454 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 1:30 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > Scott: This notion of 'skillful practice' remains contentious. How do you actually know that the practice is skillful? I mean this seriously - that's like saying "how do you know when you're awake in the morning and not still sleeping?" In truth you don't, but you get up and brush your teeth anyway. If meditation is going well over time it should lead to the experience of more peace, mindfulness and wholesomeness in your life. If you want to second-guess that experience and wonder if it's real or not, that is fine, but Buddha said "come and see" not "wait and wonder." Practice will produce mental states and emotional states that are more in line with Dhamma over time. If it doesn't go in that direction, then whatever practice you are doing is incorrect. > I'll have to wait until you clarify 'skillful.' It doesn't seem to make sense. With 'skillful' meaning 'kusala,' then it would have to be 'kusala' to be skillful. I don't see how just sitting down to be 'mindful' is kusala from the beginning. It seems so entirely arbitrary. It seems arbitrary to me to think the path is going to magically happen by itself. I think that's a fairy tale. For most people life is spent in ignorance and no experience of the reality of dhammas. I don't believe that reading Dhamma and understanding it better conceptually is going to cause the path to arise all by itself, without being applied. There are myriad scholars who never get enlightened. The missing ingredient is direct practice. Thinking that it's not supposed to happen in this lifetime anyway is an easy way of putting off following the path and backing it up with action. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #118455 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 1:39 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > Scott: See Dhammasa.nganii. Please offer these other definitions. You are talking about a concept known to modern Buddhists as 'mindfulness' which is not sati. My understanding of mindfulness is based on sutta, not "modern Buddhists" who you are constantly invoking. I gave you a direct quote from anapanasati Sutta whose subject is the practice and development of mindfulness. So please tell me how the following has anything to do with memory and recollection: "Breathing in a long breath, he knows "I am breathing in a long breath." Breathing in a short breath, he knows "I am breathing in a short breath." Here, BUDDHA, not modern Buddhists, describe the practice of mindfulness as the conscious knowing awareness of exactly what is being experienced in the moment with regard to the breath, NOT remembering anything. So it seems to me that the Dhammasangani has a skewed definition here of sati that does not accord with the Buddha's definition in the suttas, whether it is the anapanasati or the satipatthana sutta. They both describe mindfulness as clear knowing in the moment, NOT remembering or recollection. In addition, satipatthana, which is the further application of mindfulness to the four foundations, is not a function of memory in any way, [though the fourth foundation is associated with knowledge and thus memory of the Dhamma,] but is a function of being aware of what is taking place in those four areas of experience as they arise. Are you saying that knowing vedana when it arises as pleasant or unpleasant feeling is a function of *memory?* Give me a break. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #118456 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 1:40 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., Me: "This notion of 'skillful practice' remains contentious. How do you actually know that the practice is skillful?" R: "I mean this seriously - that's like saying 'how do you know when you're awake in the morning and not still sleeping?' In truth you don't, but you get up and brush your teeth anyway. If meditation is going well over time it should lead to the experience of more peace, mindfulness and wholesomeness in your life. If you want to second-guess that experience and wonder if it's real or not, that is fine, but Buddha said 'come and see' not 'wait and wonder.' Practice will produce mental states and emotional states that are more in line with Dhamma over time. If it doesn't go in that direction, then whatever practice you are doing is incorrect..." Scott: Again, we are to the heart of the matter. The nerve is touched again. You are saying that 'you' are the one who judges the wholesomeness of your 'practice.' This is placing all the weight on a notion that is only psychology: my consciousness is all there is and if I think I am conscious of something then it is true. This is a very shaky foundation for 'meditation practice.' This is, is suppose, the corollary to invoking 'faith' as the precursor for 'practice.' Scott. #118457 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 1:57 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...Are you saying that knowing vedana when it arises as pleasant or unpleasant feeling is a function of *memory?*..." Scott: Dhammasa.nganii: "[4] What on that occasion is perception (sa~n~naa)? The perception, the perceiving, the state of having perceived which on that occasion is born of contact with the appropriate element of representative intellection..." "[14] What on that occasion is the faculty of mindfulness (satindriya.m)? The mindfulness which is remembering, bearing in mind, the opposite of superfiality and of obliviousness..." Scott: I think you've got to drop your notions of modern psychology to consider Abhidhamma. In particular, you must stop thinking in terms of persistent and overlapping, flowing, mystical processes. Scott. #118458 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 2:18 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "My understanding of mindfulness is based on sutta, not 'modern Buddhists' who you are constantly invoking...." Scott: I'm afraid that makes you one of the 'modern Buddhists' then. I don't accept your understanding of the suttas and, as I've mentioned, I certainly don't accept your saying that your understanding *is* what the suttas are also saying. This is simply unacceptable as an argument. You may as well just argue that you know best and you're right and it's because you said so. Scott. #118459 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 3:24 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...Here's Nyanatiloka, everyone's favorite dictionarian...:" > > Scott: Not always correct. > > R: "...A bit from the satipatthana section: > 'He beholds how the body arises and how it passes away, beholds the arising and passing away of the body.' > Rob Note: > Please note this is not a function of 'memory' but of awareness of what is arising in the moment." > > Scott: Which dhammas are functioning here? This statement does not make this clear yet you make inferences therefrom. Yes it's an inference. Probably the rupas of physical experience. You know the physical-body-base-sense-thingy or whatever it's called. You can tell me! :-) > R: "...Rob Note: Please note that the com. on the above section acknowledges mindfulness as 'attentiveness,' not memory." > > Scott: Please provide a quote. It was a quote. You deleted the com part for some reason. But just as the dictionary here says he "beholds," which is attending, seeing, perceiving in the moment, not remembering. And here is the satipatthana sutta: "...when walking, the monk discerns, 'I am walking.' When standing, he discerns, 'I am standing.' When sitting, he discerns, 'I am sitting.' When lying down, he discerns, 'I am lying down.' These are the words of the Buddha. Can you understand them in any other way than being aware of what the body is doing *at the moment,* having nothing to do with memory? "When standing/"I am standing" It is at the time that it is taking place that it is being perceived and being understood as such. And this is the sutta on the practice of sati, so I think my conclusion is correct. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #118460 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 3:28 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > "...Rob Note: Please note that the com. on the above section acknowledges mindfulness as 'attentiveness,' not memory." > > Scott: 'Sa~n~naa' is 'memory.' Sati has a different function. I wonder if the Paa.li is available for this Comy. Would be good to know. Don't ask me - je ne parle pas Pali. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - #118461 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 3:48 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...Panna is wisdom or clear knowing, not insight. Insight is vipassana. It is a different cetasika..." > > Scott: I think this is incorrect. Wisdom and insight are synonyms and pa~n~naa is vipassana. This is pa~n~naa cetasika. No sorry you are wrong about that. I gave you definitions from Nyanitaloka, but I guess that's not convincing enough for you. Here are some more cites on this. Buddhist Glossary from Insight Meditation Society: "Panna (Pali) = Wisdom; one of the five spiritual faculties." Vism: Buddhaghoṣa states that the function of paā is "to abolish the darkness of delusion" and that it is "manifested as non-delusion." Its proximate cause is concentration. From Nina's "Cetasikas": "When one has studied the Dhamma there can be intellectual understanding about ultimate realities about kamma and vipaka, about namas and rupas which can be experienced through six door, and, when understanding develops further there can be direct understanding of ultimate realities, of nama and rupa. Direct understanding of realities can develop to the highest wisdom which eradicates aIl defilements." Here are definitions of vipassana and panna from PTS, as quoted by Nina and then re-quoted by Rob K. on his forum: PTS Dictionary has a full article on pa~n~naa. Here are some of the meanings given in the first line: intelligence, comprising all the higher faculties of cognition, "intellect as conversant with general truths" (Dial. ii.68), reason, wisdom, insight, knowledge, recognition. > For vipassanaa: Vipassanโ (f.) [fr. vi+passati; BSk. vipassanaa, e.g. Divy 44, 95, 264 etc.] inward vision, insight, intuition, introspection. They overlap in some places because they work together, but they are two different faculties, I believe. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #118462 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 3:50 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...I just have faith that this practice will create conditions for sati to arise, as taught by the Buddha. I don't see that as 'self-motivated' but 'Dhamma-motivated...'" > > Scott: Many points of Abhidhamma to clarify but this above goes right to the heart of the problem I see with your (or anyone's) 'practice.' > > This, to me, is the loosest of justifications for the efficacy of a consciously-chosen 'practice.' What is this 'faith?' Where is it said that 'faith' is a condition for sati? This, to me, is like saying that sati will arise because you are wishing it will. I've not read anywhere that this is the case. > > I think this is a major problem. You've twisted and misunderstood what I said. Meditation is not faith-based, it is a practice. But without some belief or trust that the Buddha is worth following and that the teaching is correct, why would one pay any attention to it? That's all I mean, that I trust the teachings and I try to carry out what I can. There's no "faith" or "wishing" in "making sati arise." But I do trust that the principles of Dhamma will have positive results. Don't you? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #118463 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 3:56 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > Me: "This notion of 'skillful practice' remains contentious. How do you actually know that the practice is skillful?" > > R: "I mean this seriously - that's like saying 'how do you know when you're awake in the morning and not still sleeping?' In truth you don't, but you get up and brush your teeth anyway. If meditation is going well over time it should lead to the experience of more peace, mindfulness and wholesomeness in your life. If you want to second-guess that experience and wonder if it's real or not, that is fine, but Buddha said 'come and see' not 'wait and wonder.' Practice will produce mental states and emotional states that are more in line with Dhamma over time. If it doesn't go in that direction, then whatever practice you are doing is incorrect..." > > Scott: Again, we are to the heart of the matter. The nerve is touched again. You are saying that 'you' are the one who judges the wholesomeness of your 'practice.' This is placing all the weight on a notion that is only psychology: my consciousness is all there is and if I think I am conscious of something then it is true. This is a very shaky foundation for 'meditation practice.' This is, is suppose, the corollary to invoking 'faith' as the precursor for 'practice.' Your interpretation is again incorrect. You asked the question. The answer reflects a response, not some thought process I engage in to judge and assess my practice. So you bring something up, and basically invoke the answer, then critique it - it's sort of like talking to yourself. What other basis is there for anything in life other than understanding and experiencing? It's not psychological or self-based - it's just what it is. How do you judge whether your understanding of Dhamma is correct - the whole single-citta/dhammas-only philosophy? Do you have chats with the Buddha about it? Or do you just believe it's correct? If you consult with a teacher or commentary, how do you know they are correct? It comes down to your opinion, belief or faith that they are correct. Your view, whatever it may be, is equally subjective. But since no one's asked you about it, you don't have to say so. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #118464 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 4:01 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...Are you saying that knowing vedana when it arises as pleasant or unpleasant feeling is a function of *memory?*..." > > Scott: Dhammasa.nganii: > > "[4] What on that occasion is perception (sa~n~naa)? The perception, the perceiving, the state of having perceived which on that occasion is born of contact with the appropriate element of representative intellection..." > > "[14] What on that occasion is the faculty of mindfulness (satindriya.m)? The mindfulness which is remembering, bearing in mind, the opposite of superfiality and of obliviousness..." > > Scott: I think you've got to drop your notions of modern psychology to consider Abhidhamma. In particular, you must stop thinking in terms of persistent and overlapping, flowing, mystical processes. I think you have a serious problem with the suttapitaka. I have quoted the Buddha's words on mindfulness and satipatthana several times, making it very clear that he is defining mindfulness as awareness of present reality and not of memory, and yet you ignore that and keep quoting Abhidhamma. The Dhammasangani definition is clearly not in line with the way the Buddha uses and teaches the term. You're going to have to choose which version is correct, but first you have to say what you think about the Buddha's words. Please stop confusing the Buddha's words - my source here - with "modern psychology." I've made it very clear I am referencing the direct language of the suttas, not a modern source, so please drop that straw man and stop accusing me of something that isn't true. Also - the Dhammasangani quote above includes "bearing in mind" and "opposite of superficiality and obliviousness." Those are not memory, those are awareness of what is present and understanding what it is. Memory is only one factor mentioned among these others. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #118465 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 4:04 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., Me: "I think this is incorrect. Wisdom and insight are synonyms and pa~n~naa is vipassana. This is pa~n~naa cetasika." R: "No sorry you are wrong about that...They overlap in some places because they work together, but they are two different faculties, I believe." Scott: Dhammasa.nganii: "[16] What on that occasion is the faculty of insight (pa~n~nindriya.m)? The insight which there is on that occasion is understanding, search, research, searching the Doctrine, discernment, differentiation, erudition, proficiency, subtlety, criticism, reflection, analysis, breadth, sagacity, a 'guide,' intuition, a 'goad'..." Scott: One and the same cetasika. Scott. #118466 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 4:05 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "My understanding of mindfulness is based on sutta, not 'modern Buddhists' who you are constantly invoking...." > > Scott: I'm afraid that makes you one of the 'modern Buddhists' then. > > I don't accept your understanding of the suttas and, as I've mentioned, I certainly don't accept your saying that your understanding *is* what the suttas are also saying. This is simply unacceptable as an argument. > > You may as well just argue that you know best and you're right and it's because you said so. I notice that you are apparently afraid to discuss my quotes from the suttas, which are clear statements, not confusing or subject to vast interpretive variation. So you can't talk about being "aware of a long breath" or a "short breath?" You are running away from talking about the actual words of the suttas like they are a fast-moving train. If you continue to do so, I will stop talking to you. I can't have a sensible conversation with someone who says I am claiming special knowledge or 'interpreting' a sutta when I am quoting it on its face, and you can't even acknowledge the existence of the quote, since it contradicts your treasured wrong views. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #118467 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 4:11 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "I think you have a serious problem with the suttapitaka..." Scott: Not at all, Rob. I have a 'serious problem' with the ongoing insistence that you understand the suttas correctly. As I've mentioned a time or two, it doesn't do to just assert something and then, as proof of the assertion, append a portion of a sutta, expecting the reader to assume that, by mere association, the assertion and the sutta quote are saying the same thing. So no, of course I don't have a problem with the suttas. Scott. #118468 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 4:16 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...I notice that you are apparently afraid to discuss my quotes from the suttas, which are clear statements, not confusing or subject to vast interpretive variation. So you can't talk about being 'aware of a long breath' or a 'short breath?'..." Scott: Again, Rob, I have no problem with the suttas. I recall that Nina wrote a very clear response to you regarding 'breath.' I have no need to reinvent the wheel. I agree with what Nina gave you. 'Long breath' and 'short breath' are concept. The ruupa is fleeting and it is this fleeting dhamma that is object of sati, not the so-called 'breath' that is only the 'object' of conscious, ignorance-based perception where wholes are taken for dhammas. Paying attention while you breath in and out is not where it's at. That's just breathing and thinking. Scott. #118469 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 4:19 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > R: "I think you have a serious problem with the suttapitaka..." > > Scott: Not at all, Rob. I have a 'serious problem' with the ongoing insistence that you understand the suttas correctly. As I've mentioned a time or two, it doesn't do to just assert something and then, as proof of the assertion, append a portion of a sutta, expecting the reader to assume that, by mere association, the assertion and the sutta quote are saying the same thing. So no, of course I don't have a problem with the suttas. If I think there is a plain meaning in a line of sutta, and it's very obvious, like "When breathing in a long breath, he knows "I am breathing in a long breath," and you keep deleting those quotes instead of discussing them, and then criticize me for quoting them, saying I am doing some weird form of interpretation, what am I supposed to think? Why don't you look at the quote, look at what I said about it, and say something substantive about what you think. That would be discussing it, rather than hiding the evidence and making believe I am doing some sort of outrageous interpretation. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #118470 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 4:22 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...I notice that you are apparently afraid to discuss my quotes from the suttas, which are clear statements, not confusing or subject to vast interpretive variation. So you can't talk about being 'aware of a long breath' or a 'short breath?'..." > > Scott: Again, Rob, I have no problem with the suttas. I recall that Nina wrote a very clear response to you regarding 'breath.' I have no need to reinvent the wheel. I agree with what Nina gave you. 'Long breath' and 'short breath' are concept. The ruupa is fleeting and it is this fleeting dhamma that is object of sati, not the so-called 'breath' that is only the 'object' of conscious, ignorance-based perception where wholes are taken for dhammas. Paying attention while you breath in and out is not where it's at. That's just breathing and thinking. As I said, you are denying the words of the Buddha, not mine. He is the one that said that, not me, and you are saying that is "not where it's at." So the Buddha either didn't mean what he said, or you just don't buy his description - the Buddha's words are "not the real thing." Sure, you can break it down into namas and rupas and talk about what kind of object the breath is, but that's not where the Buddha starts. Maybe what you think is "not where it's at" *is* where it starts, according to Buddha. What do you think it means that *he* says things like that all the way through the suttas? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = #118471 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 4:26 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > Me: "I think this is incorrect. Wisdom and insight are synonyms and pa~n~naa is vipassana. This is pa~n~naa cetasika." > > R: "No sorry you are wrong about that...They overlap in some places because they work together, but they are two different faculties, I believe." > > Scott: Dhammasa.nganii: > > "[16] What on that occasion is the faculty of insight (pa~n~nindriya.m)? The insight which there is on that occasion is understanding, search, research, searching the Doctrine, discernment, differentiation, erudition, proficiency, subtlety, criticism, reflection, analysis, breadth, sagacity, a 'guide,' intuition, a 'goad'..." > > Scott: One and the same cetasika. I have given you a number of quotes that suggested otherwise, which as usual you have neither quoted nor answered in any way. And the Dhammasangani's definition is more a list of every wise and probing quality of mind that can be thought of, including those of mindfulness, vitakka and vicara, and more. It is mushing them all together, rather than distinguishing them, so I wouldn't take that as a clear definition of both cetasikas being the same. It doesn't particularly distinguish the quality of insight or of panna. Seriously, it covers just about every cetasika in the book. I will see if I can find some more specific sutta quotes to compare. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #118472 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 4:43 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...Sure, you can break it down into namas and rupas and talk about what kind of object the breath is...What do you think it means that *he* says things like that all the way through the suttas?" Scott: The suttas are, as you have heard, for the most part, rendered in conventional speech. The breakdown 'into namas and rupas' is, in fact, all there is. Conventional speech is only a way to describe the one reality - paramattha dhammas. One's comprehension of conventional speech is erroneously linear and concrete when one ignores the fact that the only things that are being spoken of by the conventional vernacular are paramattha dhammas. I consider the Abhidhamma pitaka as well, and with my limited understanding, know enough not to think the suttas are straightforward; know enough to recall the underlying basis of all the conceptual conventional language in the suttas. When your 'practice' is based on a linear, concrete, understanding of the suttas, - forgetting that conventional language still refers only to ultimate realities - without recourse to the clarifying precision of the Abhidhamma, then this 'practice' has some serious fundamental flaws based on wrong understanding right from the start. I don't think I'm saying anything here that Jon or Sarah or Nina or Ken H. or pt haven't said to you before. None of this should be new to you, Rob. It would be prudent to consider that the suttas might not be as clearly written in their conventional form as you would like to think. The Dhamma is deep - especially when rendered conventionally. This makes it even harder to understand and much easier to misinterpret, as I believe you do on a regular basis. It would be good to step back and question whether or not you really do get it. I don't read the suttas and find them straight-forward at all. I know, that's because I'm an utter moron... Scott. #118473 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 4:51 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > The Dhamma is deep - especially when rendered conventionally. This makes it even harder to understand and much easier to misinterpret, as I believe you do on a regular basis. It would be good to step back and question whether or not you really do get it. I don't read the suttas and find them straight-forward at all. I know, that's because I'm an utter moron... Well, no worries - it's a monkey conversation all round. I agree that the suttas are deep, and the real perception of dhammas remains the true measure of understanding. On the other hand, I don't dismiss what the Buddha says, but I don't doubt that one can understand different levels of its implications by breaking down the concepts into finer components. I'll leave it at that for tonight. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #118474 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 4:56 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., Me: Dhammasa.nganii: "[16] What on that occasion is the faculty of insight (pa~n~nindriya.m)? The insight which there is on that occasion is understanding, search, research, searching the Doctrine, discernment, differentiation, erudition, proficiency, subtlety, criticism, reflection, analysis, breadth, sagacity, a 'guide,' intuition, a 'goad'..." R: "...the Dhammasangani's definition is more a list of every wise and probing quality of mind that can be thought of, including those of mindfulness, vitakka and vicara, and more..." Scott: Sati has been given; Dhammasa'nga.nii: "[7] What on that occasion is application of mind (vitakko)? The discrimination, the application which on that occasion is the disposing, the fixing, the focussing, the superposing of the mind..." "[8] What on that occasion is sustained thought (vicaaro)? The process, the sustained procedure (vicaaro), the progress and access [of the mind] which on that occasion is the [continuous] progress and access [of the mind] which is the [continuous] adjusting and focussing of thought..." Scott: Different mental factors, different characteristics. Not whole ways of thinking over time - that is the influence of the phenomenological bias. Scott. #118475 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 9, 2011 5:02 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...but I don't doubt that one can understand different levels of its implications by breaking down the concepts into finer components. I'll leave it at that for tonight." Scott: It is wrong to consider paramattha dhammas to simply be the products of an intellectual process involving the 'breaking down' of concepts into 'finer components.' There are only paramattha dhammas and the rest is conceptual. Conventional language refers in a certain literary style to the underlying, fundamental reality of the paramattha dhammas. Scott. #118476 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:07 am Subject: The black curtain. 1. nilovg Dear friends, This is from a recording in India, where Khun Sujin spoke to our group, including our Dhamma friend Jill who passed away. She took a great interest and had several questions and remarks. Kh Sujin: When there is not the light of understanding, all dhammas are behind a black curtain. How could they appear without understanding? The understanding of seeing now as just a reality seems easy, but if there is no understanding nothing appears behind the black curtain. It seems that in our daily life there are people and things all the time, but in reality it is not like that at all. Pa~n~naa has to grow little by little, very little at a time. After seeing and hearing there is always ignorance and attachment. Why was the Buddha at first disinclined to teach? Because his teaching is against the current of life. There has to be detachment from the very beginning and it is very difficult to become detached from what one is used to being attached to, from life to life, during aeons. It is very difficult even to begin to be detached from not understanding, while one is wondering how to develop understanding. People like to have result in this life; attachment comes all the time as soon as there are conditions for its arising, through any doorway. One has to be wise to the moment of attachment and remember all the time that there is only one way: detachment with right understanding of the reality which appears. It is a very long way to go and one has to be very patient. One should understand the core of the teachings: being patient. Patience, khanti, is the highest ascetism. Pa~n~naa knows : there is no I who tries so hard to acquire the understanding which will gradually eliminate the idea of self. This means: no trying to do something special, not to wish, not to go away from this moment without any understanding. ------ N: remark afterwards: I like the reminder not to go away from this moment. It seems that one delays understanding this moment, wanting to do other things, or creating favorable conditions for awareness. Before one realizes it, attachment creeps in, we want so much to have right understanding. I discussed with Lodewijk how difficult it is to become detached, it goes very much against our nature. We are attached to all pleasant sense objects, or else to having more understanding. ------- Nina. ********* #118477 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:21 am Subject: Re: meditation (anapanasati) ptaus1 Hi Alex, > A: I do not believe that it is wise approach to say that one should not follow what is said because one would make some mistake. pt: I'm not saying that we should not follow what is said, I'm saying we don't understand (experientially) what is said (as in we take lobha for sati) and are therefore following something else in practical terms, even though we believe we are following the suttas, or abhidhamma or whatever. > A: It seems like too much doubt and implying that suttas are incompetent, the VsM is incompetent, the teachers for the last 2,500 are incompetent at teaching Dhamma, (and yet only the one lay teacher has figured it all out). pt: I'm not saying the suttas and the teachers are incompetent, I'm saying you and me are incompetent. E.g. suttas and the rest take it for granted that we all know what sati is (experientially) and go from there. Do you actually know what sati is experientially? I don't. > A: Only one way to find out is to actually do it, and if it doesn't work, keep trying different approached based on what is said in the suttas and VsM. pt: Do what? Do you know what mindfulness is? Experientially? > A: I do not like the implication that the Buddha was such an inept teacher that He couldn't clearly say what He has meant. pt: Again, I'm not saying the Buddha was inept, I'm saying me and you are inept. I.e. we can't understand what he's saying. It's sort of like the Buddha calling us from Mars and saying - "...and that's how life is on Mars" - and me and you, we nod and say "yes, I know" although we have never really been to Mars. So, just lies we tell ourselves. > >pt: I think you have completely misused the toddler analogy in this >case - imo, it would be more like this: > > > > If a toddler is trying to learn to walk (trying to do anapanasati, >satipatthana, etc) but is instead poking himself in the eye with a >spoon believing that that is what walking is all about (mistaking > >=========================================== > > A: Sounds like too much doubt. We have the suttas and VsM. While errors are almost certain, for many the errors will not be fatal. If there was no Dhamma books, then we could speak about what you are saying. Your analogue can be used even for studying the books. pt: Alex, please let's leave the argument of mediation vs. books aside, this discussion has nothing to do with that. I'm simply asking - do you know experientially what mindfulness is? If you do, describe it. I'll do the same in the thread that RobE and Scott started. Let's discuss mental states rather than theorise about what should/n't be done. Best wishes pt #118478 From: "philip" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 1:22 am Subject: Re: meditation (anapanasati) philofillet Hi Pt, Alex and all > > pt: I'm not saying the suttas and the teachers are incompetent, I'm saying you and me are incompetent. Ph: Incompetent, deluded, hungry for fast results and solutions. Often we hear "the people in the Buddha's day were wise etc" but I think it is more about how unwise we are, I wonder if it is possible to say how, in what way we are incimpetent? People who are, quite understandably, eager to enjoy. their "access to insight" in the suttas (that name says ii all)won't be easily persuaded that we are severely handicapped...but then again, what proof do we have in saying that we are uncapable of really ubderstanding suttas as they are translated and laid out before our hungry eyes? (I don't know if you would go thatt far, pt, don't want to put words in your mouth.) Metta, Phil #118479 From: "philip" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 2:10 am Subject: Re: The black curtain. 1. philofillet Hi Nina Thank you for transcribing this amazing talk which is easy to find for those who haven't heard it, it comes right at the very beginning of India 2004. Jill's question leads to 13 minutes (seeing that you had posted it, I listened again for the umpteenth time) of talking from A Sujin. It's so good that as I was listening tonight I thought I could put away all my books and just listen to this again and again...with detachment of course! ( haha) I also like Jon's question that follows about understanding for the purpose of detachment from dhammas as compared to understanding the characteristics of dhammas, AS says detachment comes from understandng the characterisics. Btw, in another talk I heard "detachment arises" and I realized detachment is a dhamma, I had been thinking of it as a kind of concept, i guess. But as Sarah said it recently it develops. Is detachment alobha? does it accompany all kusala or just those with panna? Metta, Phil #118480 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 2:16 am Subject: Re: meditation (anapanasati) truth_aerator Hello Pt, all, >A: I do not believe that it is wise approach to say that one >should >not follow what is said because one would make some mistake. > > pt: I'm not saying that we should not follow what is said, I'm >saying we don't understand (experientially) what is said (as in we >take lobha for sati) and are therefore following something else in >practical terms, even though we believe we are following the suttas, >or abhidhamma or whatever. >========== It is one thing to read about how to swim, and it is different to actually learn to swim (starting from a shallow pool and then gradually working to swimming in a lake under harder conditions). > pt: I'm not saying the suttas and the teachers are incompetent, I'm >saying you and me are incompetent. >================= And unless one does something to increase the skill, one will forever remain incompetent. >pt: Do what? Do you know what mindfulness is? Experientially? >============================================ Only one way to know how the water feels like. Books can only point the way. You will never learn what dhamma XYZ is just by reading. You can't satiate your hunger by merely reading the menu. The real world can never be described in a book, no book can cover all things that can occur. Just because one has good memory and can recite 100 pages about one dhamma, practically can mean almost nothing and one is no better than a parrot in this regard. Between a scholar and practitioner, in general, the practitioner knows better. Book knowledge is very limited. Example, if one tried to build a company following a book, one would fail: What book take into the picture things like: theft, longer or harder than expected to hire employees, employees getting sick not working or going on maternity leaves, upgrading personnel, employees not getting along with you or themselves, terrorist attacks, stock market crashes, etc etc? You won't find real life in dead books. Maybe this is one of the reasons the Buddha didn't give "enough" details, the issue that seems to have been raised up only ~2500 years after the Buddha. No book can accurately and fully describe someone's experience, so Buddha didn't waste his time trying the impossible. Rather, He gave reasonably clear instructions that one follows and improvises along the way whenever various situations arise. Unfortunately there won't be anyone who will deliver the perfect book containing ALL minor details specifically aimed for you. I've tried finding one, and now realize that it is futile. Of course one won't be perfect in all the minor details, this is why one doesn't become an Arhat in 12 hours like one could under Buddha's personal guidance. As long as one follows the path that leads to nibbida, viraga, nirodha, Nibbana - one is on the right path. With best wishes, Alex #118481 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 2:23 am Subject: Re: meditation (anapanasati) truth_aerator Hi Phil, Pt, all, >Ph: Incompetent, deluded, hungry for fast results and solutions. >Often we hear "the people in the Buddha's day were wise etc" but I >think it is more about how unwise we are, >============================= So if we are so unwise and incompetent, maybe we shouldn't add into the suttas and commentaries (such as VsM) something that isn't there such as "no practice". Maybe we, the incompetent, shouldn't add NEW teachings such as "if you practice you will develop Self Views" . If the sutta/VsM says "Do this", I really believe that it means that one should "do this". And if someone is incompetent, one shouldn't insist that "do this" really means "don't do this". I think it is really inappropriate to imply that Buddha was incompetent teacher whose teaching needs to be turned 180 degrees to be correct, and all the teachers from His day toward today are incompetent in teaching, but only one lay teacher has figured it all out. With best wishes, Alex #118482 From: "philip" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 2:44 am Subject: Re: meditation (anapanasati) philofillet Hi Alex > So if we are so unwise and incompetent, maybe we shouldn't add into the suttas and commentaries (such as VsM) something that isn't there such as "no practice". Maybe we, the incompetent, shouldn't add NEW teachings such as "if you practice you will develop Self Views" . Ph: If you practice you will develop self views, yes, certainly true of you, Alex, as indicated by your use of swimming and weight lifting analogies for the develipment of panna, that reveals that you don't understand bhavana at all yet, sorry. You have a notion of lobha and moha magically being transformed into panna in the same way scrawny arms are turned into muscular ones. You had better drop the sports gym thinking provided by TB, it's leading you into a aea of delusion that you may never be able to emerge from. In the meantime, don't expect to be taken seriously. Sorry. Metta, Phil #118483 From: "philip" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 2:50 am Subject: Re: meditation (anapanasati) philofillet Hi again Alex I wrote: You had better drop the sports gym thinking provided by TB. I know it was him because I heard that talk too, about the gym and the weights, you don't wait until you have a muscular body to join a gym etc. It's a terrible, terrible analogy. Metta, Phil #118484 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 3:33 am Subject: Re: meditation (anapanasati) truth_aerator Hi Phil, all, >I wrote: You had better drop the sports gym thinking provided by TB. >================================= In any case, I believe that this analogue is much closer to what the Buddha meant than the new age teaching of that Buddha meant 180 opposite of what He has said. The Buddha used Archer's training example: ""Suppose that an archer or archer's apprentice were to practice on a straw man or mound of clay, so that after a while he would become able to shoot long distances, to fire accurate shots in rapid succession, and to pierce great masses. In the same way, there is the case where a monk... enters & remains in the first jhana: ...He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications, & consciousness, as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a disintegration, an emptiness, not-self. He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.036.than.html Again, it talks about developing a skill, exactly like an Archer would. IMHO, meditation is a skill and like any skill is developed ONLY with practice. Sure it "just happens when the conditions are right", but if one never puts in the causes, it will simply never happen because there were no conditions created. The Gym training analogue is right on spot, it just uses a modern day example that is relevant to more people. With best wishes, Alex #118485 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 3:42 am Subject: Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view moellerdieter Hi Howard, you wrote: (D: the 5 khandas are a compound, which in its function is called a being, person , individual. So we may say, a person or chariot , using the wellknown simile , represents the common whole of the 5 elements. This common whole does not appear in its parts , it cannot be found . But of course its function exists . Hence one can state: the whole /the compound is neither identical with nor different from the parts /aggregates , can't one? ------------------------------------------- HCW: It is not the collection (that you call "the common whole") that acts. What is the case is that its elements are interrelated, and the namas among them function in concert. D: I vaguely remember we have talked before about the whole and its parts , in particular: (the (common) whole is more than the sum of its parts.. Something seems to disturb you using here khandas or chariot to make a point. Newer Philosophy used the term holism ( Wiki : (from ὂλος holos, a Greek word meaning all, whole, entire, total) is the idea that all the properties of a given system (physical, biological, chemical, social, economic, mental, linguistic, etc.) cannot be determined or explained by its component parts alone. Instead, the system as a whole determines in an important way how the parts behave.) Yes, all its elements are interrelated (nama and rupa) and function respectively presenting a system in concert. So instead of speaking of the common whole, one may say too: by its interrelated action the parts take effect as a given system . The Buddha stated that by the get-together of all 5 parts ( dito in the Khanda grouping of 3 or even only 2 , when vinnana is understood to be nama) of a living being do we speak. The interesting point is, that in no single part it is possible to find the property of the system , or function. Hence refering to the living being , the person or anticipated self , no substance can be found. I think it is a useful analogy. H: (D: the discussion of person, self has been and still is a walk on eggshells ( leaving aside eternity and annihilation belief, the latter seemingly far common than the former). The term Puggala is probably mainly used to describe types of person (e.g. Puggala Pannatti) , what other Pali word do you prefer? --------------------------------------------- Even 'person' is better, I think, merely because of the common association of 'puggala' with the Puggalavada school D: I haven't yet read much about this school to develop such sensibility .. but I may.. H: (D: Frankly speaking I have doubts that 'person ' may be called 'simply a conventional designation ' , a concept (see above). --------------------------------------------- It is a fuzzy collection of namas and rupas that act in concert. The speaking of it as an individual thing, however, is at best a useful manner of speech, and at worse an expression of cognitive error. D: this concert is indeed individual , the music played is kamma. Speaking of khandas or nama and rupas is a concept , the music is not ...but its assignment. H :(D:The person's identity (attachment) in lifetime(s) is conditioned by previous and future kamma and this is individual reality. --------------------------------------- No person has an identity (other than in terms of an imposed name and as a matter of convention), for the components of a person undergo constant change (and replacement), always becoming (or giving way to an)other, and identity, meaning "same and same," requires that there be no alteration. ------------------------------------ D: I don't follow you and repeat : the individual factor is determined by (previous and future) kamma. Although a process of constant change , there is without doubt a history of previous kamma (the book of life/lives) which is individual , different from others . H: (D: That in a highest / supramundane sense merely a stream of arising and ceasing mental and bodily phenomena exists , does not change this reality , does it? -------------------------------------- I don't follow you here. That IS the reality of the situation. D: it is reality only for those who instead of the 6senses situation focus on its background (the arising and ceasing ) . What I meant is, what does it help , when you miss the bus .. ? with Metta Dieter #118486 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 3:54 am Subject: lobha and anapanasati truth_aerator Hi Phil, Robert E, all, >that reveals that you don't understand bhavana at all yet, sorry. >======================================== And you, of course, know better. You also know better than the Buddha, Buddhaghosa, the teachers from Buddha's day onward including such great Abhidhamma Scholars as Mahasi who participated in 6th Buddhist Council. You also know better than Pa Auk Sayadaw, a good Abhidhamma scholar Monk who does teach Anapanasati. >You have a notion of lobha and moha magically being transformed into >panna in the same way scrawny arms are turned into muscular ones. >=============================== And lobha has NOTHING, NOTHING to do with following the Buddha's teaching such as Anapanasati. Lobha, in fact, is more likely when one doesn't meditate. Anapanasati is not included in Clinging (upadana) but attachment to sensual pleasures is. Some talk about living the daily life, but don't ever do anapanasati "because it promotes clinging" while forget that daily life is much more conducive to clinging. Lobha is clinging toward sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, dhammas. When one does deep meditation one tries not to have any lobha toward 5 sense objects or various thoughts. "There are these six classes of craving: craving for forms, craving for sounds, craving for odors, craving for flavors, craving for tangibles, craving for mind-objects." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.009.ntbb.html In daily life all six cravings can be present. Not so in deep meditation. Furthermore, while craving in daily life typically leads to more craving, not so with Anapanasati (even *if* it by some fluke has some craving). Even *if* bhavana includes some 1/6th craving (nowhere stated in the suttas or VsM to my knowledge), if it still leads to cessation of all craving & suffering, it is worthwhile. To avoid doing something that in short term could be craving that would remove all craving in long term is like giving away gold to buy crap. With best wishes, Alex #118487 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 4:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 10/9/2011 12:42:29 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard, you wrote: (D: the 5 khandas are a compound, which in its function is called a being, person , individual. So we may say, a person or chariot , using the wellknown simile , represents the common whole of the 5 elements. This common whole does not appear in its parts , it cannot be found . But of course its function exists . Hence one can state: the whole /the compound is neither identical with nor different from the parts /aggregates , can't one? ------------------------------------------- HCW: It is not the collection (that you call "the common whole") that acts. What is the case is that its elements are interrelated, and the namas among them function in concert. D: I vaguely remember we have talked before about the whole and its parts , in particular: (the (common) whole is more than the sum of its parts.. ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: Functionally, yes. As I said, the namas act in concert - and in doing so, the effect is different from the case of their acting alone. (Analogy: There's a heavy table that needs to be carried. Case 1, person A tries to carry it and fails. Case 2, person B tries to carry it and fails. Case 3, acting in concert, persons A and B try to carry it and succeed.) ------------------------------------------------- Something seems to disturb you using here khandas or chariot to make a point. ----------------------------------------------- HCW: I don't think so. (???) --------------------------------------------- Newer Philosophy used the term holism ( Wiki : (from ὂλος holos, a Greek word meaning all, whole, entire, total) is the idea that all the properties of a given system (physical, biological, chemical, social, economic, mental, linguistic, etc.) cannot be determined or explained by its component parts alone. Instead, the system as a whole determines in an important way how the parts behave.) ------------------------------------------------ HCW: I don't disagree with that. This is the nature of "acting in concert". However, it doesn't turn a collection of phenomena into a single phenomenon of its own. ----------------------------------------------- Yes, all its elements are interrelated (nama and rupa) and function respectively presenting a system in concert. So instead of speaking of the common whole, one may say too: by its interrelated action the parts take effect as a given system . ---------------------------------------------- HCW: I have no problem with calling a collection of phenomena that are interrelated and act in concert "a system". (In the past I've called it "an aggregation".) It is, nonetheless, not a single phenomenon; it is still a collection. To view it as an individual is a useful convention, especially of speech, but only a convention, not a reality. -------------------------------------------- The Buddha stated that by the get-together of all 5 parts ( dito in the Khanda grouping of 3 or even only 2 , when vinnana is understood to be nama) of a living being do we speak. The interesting point is, that in no single part it is possible to find the property of the system , or function. Hence refering to the living being , the person or anticipated self , no substance can be found. I think it is a useful analogy. --------------------------------------------- HCW: So long as we don't reify the collection, I have no problem with this. ------------------------------------------ H: (D: the discussion of person, self has been and still is a walk on eggshells ( leaving aside eternity and annihilation belief, the latter seemingly far common than the former). The term Puggala is probably mainly used to describe types of person (e.g. Puggala Pannatti) , what other Pali word do you prefer? --------------------------------------------- Even 'person' is better, I think, merely because of the common association of 'puggala' with the Puggalavada school D: I haven't yet read much about this school to develop such sensibility .. but I may.. ----------------------------------------- HCW: I think it is an odd school that wants to be both "attic" and "anattic"! (Maybe "lunattic"! LOL!) -------------------------------------- H: (D: Frankly speaking I have doubts that 'person ' may be called 'simply a conventional designation ' , a concept (see above). --------------------------------------------- It is a fuzzy collection of namas and rupas that act in concert. The speaking of it as an individual thing, however, is at best a useful manner of speech, and at worse an expression of cognitive error. D: this concert is indeed individual , the music played is kamma. ----------------------------------------- HCW: Well. now you're being poetic! ;-) Of course, by "in concert" I only mean "together and interactively". ---------------------------------------- Speaking of khandas or nama and rupas is a concept , the music is not ...but its assignment. -------------------------------------- HCW: Any kamma is simply volition, a mental phenomenon. --------------------------------------- H :(D:The person's identity (attachment) in lifetime(s) is conditioned by previous and future kamma and this is individual reality. --------------------------------------- No person has an identity (other than in terms of an imposed name and as a matter of convention), for the components of a person undergo constant change (and replacement), always becoming (or giving way to an)other, and identity, meaning "same and same," requires that there be no alteration. ------------------------------------ D: I don't follow you and repeat : the individual factor is determined by (previous and future) kamma. Although a process of constant change , there is without doubt a history of previous kamma (the book of life/lives) which is individual , different from others . --------------------------------------------- HCW: Any time-spanning whole is apprehended only by, and is in fact constructed by, the conceptual faculty. It is, in fact, only thought of. Beings are neither namas not rupas, but are fuzzy, time-spanning collections of interacting phenomena. Their interaction and acting in concert are what make us think that the collection 0f them is itself a "thing". --------------------------------------------- H: (D: That in a highest / supramundane sense merely a stream of arising and ceasing mental and bodily phenomena exists , does not change this reality , does it? -------------------------------------- I don't follow you here. That IS the reality of the situation. D: it is reality only for those who instead of the 6senses situation focus on its background (the arising and ceasing ) . What I meant is, what does it help , when you miss the bus .. ? ---------------------------------------------- HCW: I'm being obtuse here, Dieter, and I apologize for that. I don't follow what you are saying. ---------------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #118488 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 4:34 am Subject: Re: lobha and anapanasati truth_aerator Hello Phil, all, Anapanasati is nowhere stated to promote Self Views or clinging. Daily life as it is usual lived is part of upadana, anapanasati and such are NOT. Desire for liberation is NOT the same as craving or clinging. Even *if* it did contain certain kind of "attachment", it is still not included in upadana part of Dependent Origination . We have two choices: a) Don't do anything to stop desiring six sense objects. This just leads to never ending cycle of more desire. Sure one may avoid doing kusala (under the excuse of "its lobha!"), but it leads to more akusala later on. or b) Do something to stop desire for 6 sense objects. This required "Determination" for Liberation (not tanha, or upadana) which leads to cessation of all tanha, upadana, avijja and so forth. Even if it there was some minor mistakes involved, it leads to more kusala and liberation. So it is worthwhile. If Buddha would say that anapanasati (or any other method He taught) = craving or clinging, then why would He teach it? Was He such a teacher that taught wrong things on purpose and said exactly the opposite of what He meant? Was the Buddha so inept and incapable teacher who couldn't describe Anapanasati well enough to be understood and developed properly by us? Are all the Abhidhamma masters who teach Anapanasati or other kinds of proper practice wrong, and only you and a certain teacher got it right? With metta, Alex #118489 From: "philip" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 5:18 am Subject: Re: lobha and anapanasati philofillet Hi Alex > a) Don't do anything to stop desiring six sense objects. This just leads to never ending cycle of more desire. Sure one may avoid doing kusala (under the excuse of "its lobha!"), but it leads to more akusala later on. > Ph: Yes, of course, we are advocating avoiding kusala! Fantastic that all the time people have spent writing to you has led you to this very intelligent conclusion. Well done. > > b) Do something to stop desire for 6 sense objects. This required "Determination" for Liberation (not tanha, or upadana) which leads to cessation of all tanha, upadana, avijja and so forth. Even if it there was some minor mistakes involved, it leads to more kusala and liberation. So it is worthwhile. Ph: Wonderful, for you it is kusala adhimokha and kusala chanda, super! Oh wait, you don't anapanasati, you are just the spokesman. Carry on, catch you again in a few hundred posts. Metta, Phil #118490 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 5:58 am Subject: Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view moellerdieter Hi Phil, you wrote: 'Thank you for your further comments, many of which I would have agreed with a few months ago and, knowing the vagaries of my view swings, may again! But for now I will back away from this topic.' that's ok , Phil .. a Kalama minded direction. See you later , alligator .. ;-) with Metta Dieter #118491 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 8:15 am Subject: The Danger of Anger: Hot Hostile Hate! bhikkhu5 Friends: Hatred Hurts all Beings, yet mostly the Hater! The Blessed Buddha once said: Whoever in revenge repays Hate with Hate, Is even worse, than he who Hated first! Whoever to the Hater returns no Hate, Is winning a difficult mental Battle! Since he is saving both himself and the other being too from much pain. The Hero, when seeing others in anger, Remains calm & clearly comprehending... SN 7:2 Danger of Anger: The Hater does not understand what is good, Nor does he wish to see any of the real truth, For cruel gloom and darkness reign supreme, When fiery Hatred overpowers a man. Even when the Hater puts the brake, And with difficulty stop his outburst, He still suffers from frantic burning within. Agitated he looks, inflamed & smoking hot! Later again all-consuming Hate may burst And set ablaze all beings in fear & alarm. The Hater knows no shame, no moral fear, The Hater speaks hurting and impolite, And overpowered by his Hate, He nowhere any shelter or calm ever finds. Oneself is everyone's best friend, Everyone loves himself most, Yet in rage one kills oneself by Hate, Made blind by puffed pride & self-conceit! Who others deprive of life and joy, Will to his own good life put an end, Ruining his own future health and life, With Hatred poisoned and overpowered, Is all unaware of what atrocity he commits. Thus, of this crime of Hate there may result A deadly future real, yet now quite hidden! Therefore: Break all this Danger of Anger, hidden within mind, to pieces by self-control, With insight, with understanding, with effort! Any intelligent clearly seeing sound man will naturally try to subdue his own evil tendency, So should you practise all advantageous good, So that no resentment, or bitter anger may arise. Redeemed from Hate, recovered from Anger, Released from Despair, Rid of Greed, from Envy Freed, The Tamed Ones having eliminated and discarded Hate, Reach Nibbana saliently smiling and silenced, All freed from this vicious wrong.,, AN 7:60 <....> Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * <....> #118492 From: "philip" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 11:11 am Subject: The 7 and the 5 and the 12 philofillet Hi all Stop for a moment. Can you guess what the 7 and the 5 and the 12 are? These days I hear a lot that there are only 7 rupa that can impinge on the 5 rupa that are the sense doors. I sense that it's a rich area for contemplation and could really help to understand rupa. There are 7 because tangible object is made up of 3 primary rupa (temperature, hardness, motion/pressure) but not liquidity/cohesion which can only be experienced through themind door. These are the 12 sabhava rupa. There are 16 other rupa that are asabhava (?) because they don't have their own recognizable (?) characteristics. Good to know about them but if they are asabhava it means they will never be object of awareness. Have I got that right? Metta Phil #118493 From: "philip" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 11:20 am Subject: Re: meditation (anapanasati) philofillet > Hi Alex, > > > A: I do not believe that it is wise approach to say that one should not follow what is said because one would make some mistake. > > pt: I'm not saying the suttas and the teachers are incompetent, I'm saying you and me are incompetent. E.g. suttas and the rest take it for granted that we all know what sati is (experientially) and go from there. Do you actually know what sati is experientially? I don't. Ph: My apologies for having jumped in at this (very good) point. Carry on fellows. Metta, Phil #118494 From: "philip" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 11:32 am Subject: Re: A lovely dream about Kaeng Krajan! philofillet Hi Sarah and all I missed this when you posted it on your return to Hk from the KK trip in March. > At one point Azita asked K.Sujin whether she doesn't tire of answering the same questions and sharing the Dhamma, but she always replies that she usually doesn't think about herself or how she feels (hard for some of us to imagine!). Just passing dhammas. She also agreed that she sees her main task as helping us all to see how much ignorance has been accumulated and how little understanding there really is! Some people may find this depressing or discouraging, but the pa~n~naa which appreciates the truth and the sacca paramii (perfection of truthfulness) is never depressing. Ph: As Nina said once, hard to feel encouraged when we hear about aeons and aeons, but understanding is beginning to develop. > Stories, dreams, occasional snippets of understanding.... Ph: Only for rhose who are sensitive to Dhamma are there even those snippets, so there is hope! > May we all learn to see more and more ignorance in a day through the understanding of the realities appearing now, such as visible object, hardness, temperature, feeling and so on. Ph: The seven on the five.... Metta, Phil #118495 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:09 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > Me: Dhammasa.nganii: > > "[16] What on that occasion is the faculty of insight (pa~n~nindriya.m)? The insight which there is on that occasion is understanding, search, research, searching the Doctrine, discernment, differentiation, erudition, proficiency, subtlety, criticism, reflection, analysis, breadth, sagacity, a 'guide,' intuition, a 'goad'..." > > R: "...the Dhammasangani's definition is more a list of every wise and probing quality of mind that can be thought of, including those of mindfulness, vitakka and vicara, and more..." > > Scott: Sati has been given; Dhammasa'nga.nii: > > "[7] What on that occasion is application of mind (vitakko)? The discrimination, the application which on that occasion is the disposing, the fixing, the focusing, the superposing of the mind..." > > "[8] What on that occasion is sustained thought (vicaaro)? The process, the sustained procedure (vicaaro), the progress and access [of the mind] which on that occasion is the [continuous] progress and access [of the mind] which is the [continuous] adjusting and focussing of thought..." Yes, those definitions are clear and specific and match expectation as regards these two cetasikas. However, the other definition, for insight, was a mixed laundry list which included many different qualities and functions - not like these. > Scott: Different mental factors, different characteristics. Not whole ways of thinking over time - that is the influence of the phenomenological bias. I am happy to argue with this, but since you haven't quoted me directly saying anything about "whole ways of thinking over time" I am not sure what the reference is in this case. However, I have no problem with the definitions above. If you read them, you will see that they do refer to processes over time. What do you think "continuous progress and continuous adjusting" refer to? They refer to continued moments of navigation/adjustment over time. So your quote contradicts your own statement, rather than supporting it. In addition, the definition of vicara includes more 'process' and 'time' references. Vicara is defined as "The process, the sustained procedure...," rather than a 'single-moment' cetasika. Pretty cool, huh? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - #118496 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:15 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...but I don't doubt that one can understand different levels of its implications by breaking down the concepts into finer components. I'll leave it at that for tonight." > > Scott: It is wrong to consider paramattha dhammas to simply be the products of an intellectual process involving the 'breaking down' of concepts into 'finer components.' I am not saying that dhammas are nothing but a finer description of concepts. I am saying that by taking a concept and seeing what the realities are that exist and that are designated by the concept, one understands what is signified by that concept, but incorrectly designated. > There are only paramattha dhammas and the rest is conceptual. Conventional language refers in a certain literary style to the underlying, fundamental reality of the paramattha dhammas. I think it's more than that. Instructions allow certain intentions and conventional activities to take place which put conditions into play that allow one to develop non-conceptual understandings. It is not wrong to practice "mindfulness of breathing," because that instruction puts one in contact with the rupas of the breathing, even if one is originally instructed through concept. One may not perceive the rupas and namas directly at first, but one will be closer to attending those sensations and other rupas through concentration and attention, and their reality will gradually become more clear. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #118497 From: "philip" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:18 pm Subject: Panna and the not yet known philofillet Hi Nina and all I was curious about this sentence from SPD, p.379: "When panna realizes that there are namas which are not yet known, it will also study and investigate these and in this way the characteristic of nama can clearly appear as only an element which experiences, only a reality, not a being, person or self. " At first when I read this it felt like a recipe for trying too hard to grasp "namas which are not yet known", but the point is it is panna, not self trying to know. I wonder if this is how "panna works its way", always performing its function slowly but surely at the border of the known and the unknown, but self interferes, trying to speed up tge natural development of understanding, dismissing panna again and again, unknowingly... Metta, Phil #118498 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:28 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...What do you think 'continuous progress and continuous adjusting' refer to? They refer to continued moments of navigation/adjustment over time. So your quote contradicts your own statement, rather than supporting it. In addition, the definition of vicara includes more 'process' and 'time' references. Vicara is defined as 'The process, the sustained procedure...,' rather than a 'single-moment' cetasika..." Scott: These descriptions of function refer only to the moment, that is the meaning of 'on that occasion' as I have already mentioned. These quotes appear in the section of Dhammasa'nga.nii that describes the varioius mental factors that can arise with kusala citta. The descriptions, being found in the Abhidhamma, are about a moment of consciousness. Vitakka's function is to direct the citta to an object; vicaara's is to keep it there for the duration of the citta's arising. Basic Abhidhamma. Again, Rob, it's conventional language. I'm afraid your pet theories are not supported by the Abhidhamma. I think it's even a stretch for you to suggest that the Abhidhamma doesn't refer to moments. Where do you think we get all of this stuff you argue against from anyway? If you've not read these parts of the Abhidhamma before, I'd suggest a lot more study before just leaping to the sort amazing conclusions as in the above. Scott. #118499 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 1:11 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...What do you think 'continuous progress and continuous adjusting' refer to? They refer to continued moments of navigation/adjustment over time. So your quote contradicts your own statement, rather than supporting it. In addition, the definition of vicara includes more 'process' and 'time' references. Vicara is defined as 'The process, the sustained procedure...,' rather than a 'single-moment' cetasika..." > > Scott: These descriptions of function refer only to the moment, that is the meaning of 'on that occasion' as I have already mentioned. These quotes appear in the section of Dhammasa'nga.nii that describes the varioius mental factors that can arise with kusala citta. The descriptions, being found in the Abhidhamma, are about a moment of consciousness. > > Vitakka's function is to direct the citta to an object; vicaara's is to keep it there for the duration of the citta's arising. Basic Abhidhamma. > > Again, Rob, it's conventional language. I'm afraid your pet theories are not supported by the Abhidhamma. I think it's even a stretch for you to suggest that the Abhidhamma doesn't refer to moments. Where do you think we get all of this stuff you argue against from anyway? If you've not read these parts of the Abhidhamma before, I'd suggest a lot more study before just leaping to the sort amazing conclusions as in the above. What is amazing to me is that you appear not to be able to read and take in what is actually on the page. When someone reads what is there and tells you about it, you accuse them of "leaping to amazing conclusions." My conclusions are about as amazing as if I saw a glass of milk and accused it of being "white." You who are so wise in Abhidhamma yet cannot read it without adding your own dogmatic view and skewing it to meet the shape of your desires. So you honestly believe that continuous progress and continuous adjusting' all take place within a single moment of citta? Please explain to me how such continuous journeys can take place within a single moment, a single citta? The explanation should be as "amazing" as my weirdly literal interpretations, which the average person calls "reading." I wait to be "amazed" by your explanation, although my guess is that you will choose not to explain it at all, but just accuse me of "not understanding anything." I think the problem really is that I do understand and that I actually read what is written, which you seem continuously incapble of. Now you cannot even read the Abhidhamma! It was bad enough when you couldn't read a sutta, or stand to discuss what it actually says. Here's my "pet theory" again, which is based on what your quote actually says: Vicara carries on the understanding of how to direct the attention or inquiry into the object from one citta to the next, and so when the next citta arises, it arises with vicara which gives it continuity in its inquiry into the dhamma, in a similar way to which sanna is able to take the understanding of a past moment and recall it in a present moment. These are operations that take place repeatedly in single moments, but their "projects" encompass more than one moment, and allow arising cittas to continue on with the process that they have begun in a preceding citta. That makes a lot more sense of the clear language of the passage than your "Basic Abhidhamma" which makes nonsense out of it. Single cittas exist and arise one at a time, but cetasikas are not restricted to the information of the current arising citta, as if that citta were a blank slate. They access whatever was handed over from the preceding citta and make use of it according to that cetasika's function in the moment when they arise. Vittakha hits and investigates and probes the nature of the object in a single moment; vicara *sustains* the investigation from one moment to the next. If Vittakha were to arise in ten cittas in a row, it would strike or probe or shake the object each time, a single action each time. If the citta arises with vicara it will 'return to the scene of the crime' of the last citta and continue the investigation where that one left off, so that the investigation is sustained and more consistent knowledge of the object is gained. Still all single moments, but functions that continue over more than one moment over time. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #118500 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 2:52 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., Um. Omigod. Here are some of my personal favourites of your new, hasty Abhidhamma re-write: 1. "Vicara carries on the understanding of how to direct the attention or inquiry into the object from one citta to the next, and so when the next citta arises, it arises with vicara which gives it continuity in its inquiry into the dhamma, in a similar way to which sanna is able to take the understanding of a past moment and recall it in a present moment." 2. "Single cittas exist and arise one at a time, but cetasikas are not restricted to the information of the current arising citta, as if that citta were a blank slate. They access whatever was handed over from the preceding citta and make use of it according to that cetasika's function in the moment when they arise." 3. "Vittakha hits and investigates and probes the nature of the object in a single moment; vicara *sustains* the investigation from one moment to the next." 4. "If Vittakha were to arise in ten cittas in a row, it would strike or probe or shake the object each time, a single action each time. If the citta arises with vicara it will 'return to the scene of the crime' of the last citta and continue the investigation where that one left off, so that the investigation is sustained and more consistent knowledge of the object is gained..." Scott: Nothing to say really. As a commentator of the suttas you're fine since there is so much room for interpretation. With a precise and clear system like the Abhidhamma, the above is, in comparison, absolutely unbelievable. You made all of that up. This is wrong in so many ways. Ask Nina to tell you. Study Abhidhamma first before launching into this again. I'll go back to getting you back on track to discussing your 'practice.' Scott. #118501 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 3:12 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., Back to your 'practice' (never do that thing with the Abhidhamma stuff again, dude): R: "...Instructions allow certain intentions and conventional activities to take place which put conditions into play that allow one to develop non-conceptual understandings." Scott: Are the descriptions in the suttas supposed to be instructions? Is it just me, or are these a little scant? Please explain the relationship between your term 'intentions' and the mental factor known as cetanaa, which arises with each moment of consciousness. In particular, please explain how these 'intentions' to which you refer - just thinking about doing something as far as I can tell and in the absence of your explanation - actually relate to the kusala dhammas they are supposed to cause to arise. Did you know, by the way, that 'conditions' *are* dhammas? What are 'non-conceptual understandings' Do you mean really deep and mystical thoughts about stuff? R: "It is not wrong to practice 'mindfulness of breathing,' because that instruction puts one in contact with the rupas of the breathing, even if one is originally instructed through concept. One may not perceive the rupas and namas directly at first, but one will be closer to attending those sensations and other rupas through concentration and attention, and their reality will gradually become more clear. Scott: Okay. What exactly do you do? What exactly is a 'rupa of breathing'? How do you know when you are 'in contact' with one? What is the connection between perceiving rupas of breathing and 'non-conceptual understandings'? What steps do you go through? Scott. #118502 From: "philip" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 4:44 pm Subject: Seeng enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. (Lukas) philofillet Hi Lukas How are you doing the days? I like this passage from Cetasikas (p.138): "Clinging is dangerous, it leads to one's destruction. Are we at this moment taken in by one of the 'five sensual elements'? Then we are in fact 'trapped'. Atthe moment of lobha we enjoy the object of clinging and we do not see that lobha makes us enslaved, we do not see the danger of lobha. Therefore it is said that the proximate cause of lobha is seeing enjoyment in things that lead to bondage." So there are ignorant cittas that blind us to enslavement and motivate us to do things that are harmful. Happily, there are also wise cittas that see the ignorant ones, that see the enslavement. I know you have lots of those wise cittas, they are what motivates you to post here about your addictions, your doubts about Dhamma etc. Those wise cittas see the kilesas and remember that the support of wise Dhammma friends (actually just more wise cittas) is a support for eradicating kilesas. Every time you post expressing your doubts and disappointments, I am encouraged because that actually means there are monents of wise cittas seeing the doubts and disappointments and probably remembering tgem to be just dhammas rolling on, not self, not Lukas. If you don't post, no way to know. How are you doing? And your friend in prison? Metta, Phil Metta, Phil #118503 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 5:42 pm Subject: Re: is cakkhuppasada aware of hardness? sarahprocter... Hi Connie (& Alex), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > Thanks for the rupa review, Sarah. > No matter how many times i forget the words i've read, it's always good to remember there's even less real understanding. .... S: Yes, it's never about the lists, the terms or the labels....but always about the understanding of what appears now... Alex, I've only just noticed the subject heading - was this one of yours? What does it mean???? Metta Sarah ===== #118504 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 5:55 pm Subject: Re: Sati in Theravada sarahprocter... Hi Howard & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > What is said about sati in Theravada? In part, there are the following: .... S: Thx for the useful collection of quotes. I always like the following: ________________ ______________________ > Sati {Dhs $14} - .......As the young treasurer of the king, in charge of the tenfold > treasure, both early and late causes the king to take note of and remember the > royal possession, so mindfulness takes note of, remembers a moral act. > Hence the Elder said: 'As, your majesty, the king's confidential adviser early > and late makes the universal monarch remember: so many, lord, are your > elephants, so many horses, so many chariots, so much infantry, so much > bullion, so much gold, so much property; let you majesty remember it - even so, > your majesty, mindfulness does not allow the floating away of moral states, > such as the four applications of mindfulness, the four supreme efforts, the > four bases of supernatural potency, the five controlling faculties, the > five powers, the seven factors of wisdom, the Ariyan eightfold path, calm, > insight, knowledge, emancipation, the transcendent states: - thus, your > majesty, mindfulness has non-floating away as its characteristic.'^2 And as that > jewel, the confidential adviser of the universal monarch, knowing what is > disadvantageous and what is advantageous, removes the disadvantageous and > promotes the advantageous, so mindfulness, searching well the courses of > advantageous and disadvantageous states: - 'these are disadvantageous states, > misconduct in body,' etc., removes the disadvantageous states, and [122] > acquires the advantageous ones: - 'these are advantageous states, good conduct > as regards body,' etc. Hence the Elder said: 'As, your majesty, that > king's jewel, the confidential adviser, knows what is advantageous and what is > disadvantageous to the king: - "these are advantageous to the king, those > disadvantageous; these are serviceable, those not serviceable" - and then > removes the disadvantageous and acquires the advantageous, even so, your > majesty, mindfulness as it arises searches well the courses of states, > advantageous and disadvantageous: - "these states are advantageous, those > disadvantageous; these states are serviceable, those not serviceable" - and then > removes the disadvantageous and acquires the advantageous. Thus, your majesty, > mindfulness has acquirement as its characteristic.' {Mil i 59} ...... > (From the Atthasalini - Commentary to the Dhammasangani) <....> Metta Sarah ==== #118505 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:03 pm Subject: Re: Mindfulness of Death. Life is a fatal disease that always ends in death. sarahprocter... Hi Azita, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "azita" wrote: >S:....Understanding more about dhammas now, there will be less and less concern about or fear about the conventional death. > > > azita: and mayb less and less concern/fear about conventional birth. ..... S: and gradually less fear about any "conventional situations" as there's more awareness, more understanding of present dhammas, the "All". ... I write this as I have some worries about a pregnant daughter and her child, woke suddenly this morning with some anxiety. > reading this post was a condition for me to contemplate my concerns re the 'conventional story' of my daughter's situation. .... S: Just the present thinking, the present anxiety, and then gone. And soon, thinking about another story, more attachment, more anxiety, on and on. And now I'm wondering which daughter? Wishing her and the baby well.... .... > There is cuti citta followed immediately by patisandhi citta, somewhere, some plane. I thought of this unborn child and I thought about its 'aloneness' in a new realm, in a new body.......again and again we are born and we die...... > we are all worthy of compassion, no matter who or what we are. .... S: Yes, alone with seeing, alone with hearing, more dukkha, more treadmilling in samsara. A couple of days ago we received a pic of Jon's nephew's new first born baby. What can one say but "a lovely picture", "a sweet baby"..... Will there be conditions later on to share the Dhamma with that baby? Who knows? Keep sharing! Metta Sarah ===== #118506 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:16 pm Subject: Re: Lost thread sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > My plan is to write a note to someone (a Buddhist) who has suffered a severe stroke, but I am struggling with it. .... S: I'd like to see a copy of your note if you'd care to share it here. I'm sure it'll be kind and helpful. Sometimes when we're sick, injured or have major 'setbacks' it can be hard to remember 'the big picture' - what's really important in life, i.e understanding any moment at all. Metta Sarah ====== #118507 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sakkaya ditthi vs atta ditthi sarahprocter... Hi Howard (& Phil), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > >>P: This is tricky. What you wrote seems to help to establish that the person > and i-phone are equally concepts, but does it establish personality view > re the phone, not sure... > ----------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Well, I see what you mean. I would say that it establishes atta-view > with regard to the phone but not personality view. I understand personality > view to pertain to so-called persons only. > ---------------------------------------------- S: Yes, as I understand too. Common sense, when we think about it!! Metta Sarah ===== #118508 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:32 pm Subject: Re: part 2! Guide to CR/Patthana sarahprocter... Hi Connie, How about sharing some short extracts, maybe even a series, so that we get a taste first and can possibly discuss together? Metta Sarah --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > dear bookworms, > thanks to budaedu! > “Being a guide to pages 13-141 of CONDITIONAL RELATIONS. Explanations of the First 2 Chapters as given in the Commentary, of the Question Chapter and of the First 6 Chapters of the Faultless Triplet Pa.t.thaana Section. “ > Part 2 of the Guide to Conditional Relations: > http://ftp.budaedu.org/ebooks/pdf/EN324.pdf > > It is a huge file (~140MB) so I can neither upload it to the group’s files nor email it. My best offer* if the above link is troublesome is the same file, slightly renamed: > http://www.wuala.com/nichicon/chewPatthana/EN324-gcr2.pdf/ #118509 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:45 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Money; was Thread: A few issues [Closed] sarahprocter... Hi Chuck, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Maipenrai Dhammasaro wrote: > Sincere warm thanks for your most polite response. > > I respectfully apologize about you defaming monks - it is a very sensitive point for me - a monk's life is not easy... as you know, I have tried... three times... as a temporary monk... as I wrote, almost daily I had to confess a small infraction... [bummers] .... S: I quite understand and thank you too for your kind note too. .. > You wrote you have read the complete Vinaya-pitaka. .... S: (Well, over the years and I forget a lot of what I read....) >I have not been able to read nor purchase the complete Vinaya-pitaka. Would you share with me where I can purchase the complete Vinaya-pitaka? > > The book store across from Wat Bovonieves Vihara keeps telling me they have the third book in print... [bummers] .... S: Connie has already given you the various links for downloads. For hard copies of the texts, I recommend the "Book of Discipline" series she linked to (#118295). As she also mentioned these are available from Pariyatti in the States and PTS in U.K. We bought Connie a set quite recently in appreciation for all her past hard work backing up the archives for this group. If they do have any at the bookshop opposite Wat Bovonives, they are usually cheaper there. Also, I've just remembered, in July, just after we'd bought the set for Connie, someone sent the following message to DSG here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/115916 You might try contacting him to see if the set is still available as that would also save money. Let us know how you get on. Metta Sarah ===== #118510 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:48 pm Subject: Re: part 2! Guide to CR/Patthana sarahprocter... Hi Connie, I thought the downloading hadn't worked and then while I was writing to Chuck it suddenly appeared. So, in brief, this would be part 2 to the Narada Guide to CR, following on from part 1 which was published decades ago now? I really should read subject headings!! Has it been published or is it just available on-line? Metta Sarah --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Connie, > > How about sharing some short extracts, maybe even a series, so that we get a taste first and can possibly discuss together? #118511 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:00 pm Subject: Re: meditation (anapanasati) ptaus1 Hi Alex, > A: It is one thing to read about how to swim, and it is different to actually learn to swim (starting from a shallow pool and then gradually working to swimming in a lake under harder conditions). ... > And unless one does something to increase the skill, one will forever remain incompetent. ... > Only one way to know how the water feels like. > > Books can only point the way. You will never learn what dhamma XYZ is just by reading. You can't satiate your hunger by merely reading the menu. The real world can never be described in a book, no book can cover all things that can occur. > > Just because one has good memory and can recite 100 pages about one dhamma, practically can mean almost nothing and one is no better than a parrot in this regard. Between a scholar and practitioner, in general, the practitioner knows better. > > Book knowledge is very limited. Example... > > Of course one won't be perfect in all the minor details, this is why one doesn't become an Arhat in 12 hours like one could under Buddha's personal guidance. As long as one follows the path that leads to nibbida, viraga, nirodha, Nibbana - one is on the right path. pt: Alex, all I get from the above is that you are very good at thinking and theorising. I'm good at it too, so I don't think we can learn much from each other if we continue in the same vein. What I'm proposing instead is to focus on the actual bits that constitute the actual "practice", as in - the mental states: 1. please describe the actual mental state that you believe from your experience is i) kusala, ii) has sati, and iii) maybe panna, with it. 2. how do these states actually differ from mental states that have no sati, panna, nor are kusala. 3. I don't think it's relevant to the discussion whether the above states occur during what you'd call anapanasati, satipatthana, book study, washing dishes, etc. A mental state is a mental state, so let's just focus on that for now and forget about all the surrounding interpretations. Of course, you don't have to unless you want to, I just think it's the only way to move the discussion into a productive territory - I'll give my descriptions in the RobE and Scott's thread just as soon as I find a bit of time. Best wishes pt #118512 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The 7 and the 5 and the 12 nilovg Dear Phil, Op 10-okt-2011, om 2:11 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > These are the 12 sabhava rupa. There are 16 other rupa that are > asabhava (?) because they don't have their own recognizable (?) > characteristics. Good to know about them but if they are asabhava > it means they will never be object of awareness. -------- N: I learnt from Kh Sujin that we should not say this. Why would the Buddha teach them if they cannot be known? She gave an example of space, even this subtle ruupa can by known by pa~n~naa. The Vis. states that subtle ruupas are difficult to penetrate, but this does not mean impossible. ------ Nina. #118513 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The black curtain. 1. nilovg Dear Phil, Nice to hear your reactions and good you could find it on audio. Op 9-okt-2011, om 17:10 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Btw, in another talk I heard "detachment arises" and I realized > detachment is a dhamma, I had been thinking of it as a kind of > concept, i guess. But as Sarah said it recently it develops. Is > detachment alobha? does it accompany all kusala or just those with > panna? ------ N: Yes, alobha cetasika and it accompanies each sobhana citta. There are different degrees of it and it is conditioned by the accompanying citta and cetasikas by way of conascent-condiiton, sahajata-paccaya. When it accompanies pa~n~naa it is of a higher degree. ----- Nina. #118514 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:08 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) ptaus1 Hi RobE, > RE: I have to say, why make the personal remarks in the first place? Why traffick in derisive statements, which invites similar statements back? Aside from it definitely not being right speech, it raises more dust than light. pt: Yes, well, we all have problems that are bound to show up here in one way or another. As Azita mentioned recently, we're all worthy of compassion. Best wishes pt #118515 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Panna and the not yet known nilovg Dear Phil, well said. Op 10-okt-2011, om 3:18 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > I wonder if this is how "panna works its way", always performing > its function slowly but surely at the border of the known and the > unknown, but self interferes, trying to speed up tge natural > development of understanding, dismissing panna again and again, > unknowingly... ------ N: I discussed with Lodewijk: when we are discouraged about how long the way is, it shows that we think of self who should know the truth. This does not work, as you say. Long ago I asked Kh Sujin: it may be easier to know ruupa, but how can naama be known? She then asnwered that when pa~n~naa knows ruupas there are conditions for pa~n~naa also to investigate naama. ------- Nina. #118516 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:15 pm Subject: Re: Seeng enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. (Lukas) szmicio Dear Phil, > How are you doing the days? L: I lost control. I am very attached to what connie called misery bad company. No way out. Best Lukas #118517 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Seeng enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. (Lukas) nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 10-okt-2011, om 10:15 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > Dear Phil, > > > How are you doing the days? > > L: I lost control. I am very attached to what connie called misery > bad company. No way out. ------ N: The best company is the Dhamma. You should not say that there is no way out. There are accumulations of right understanding and this is never lost. May be at the moment it seems all is lost, but all those akusala cittas have fallen away. They cannot stay. Conditions change so rapidly and there are bound to be conditions for understanding again. When you think that the development of understanding is so difficult, acually, as Kh Sujin says, you are praising the Buddha's wisdom. As a Bodhisatta he had to accumulate all the perfections, with ups and downs. Also the Bodhisatta was overwhelmed at times by akusala, by lust. He was overcome by it when he saw a beautiful queen and committed adultery. But he could never tell a lie, he did not hide the truth to the King (Harita Jataka). He could continue developing understanding, also of akusala. In the end he reached Buddhahood. ------ Nina. #118518 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:25 pm Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > I am just looking for a bit of a logical sequence from conventional to paramatha realities. It seems that dukkha is real for us in conventional living, otherwise we'd never be goaded towards the path. If true disgust and disillusionment with conventional suffering and the conventional dissatisfaction with conventional objects was not experientially real, we would have no motivation whatsoever to enter onto the path. We would just keep seeking satisfaction from that which cannot satisfy, and finding signs of self in that which is non-self. We may not experience dukkha and anatta directly in relation to conventional objects, but we surely do really suffer, and this is what the Buddha seemed to address when making his case. Do we really have to wait until we are able to see paramatha dhammas to understand the first Noble Truth and to have a sense that life is filled with suffering? .... S: If there is no understanding of paramattha dhammas, there will be no understanding of the realities of life as being inherently dukkha or anatta. The dukkha of realities pertains to the impermanence of those realities, so the suffering or dukkha which seems obvious to us is not the sankhara dukkha, the dukkha of ultimate realities, it is the dukkha dukkha, the unpleasant feeling, the obvious misery in life. As I'm sure you know, the Buddha taught 3 kinds of dukkha: 1. dukkha dukkha, referring to unpleasant feeling which is so very apparent 2. Viparinama dukkha, the dukkha of change, referring to the change of pleasant feeling when what we enjoy and crave for falls away 3. Sankhara dukkha, the dukkha inherent in all conditioned dhammas as taught in the 4 NT. Not only is unpleasant feeling or pleasant feeling dukkha, but also wholesome states, even sati and panna, are dukkha. All khandhas are subject to clinging - panca upadana khandha dukkha. ... >R:I don't think so. And I think we can get a sense of anicca and anatta as well when we see that conventional objects fade and fail to satisfy over and over again. That is what drives us towards a spiritual solution and to look into Buddhism in the first place. .... S: This is just thinking as you'll agree. It's not even pariyatti as taught by the Buddha. Our yogi friends who know nothing about the Buddha's teachings might say the same. ... >So I don't see this stark separation between the 'pure illusion' of conventional life and the gradual understanding and then eventual direct discernment of paramatha dhammas. .... S: There is only a beginning of understanding when there is some comprehension that there are only realities, paramattha dhammas at this moment and that the conventional objects are just that - not real. Thinking about how my mac-air will disintegrate does not bring about any lessening of illusion. ... >I see a continuum in which the path is in play as soon as one gets a sense of the truths and where the solution lies, and where the understand gradually gets more clear and direct. I can see that there is no final detachment or letting go until the true reality of dhammas is revealed to citta, but before that there seem to be many stages that are part of the path while we are still attached to conventional objects and ideas. ..... S: Well, one kind of thinking may be a condition for another kind of wiser thinking. Who knows? Accumulations can never be fully fathomed except by a Buddha. In any case, all the thinking in the past - whether wise or unwise - has all gone, so no use dwelling on it. Now there can be wise considering about paramattha dhammas and better still, direct understanding of what appears now. This is more precious. (btw, I appreciate your interest in this regard and your discussions with Scott and others. Also loved the "knitting thread" between you and Ken H:-))) ... > :-) Much appreciated. It is a very propitious situation for me to be able to sort things out with someone with your degree of clarity. Thanks! .... S: Kind of you to say so, but most the time, not much clarity, I assure you!! It's also helpful for me to discuss this points (no matter how often) with friends such as yourself, Alex and others who may have different viewpoints. Someone was surprised when I once mentioned that Jon and I had never had a dhamma discussion lasting more than a minute and that's because we've always been on the same page. DSG would just have blank pages if it were just the two of us - maybe very zen-like, but hardly inspiring!! Metta Sarah ===== #118519 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 8:15 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) sarahprocter... Hi Scott & Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > "...Rob Note: Please note that the com. on the above section acknowledges mindfulness as 'attentiveness,' not memory." > > > > Scott: 'Sa~n~naa' is 'memory.' Sati has a different function. I wonder if the Paa.li is available for this Comy. > > Would be good to know. Don't ask me - je ne parle pas Pali. .... S: If you're still referring to the Satipatthana sutta comy, the Pali for Buddhaghosa's comy to it is available (neatly in velthius) in the files section under "members' files - satipatthana sutta pali) I'm sure Scott can find the place and terms relatively easily, but let me (or Connie) know if you have any difficulty finding the file or the section. . Metta Sarah ===== #118520 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 8:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sati, remembers kusala. Was: Khandhas nilovg Dear Scott, ---------------- > Scott: 'Sa~n~naa' is 'memory.' Sati has a different function. I > wonder if the Paa.li is available for this Comy. -------- N: From my VIsuddhimagga study, Ch XIV, 141: 141. saranti taaya, saya.m vaa sarati sara.namattameva vaa esaati sati. saa apilaapanalakkha.naa, asammosarasaa, aarakkhapaccupa.t.thaanaa, visayaabhimukhabhaavapaccupa.t.thaanaa vaa, thirasa~n~naapada.t.thaanaa, kaayaadisatipa.t.thaanapada.t.thaanaa vaa. aaramma.ne da.lhapati.t.thitattaa pana esikaa viya, cakkhudvaaraadirakkha.nato dovaariko viya ca da.t.thabbaa. Intro: Sati, mindfulness, is a sobhana cetasika, arising with each sobhana citta. It remembers, is non-forgetful of what is wholesome. The Text uses the word sara.na, remembering, but this cetasika is different from saaa, recognition or remembrance, which arises with each citta. Text Vis.: 141. (x) By its means they remember (saranti), or it itself remembers, or it is just remembering (sara.na), thus it is 'mindfulness' (sati). N: As to the words, they remember (saranti), this refers to the accompanying dhammas that are conditioned by sati. Just as the Vis. states in the case of saddhaa: by means of it they have faith. The Tiika explains that the accompanying dhammas are conditioned by the predominant influence of sati. When there is such condition it is said in conventional language (vohaaro) that a person remembers. N: He remembers, is non-forgetful of what is wholesome. Text Vis. : It has the characteristic of not wobbling. [64] Note 64 (from the Tiika). 'Apilaapana' ("not wobbling") is the steadying of an object, the remembering and not forgetting it, keeping it as immovable as a stone instead of letting it go bobbing about like a pumpkin in water'. Text Vis. : Its function is not to forget. N: Sati is steadfast with regard to an object, it is non-forgetful. Whenever there is an opportunity for daana, siila or bhaavanaa, sati is non-forgetful, it does not let such an opportunity pass. Sati prevents us from committing evil deeds. Siila is not only abstention from akusala but it also includes helping others by action or speech. When sati arises we do not neglect the opportunity to help others. There is sati with bhaavanaa. Bhaavanaa includes samatha and vipassanaa. Sati is non-forgetful of the meditation subject of samatha and non-forgetful of the object of vipassanaa: a naama or ruupa appearing at the present moment. Text Vis. : It is manifested as guarding, N: The Tiika refers to Gradual Sayings, Book of the Tens, X, 20: By guarding mindfulness he is composed of mind (Sataarakkhena cetasaati). The Co to this sutta refers to the sati of the arahat who accomplishes the function of guarding the three doors all the time. These are the doors of action, speech and mind. The Co explains that he guards those, no matter he walks, stands, sleeps or is awake. Text Vis.: or it is manifested as the state of confronting an objective field. N: The Tiika explains that sati does not go elsewhere and that by it the object of citta is confronted. When there is sati there is no agitation or distraction from the object that is experienced at that moment. When the object is experienced by kusala citta with sati the citta is intent on daana, siila or bhaavanaa. Text Vis.: Its proximate cause is strong perception (thirasaaa). N: Firm remembrance is the proximate cause of sati. When one listens to the Dhamma and considers it again and again there can be firm remembrance of what one has heard, and thus, there are conditions for the arising of sati which is mindful of the naama or ruupa appearing at the present moment. Text Vis. : or its proximate cause is the foundations of mindfulness concerned with the body, and so on (see M. Sutta 10). N: The four Applications of Mindfulness include all naamas and ruupas that can be the objects of mindfulness. When they have become the objects or bases for sati they are the proximate cause of mindfulness. The four Applications of Mindfulness remind us that naama and ruupa occurring in daily life are the objects of mindfulness. We are reminded to be aware of naama and ruupa no matter whether we are walking, standing, sitting of lying down. Also when akusala citta arises it can be object of mindfulness, it is classified under the Application of Mindfulness of citta. One should learn to see citta in citta and not take akusala citta for self. Text Vis.: It should be regarded, however, as like a pillar because it is firmly founded, or as like a door-keeper because it guards the eye-door, and so on. N: Mindfulness guards the doors of the senses and the mind-door. Whenever there is mindfulness of visible object that appears and this is realized as only a ruupa appearing through the eyedoor, we are not infatuated by this object, there are no lobha, dosa or moha on account of it. Mindfulness is an indriya, a " controlling faculty", a "leader' of the citta and accompanying cetasikas in its function of heedfulness, of non-forgetfulness of what is wholesome. We read in the Expositor ((I, Part IV, Ch II< 147): <... It exercises government (over associated states) in the characteristic of presenting or illuminating the object- this is the faculty of mindfulness.> As the Tiika explains, sati does not go elsewhere but confronts the object that presents itself. Sati does not move away from the present object, it is steadfast like a pillar. Mindfulness is non-forgetful of the object, and understanding (paaa) has the function of knowing it as it is. Right Mindfulness is one of the Path-factors and it is among the factors leading to enlightenment. --------- Nina. #118521 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 8:29 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, More "striving".... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > S: Only confusing if such striving is assumed to be done by a Self or if there's the idea that right striving can be made to arise by will. > > ... > >R: I see that as being somewhat beside the point. We all agree that there is no self to do anything by "its" will, but yet right intention/volition can be caused to arise by right conditions, and one of those conditions is hearing the Buddha say to "go for it!" ..... S: OK, "hearing the Buddha say to 'go for it' , if rightly understood only as referring to conditioned dhammas which are anatta, may be a condition right now for all the rights - beginning with the path factors. If the path factors are conditioned to arise, of course they will be supported by any universal wholesome factors in addition, including kusala cetana which co-ordinates and urges on the other factors. This is not the same as "striving/trying to have" kusala cetana arise. Do you understand the distinction I'm making? .... > > It seems the Buddha thought that by cheering people on and telling them to work hard at focusing on the path, that he could motivate people to make progress and develop the enlightenment factors. That seems to be why he decided to teach, train and instruct people, as well as telling them to work at it continuously. Surely when he said those things *he* was not under the illusion that he was talking to a self that could get up and do it, but he knew that the minds of those he spoke to could take his words to heart and accelerate their attention to the path and their progress greatly. .... S: His words just acted as conditions for kusala dhammas to arise. No people to do anything or "accelerate their attention" in anyway. I know you're just speaking conventionally, but I think we do need to be very precise here. ... > > The same is true for us. We can hear his words, heed his words, and let his words spur us on to right effort, including the practice of right concentration and right mindfulness, rather than inviting lacksadaisical and casual cittas that study Dhamma "just because its interesting" and are afraid of saying that they are really interested in making progress on the path - as we all secretly or not-so-secretly are. .... S: Again, if there's any idea of an "us" to be spurred on, to make any effort, to practice any concentration or mindfulness it's wrong. Just hearing of particular sounds, wise attention and other wholesome dhammas, wise considering, and right understanding of realities which is the right practice. All conditioned dhammas. If this seems "lacksadaisical" or laid-back or a "do nothing approach", it would only be because of a taking of practice and path for being made by a Self. ... >Why not just admit it and follow those right volitions that arise when we hear the Buddha's words? .... S: No choice in the matter at all - all dhammas not in the control of an Atta. Whether there is 'secretly wishing', desire, wise attention, right view or wrong view, it just depends on conditions. Who is there to "follow those right volitions"? ... Metta Sarah #118522 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 8:45 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, part 2 - >If we have the kusala impulse to go sit under a tree, or if we just have the sudden interest in seeing that the computer screen is a concept, then why not follow the Buddha's lead and follow those impulses with enthusiasm? We don't have to hold back from following the Buddha's admonitions out of fear that some imaginary self will try to take over. ... Whatever impulse there is and regardless of whether we go sit under the tree or not, just conditioned dhammas. > Well if that is the case I wish the Buddha had explained himself a little bit more the way you do. He seemed to think that citta could take up his admonitions and run with them, not stop, resist, interpret and wait for something else to happen instead of doing what he said. I think the point is that the right factors *can* arise when we naturally follow his words and take them at face value. No reason for a self to get involved - especially if we move fast enough before the self-concept can arise. :-) [joke, sort of...] .... S: :) (I always enjoy your jokes, even the "sort-of" ones.) The Buddha clearly pointed out that all cittas are anatta, not under anyone's will, all rupas, all cetasikas..... all anatta. He also said that the teachings are very difficult, very subtle and only a few would have little enough dust in the eyes to appreciate the profundity of what he taught. We are very fortunate to even be able to have this discussion, I believe. ... > > S: He encouraged the development of the path with an understanding that in an ultimate sense there are no followers, no action, no Buddha, no 'own might'. > > Why didn't he say that? He easily could have said "Do not mistake my encouragements for calls to action by your self. .... S: I think he did say this very clearly and for those of us who need a lot of extra reinforced encouragement and reminders about the Truths, the Abhidhamma was taught and the ancient commentaries further clarified what we read in the Tipitaka. > I would say, don't kill the path in order to save it; don't refrain from the path in order to follow it. That kind of inverted thinking leads nowhere. Nothing wrong with leading with right understanding, as you would advocate, but we also should follow the path diligently in every way we can, even though there is no control and no self. No control and no self is not an excuse for ignoring conventional kusala. .... S: The more understanding of dhammas, the more kusala of all kinds it will lead to.... For example, we might have had the idea before that "righteous anger" about this or that cause was good before or that there should be "metta to oneself". As understanding develops, we learn that a lot of what we take for "conventional kusala" are actually pretty gross akusala cittas, beginning with ignorance. > > [I add the disclaimer that I'm not any good at it either way - my right understanding includes the knowledge of how frail my adherence to the path is, but at least it's very obvious to me that I have no control...] ..... S: Well, it takes a certain amount of wisdom to appreciate this, to appreciate just how difficult the path is and that there really is no control. I appreciate your words. The path has to be a beginning again and again. Metta Sarah p.s Jon & I fly to Sydney on Thursday. He's flat out at work til then and I'll be a little busy getting ready, so replies will be slower from us and there'll be a break for a few days until we are settled the other end. ======= #118523 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 9:17 pm Subject: The Black Curtain, 2. nilovg Dear friends, The Black Curtain, 2. When we speak about naama and ruupa we do not speak about theory that is in the book, but we speak about this moment. After rebirth- consciousness there are many different types of cittas. If these are not understood there are ignorance and wrong view of self. We should continue to develop understanding in order to become detached from wanting to do something, wanting something else but developing understanding, which is the only way. Only understanding can work its way to become detached from the reality which appears. There are two types of reality: naama which experiences an object and ruupa which cannot experience anything. Ruupa is the object that is experienced and to which one has attachment instantly. If there is no understanding the ruupas appearing through the six doorways are there just for attachment. Visible object right now is the element that can impinge on the eyesense, not on the other senses, so that citta can see. We lived a long time and when there is no understanding of all these things, we lived just for seeing visible object or hearing sound, and everything goes away all the time without there being any understanding. Understanding can lead to direct awareness and then one knows that it is not I who is aware, but that it is time for the arising of right awareness and that it is aware at that moment. Understanding begins to know that hardness is not visible object. They are so true when they appear, through one doorway at a time, only that. This is the way to support also other kinds of kusala, not only satipa.t.thaana. This is the way to eliminate the idea of I. -------- Nina. #118524 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 9:57 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) ptaus1 Hi RobE (Alex, Scott, Phil), Re 118367 Ok, let's first try and define the mental states experientially, so we both can relate - as in, now the task is first to see whether our experiences match. Afterwards in another post we'll proceed to examine if these mental states are a)kusala, b)with sati, c)with panna, and d)what's the object of consciousness at the time. > > pt: > > 1. thinking I know that I'm breathing. It's basically just the ordinary sort of compulsive thinking. > > > > 2. knowing that I'm breathing - this is still a thought, but a bit different in the sense that there is some sort of non-forgetfulness unlike in the first case. Does this means there's sati there somewhere? Not sure. > > > > 3. knowing that I'm breathing without it being a thought at all, so it's just a clear knowing of sorts. > > > > 4. knowing that i know (that i'm breathing). > > > > (5. there's the last possible case of when actual rupa/dhamma like wind is the object of knowing, but I don't think I experienced that one, so won't discuss it here) > > > RE: I get a different feeling from "knowing" than I do from "being aware of." When I say "being aware of," I don't mean a "thinking knowing" or registering through thought, but just the kind of awareness that is cognizant that something is happening, if that makes any sense. It's a closer cousin to perception than to thought. > > I just wonder what you mean by knowing and how it registers in your experience. > ... > The four mental states - do you mean the different states of knowing that you described? Say a little more about the knowing. If you could somehow relate these states to the language I used about awareness and being aware of being aware, some of the stuff I said, that would be helpful to me - but might be too difficult for you to look at those posts on your schedule... pt: ok, describing the mental states a bit more: > 1. thinking I know that I'm breathing. It's basically just the ordinary sort of compulsive thinking. --> More description: this is basically sort of thinking that I'd call "forgetful", as in you think and think and suddenly you come about and realise you have no idea where the last 5 minutes went. > 2. knowing that I'm breathing - this is still a thought, but a bit different in the sense that there is some sort of non-forgetfulness unlike in the first case. --> More description: this "non-forgetfulness" is the main difference. As in, you think verbally "now I am breathing" and there's full acknowledgement of every word thought in that sentence as well as the underlying breathing. So, it's as if there's some sort of background continuity, with "non-forgetfulness" lasting for a while. > 3. knowing that I'm breathing without it being a thought at all, so it's just a clear knowing of sorts. --> More description: there's a lasting and clear non-forgetfulness, and this is probably the one seen as positive development for meditators, and yes, I'd call this "being aware of whatever happens on a perceptual level" - as in there's no verbal thinking required to comprehend whatever's occurring. A dog barks, you know it, there's no thinking that says: dog, or barking, or bloody dog ruined my meditation, etc. Though we use "aware" here provisionally for now, because strictly speaking, the moment you know "dog", or "itch", or (in) "left hand", even though there are no verbal thoughts, these would all be classified as concepts in abhidhamma, even though there's no (verbal) thinking involved. Furthermore, say you've been meditating for two hours, and by then the image and concept of the "body" has sort of completely dissolved, "left hand" is no longer left hand, but just a sensation of sorts without space/time coordinates, same with "breath" and "breathing", but it's all still a perceptual construct, and as such a concept, even though it's very clear, instantaneous, non-verbal, non-thinking, still, because it's not a dhamma - as in heat, wind, or hardness, I gather it's still a concept. But I'm getting ahead of myself, we're supposed to discuss this in another post. Further, this sort of "knowing" or "awareness" often seems "continuous", in the sense that there's no break in it, regardless of whatever arises (dogs, hands, itches, etc). As in, "non-forgetfulness" is there for a while, and sometimes there's a lapse into "forgetfulnes", but then you're jolted back to "non-forgetfulness", which again lasts for a while, etc. Further, if in meditation, there's usually a blissful state in the mind/body (no particular border between the two by this time), peace, clarity, etc. > 4. knowing that i know (that i'm breathing). --> More description: yes, I'd call this being aware of being aware. Why not. But here it gets blurry and hard to describe. The main thing I find though is that it is not "continuous" - as in, it would correspond to those instances when you're jolted back into "non-forgetfulness", but then it would go back to state number 3 in the very next instant. But of all the mental states so far, this one seems like the best candidate for some sort of kusala. Anyway, Let me know how much this corresponds to your experiences, in or out of meditation, I don't care, and then we can see is there any sati, panna, etc, in there or not. Best wishes pt #118525 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 11:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Seeng enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. (Lukas) upasaka_howard Hi, Lukas - In a message dated 10/10/2011 4:15:42 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, szmicio@... writes: Dear Phil, > How are you doing the days? L: I lost control. ---------------------------------------- HCW: This happens. ---------------------------------------- I am very attached to what connie called misery bad company. No way out. -------------------------------------- HCW: That's untrue, Lukas. There is always a way out. Much better to say and think "Very difficult at the moment." -------------------------------------- Best Lukas ================================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #118526 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 10, 2011 11:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sati, remembers kusala. Was: Khandhas upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Scott) - Nina, I find this a wonderfully rich post, filled with clear information! Thank you for it. I'm saving this in an AOL folder of items to frequently revisit. With metta, Howard In a message dated 10/10/2011 5:27:12 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear Scott, ---------------- > Scott: 'Sa~n~naa' is 'memory.' Sati has a different function. I > wonder if the Paa.li is available for this Comy. -------- N: From my VIsuddhimagga study, Ch XIV, 141: 141. saranti taaya, saya.m vaa sarati sara.namattameva vaa esaati sati. saa apilaapanalakkha.naa, asammosarasaa, aarakkhapaccupa.t.thaanaa, visayaabhimukhabhaavapaccupa.t.thaanaa vaa, thirasa~n~naapada.t.thaanaa, kaayaadisatipa.t.thaanapada.t.thaanaa vaa. aaramma.ne da.lhapati.t.thitattaa pana esikaa viya, cakkhudvaaraadirakkha.nato dovaariko viya ca da.t.thabbaa. Intro: Sati, mindfulness, is a sobhana cetasika, arising with each sobhana citta. It remembers, is non-forgetful of what is wholesome. The Text uses the word sara.na, remembering, but this cetasika is different from saaa, recognition or remembrance, which arises with each citta. Text Vis.: 141. (x) By its means they remember (saranti), or it itself remembers, or it is just remembering (sara.na), thus it is 'mindfulness' (sati). N: As to the words, they remember (saranti), this refers to the accompanying dhammas that are conditioned by sati. Just as .... #118527 From: "philip" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 12:38 am Subject: Re: Seeng enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. (Lukas) philofillet Hi Lukas > > L: I lost control. I am very attached to what connie called misery bad company. No way out. Well, there is no control to begin with, just dhammas, and you're a young guy living your life, going to parties, getting high, listening to cool bands (I assume) not possible to give that up until you see the limitations in it, get tired of it, bored of it, as almost all people do. (Sadly, some never do, but most get tired, I got tired of hangovers eventually.) That day will come, you just don't know when, depends on conditions. You've been accumulating understanding of Dhamma by reading here, please keep reading, listening. Also yoga/pop meditation to create sense of physical well better than beers. But understanding is best. Panna truly does work its way in ways we can't predict. When I was in Thailand, I had lunch with Sukin, and he talked to me about Dhamma, things that just didn't make sense to me at thr time, but I kept listening and now 6 months later it makes perfect, almost obvious sense. So don't kick yourself, enjoy your parties, but just keep listening, OK? Will you promise that? As long as you promise that I'm not worried about you, understanding accumulates in ways we cannot know. But maybe it's just not time for you to stop partying yet. At least you are thinking about the disadvantages of having friends who like drinking and drugs, and you reflect on the disadvantages of doing that. Eventually understanding will tell you it's time to stop, and you will stop. Probably sooner than your friends, and maybe you can provide an example for them by quitting. Someday that will happen, don't worry. Or maybe you will be a lifelong alcoholic, or become a crack or meth addict and die young. That is also possible. But I doubt that will happen, somehow. But it's possible, no way to know. And of course no control. Please keep reading and listening, now and then, even if it doesn't fascinate you anymore. Panna works its way. Metta, Phil #118528 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 12:57 am Subject: [dsg] Re: sati, remembers kusala. Was: Khandhas scottduncan2 Dear Nina, N: "From my VIsuddhimagga study, Ch XIV, 141..." Scott: Thank you for these. I'm going over them. Scott. #118529 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 1:01 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Sarah, S: "If you're still referring to the Satipatthana sutta comy, the Pali for Buddhaghosa's comy to it is available (neatly in velthius) in the files section under 'members' files - satipatthana sutta pali)..." Scott: Thanks Sarah. And sorry, I'd forgotten to look there... Scott. #118530 From: "philip" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 1:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Panna and the not yet known philofillet Hi Nina > Long ago I asked Kh Sujin: it may be easier to know ruupa, but how > can naama be known? She then asnwered that when pa~n~naa knows ruupas > there are conditions for pa~n~naa also to... (oops cut too much pretty sure last two woeds were "know naama") Ph: Could I ask you to add some thoughts on that? Perhaps it is that panna knowing the characteristic of @any@ dhamma conditions the arising of more understanding in cittas that follow, by some aspect of contiguity? Panna is invigorated by knowing, and more knowing follows... is contiguity an aspect of panna working its way? Metta, Phil #118531 From: "philip" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 1:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The 7 and the 5 and the 12 philofillet Hi Nina > -------- > N: I learnt from Kh Sujin that we should not say this. Why would the > Buddha teach them if they cannot be known? She gave an example of > space, even this subtle ruupa can by known by pa~n~naa. The Vis. > states that subtle ruupas are difficult to penetrate, but this does > not mean impossible. Ph: Hmmm, I thought sabhava characteristics were necessary for penetration, not that "my" panna is up to penetrating. But I thought that was what Abhidhamma or commentary says. No? If subtle rupas are asabhava, what could sati be aware of? Metta, Phil p.s thanks for your explanation on alobha #118532 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 2:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sati, remembers kusala. Was: Khandhas nilovg Hi Howard, Op 10-okt-2011, om 14:27 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I find this a wonderfully rich post ------ N: I am glad you find this helpful. It is from the long study of Vis. Ch XIV, I made together with Larry. ----- Nina. #118533 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 4:53 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Money; was Thread: A few issues [Closed] dhammasaro Good friend Sarah, et al Warm thanks. Yes, thanks to Connie I downloaded the file. And, thank you for the additional information. On your request to keep in touch; I will try... First reason, I do not understand most of the conversations... [bummers] Second reason, it usually takes from four (4) hours to about twenty-four (24) hours to see my message appear. By that time, my message may be twenty (20) messages late and the conversation trend has moved on... [reel beeg Texican bummers] Warm thanks for your help. yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: sarahprocterabbott@... <...> S: Connie has already given you the various links for downloads. For hard copies of the texts, I recommend the "Book of Discipline" series she linked to (#118295). As she also mentioned these are available from Pariyatti in the States and PTS in U.K. We bought Connie a set quite recently in appreciation for all her past hard work backing up the archives for this group. If they do have any at the bookshop opposite Wat Bovonives, they are usually cheaper there. Also, I've just remembered, in July, just after we'd bought the set for Connie, someone sent the following message to DSG here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/115916 You might try contacting him to see if the set is still available as that would also save money. Let us know how you get on. <....> #118534 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 7:32 am Subject: Today is Vap Poya Observance Day! bhikkhu5 Friends: How to be a Real Buddhist through Observance? Vap Poya day is the full-moon of October. This holy day celebrates the end of the Bhikkhu's three months rains retreat and marks the Kathina month of robes , where lay people donate a set of robes to the Sangha. This also celebrates the day that Buddha began to teach the Abhidhamma ! The Buddha descending from the Tusita Level after having spent a rains retreat there explaining the Abhidhamma to the assembled devas during a single three months long speech! His biological mother Mahmy , who died 7 days after his birth, and was reborn there as a deva, was present. He is followed down by the deva rulers Sakka and Mah-Brahm . More about this Higher Abhidhamma Science: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/abhi/index.html More about the Kathina Ceremony: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Kathina_Ceremony.htm The Kathina Ceremony of giving robes to the Mha-Sangha and receive blessing merit thereby! On such Full-Moon Uposatha Poya 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 & head touch the floor. Then, with joined palms at the heart, one recites 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 ... Today indeed is Pooya or Uposatha or observance day, where any lay Buddhist normally keeps even the Eight Precepts from sunrise until the next dawn... If any wish an official recognition by the Bhikkhu-Sangha, they may simply forward the lines starting with "I hereby ..." signed with name, date, town & country to me or join here . A public list of this new quite rapidly growing global Saddhamma-Sangha is set up here! The True Noble Community of Buddha's Disciples: Saddhamma Sangha: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/sangha/Saddhamma_Sangha.htm Can quite advantageously be Joined Here: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/sangha/Sangha_Entry.htm May your journey hereby be light, swift and sweet. Never give up !! Bhikkhu Samahita: what.buddha.said@... For Details on The Origin of Uposatha Observance Days: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/uposatha.html For the 2010 Calendar of Uposatha Observance Days: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/various/Poya.Uposatha.Observance_days.2010.htm Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Vap Poya Observance Day! #118535 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 9:03 am Subject: Re: meditation (anapanasati) truth_aerator Hello Pt, all, >1. please describe the actual mental state that you believe from >your >experience is i) kusala, ii) has sati, and iii) maybe panna, >with it. > >2. how do these states actually differ from mental states that have no >sati, panna, nor are kusala. >=============================================================== IMHO. During Anapanasati one directly observes the present moment that rises and fall. One should not think "I do this or experience that". One just observes in and out breath. Every in-out breath is actually a different citta that rises and falls. One without theorizing or reading about it observes rise & fall of citta. As one observes this, more and more direct observation about namarupa is developed. Eventually when enough observation has occured, the selfless process will effortlessly develop dispassion, revulsion and other insight states. When there is sati one knows that there isn't Atta or someone who can control realities. It is just namarupa process that develops in cause-effect stream. No Person reaches any stage, just the stream of namarupas progresses in such and such a away. Any forgeting about namarupa = wrong or no sati. Remembering about namarupa, anicca, dukkha, anatta, = sati. Hopefully we can agree on the above. With best wishes, Alex #118536 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 8:57 am Subject: Off-topic: Thanks to budaedu.org dhammasaro Good friends all, I am very indebted to The Corporate Body of the Buddha Educational Foundation in Taiwan (Republic of China). They freely provided the first two Theravada books I studied in the 1990's. Web site: http://www.budaedu.org/en/ Please support their great work. peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #118537 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:09 am Subject: Re: is cakkhuppasada aware of hardness? truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, >Alex, I've only just noticed the subject heading - was this one of >yours? What does it mean???? >================ It was from a discussion some time ago that not all sabhava qualities are simultaneously perceived at a single instance. With best wishes, Alex #118538 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:30 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > Um. Omigod. > > Here are some of my personal favourites of your new, hasty Abhidhamma re-write: > > 1. "Vicara carries on the understanding of how to direct the attention or inquiry into the object from one citta to the next, and so when the next citta arises, it arises with vicara which gives it continuity in its inquiry into the dhamma, in a similar way to which sanna is able to take the understanding of a past moment and recall it in a present moment." > > 2. "Single cittas exist and arise one at a time, but cetasikas are not restricted to the information of the current arising citta, as if that citta were a blank slate. They access whatever was handed over from the preceding citta and make use of it according to that cetasika's function in the moment when they arise." > > 3. "Vittakha hits and investigates and probes the nature of the object in a single moment; vicara *sustains* the investigation from one moment to the next." > > 4. "If Vittakha were to arise in ten cittas in a row, it would strike or probe or shake the object each time, a single action each time. If the citta arises with vicara it will 'return to the scene of the crime' of the last citta and continue the investigation where that one left off, so that the investigation is sustained and more consistent knowledge of the object is gained..." > > Scott: Nothing to say really. Of course not. I love how you won't answer or give your alternative to what I say, but just wholesale laugh it off. Ha ha ha, why bother? Most of the above is paraphrasing the PTS. I think you're mired in one-dimensional dogma. Just tell me how an 'ongoing process,' as defined by the PTS for vicara, can take place within a single moment. Please explain. ... > I'll go back to getting you back on track to discussing your 'practice.' No thanks. How about discussing yours for awhile? Robert = = = = = = = = = #118539 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:38 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > Back to your 'practice' (never do that thing with the Abhidhamma stuff again, dude): I haven't gotten much a critique from you, other than incomprehension and your usual undetailed astonishment. OMG! Someone actually spoke in their own words! How horrible. What will the parrot brigade think? > R: "...Instructions allow certain intentions and conventional activities to take place which put conditions into play that allow one to develop non-conceptual understandings." > > Scott: Are the descriptions in the suttas supposed to be instructions? Is it just me, or are these a little scant? No they're all over the place. Some folks have made a lot out of Buddha's form of speech of the day "there is the case where..." but that is a normal way to illustrate what is being put forward, in many cases instructions that are clear, ordered and explain what to do. > Please explain the relationship between your term 'intentions' and the mental factor known as cetanaa, which arises with each moment of consciousness. In particular, please explain how these 'intentions' to which you refer - just thinking about doing something as far as I can tell and in the absence of your explanation - actually relate to the kusala dhammas they are supposed to cause to arise. Intentions or volitions or whatever the technical term is, are not just "thinking." If you don't know what an intention is then I can't explain it. > Did you know, by the way, that 'conditions' *are* dhammas? > > What are 'non-conceptual understandings' Do you mean really deep and mystical thoughts about stuff? Explained a hundred times that I mean direct perception or understanding, not based on 'thoughts about stuff,' so, no, the opposite. > R: "It is not wrong to practice 'mindfulness of breathing,' because that instruction puts one in contact with the rupas of the breathing, even if one is originally instructed through concept. One may not perceive the rupas and namas directly at first, but one will be closer to attending those sensations and other rupas through concentration and attention, and their reality will gradually become more clear. > > Scott: Okay. What exactly do you do? What exactly is a 'rupa of breathing'? How do you know when you are 'in contact' with one? What is the connection between perceiving rupas of breathing and 'non-conceptual understandings'? What steps do you go through? I've already described all of this in my original posts. I'll say in general that a rupa is a rupa, and if it's associated with breathing then it's a rupa that is associated with breathing, such as the sensation of the breath. This is kind of obvious. How do you know when someone steps on your foot? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #118540 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 11:12 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...If you don't know what an intention is then I can't explain it..." Scott: It certainly isn't clear-cut. In your practice, do you equate your own consciously-considered idea about doing something with cetanaa? If so, how do you know it is kusala? It could be anything. R: "...I mean direct perception or understanding, not based on 'thoughts about stuff,' so, no, the opposite..." Scott: How do you know it's 'direct perception'? And how does this differ from ordinary 'paying attention'? And how is it not just thinking about concepts? What do you mean by 'understanding'? The function of pa~n~naa, or just thinking? How do you know it's not just you thinking you 'understand' - as in an understanding as an intellectual thing? R: "...I'll say in general that a rupa is a rupa, and if it's associated with breathing then it's a rupa that is associated with breathing, such as the sensation of the breath..." Scott: Have you ever heard the 'buddhists' talking about a 'buddha rupa'? They are talking about a statue of the Buddha. Is it in the same sense that you mean 'breath rupa'? I mean, isn't this just thinking about breathing? How do you make things go from this to the arising of functional kusala dhammas? Scott. #118541 From: "philip" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 11:18 am Subject: Re: Seeng enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. (Lukas) philofillet Hi again, Lukas More from Cetasikas, p.142: "The Buddha taught peopoe to be mindful of whatever reality appears. When akusala dhamma appears it can be object of awareness and right understanding. Some people may feel guilty when there is attachment to pleasant things and they nay be inclined to think they should not be mindful of lobha. If we have accumulations for arts such as painting or music sbould we give those up in order to develop vipassana? That would not be the right practice. We should know the realities of our daily life. One person has accumulations for art, another is skillful in cooking or writing, we all have different accumulations. A layman does not live the monk's life, he could not force himself to live as a monk. We should develop understanding in our daily life, because then we will see that whatever arises, does so because of its own conditions. " Ph: I think it is possible that even young men can have conditions to be strict about sensual gratification and decide successfully to graduate from them even sex. It is possible, maybe he was a monk with a high degree of renunciation in a past life. But probably trying to give up pleasures when our accumulations lie in the direction of enjoying them will only lead to wrong understanding of Dhamma, and wrong, painful and ultimately impossible akusala striving and struggling all wrapped up in atta. BUT, BUT, this doesn't mean we are right to carry on performing akusala kamma patha again and and again, constantly. If you are drinking and doing drugs and partibg and enjoying sex a lot that is NOT akusala kamma patga. But if you are kying to girls in order to get them to bed, being harsh and aggressive with your speech in order to impress bad friends, getting in fights, and having wrong view that that kind of behaviour doesn't matter, it is akysala kamma patha. So my advuce is if you understand that you have accumulations to enjoy party life, enjoy it untill panna reveals the disadvantages and you give it up, but take note of when there is kusala kamma patha of abstaining and akusala kamma patha of bad deeds and remember the advantages and disadvantages of them. Also remember that good deeds and bad deeds are just dhammas, not self, not Lukas. This is not tge story of Lukas and hus life and his lufestyle decisions, if you believe that there is incorrect understanding of Dhamma. It is about dhammas performing functiins and conditoning itger dhammas. And I am confident that the good dhamnas, the helpful dhammas, the pure dhammas, the truly pleasant, rewarding and liberating dhammas will win. I think they always do for people who maintain faith in the Dhamma and keep listening to true, correct Dhamma. So again I ask you to pkease keep listening. Metta, Phil #118542 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 3:02 pm Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > S: If there is no understanding of paramattha dhammas, there will be no understanding of the realities of life as being inherently dukkha or anatta. The dukkha of realities pertains to the impermanence of those realities, so the suffering or dukkha which seems obvious to us is not the sankhara dukkha, the dukkha of ultimate realities, it is the dukkha dukkha, the unpleasant feeling, the obvious misery in life. As I'm sure you know, the Buddha taught 3 kinds of dukkha: > > 1. dukkha dukkha, referring to unpleasant feeling which is so very apparent > > 2. Viparinama dukkha, the dukkha of change, referring to the change of pleasant feeling when what we enjoy and crave for falls away > > 3. Sankhara dukkha, the dukkha inherent in all conditioned dhammas as taught in the 4 NT. > Not only is unpleasant feeling or pleasant feeling dukkha, but also wholesome states, even sati and panna, are dukkha. All khandhas are subject to clinging - panca upadana khandha dukkha. I know generally about these types of dukkha, but very much appreciate the concise and clear summary above. It is good to remember that even kusala dhammas are dukkha. That is easy to forget, isn't it? > >R:I don't think so. And I think we can get a sense of anicca and anatta as well when we see that conventional objects fade and fail to satisfy over and over again. That is what drives us towards a spiritual solution and to look into Buddhism in the first place. > .... > S: This is just thinking as you'll agree. It's not even pariyatti as taught by the Buddha. Our yogi friends who know nothing about the Buddha's teachings might say the same. When it comes to the path of liberation from suffering I would agree that you can't get there without seeing and understanding directly that the objects of clinging are inherently dukkha and not-self. But if that were a requirement for basic disenchantment or basic understanding of suffering, no one would ever have an interest in the Buddha's teaching. So I think the path starts from conventional understanding and becomes more refined from there. Guess you don't agree... :-/ Does anyone start the path with pariyatti? I wouldn't think so... > >So I don't see this stark separation between the 'pure illusion' of conventional life and the gradual understanding and then eventual direct discernment of paramatha dhammas. > .... > S: There is only a beginning of understanding when there is some comprehension that there are only realities, paramattha dhammas at this moment and that the conventional objects are just that - not real. Thinking about how my mac-air will disintegrate does not bring about any lessening of illusion. I have a different view of conventional understanding. I think the reactions we have in daily life to conventional situations, and the potential to become aware of the pattern of suffering that exists in conventional living, opens the door to greater understanding. It's not "just thinking" to become more conscious of what is taking place in the moments of living, even if the view of those moments is not yet totally clear. > >I see a continuum in which the path is in play as soon as one gets a sense of the truths and where the solution lies, and where the understand gradually gets more clear and direct. I can see that there is no final detachment or letting go until the true reality of dhammas is revealed to citta, but before that there seem to be many stages that are part of the path while we are still attached to conventional objects and ideas. > ..... > S: Well, one kind of thinking may be a condition for another kind of wiser thinking. Who knows? If that is the case, I guess we shouldn't dismiss any experiences that can potentially open the door to greater understanding. > Accumulations can never be fully fathomed except by a Buddha. In any case, all the thinking in the past - whether wise or unwise - has all gone, so no use dwelling on it. Now there can be wise considering about paramattha dhammas and better still, direct understanding of what appears now. This is more precious. Good to get back to the present moment. I wonder what's happening there... :-) > (btw, I appreciate your interest in this regard and your discussions with Scott and others. Also loved the "knitting thread" between you and Ken H:-))) :-) That was fun - unlike the 20 some-odd micro-surgeries offered by Dr. Scott. [just kidding......] > > :-) Much appreciated. It is a very propitious situation for me to be able to sort things out with someone with your degree of clarity. Thanks! > .... > S: Kind of you to say so, but most the time, not much clarity, I assure you!! Clear enough for the likes of us. :-) > It's also helpful for me to discuss this points (no matter how often) with friends such as yourself, Alex and others who may have different viewpoints. Someone was surprised when I once mentioned that Jon and I had never had a dhamma discussion lasting more than a minute and that's because we've always been on the same page. DSG would just have blank pages if it were just the two of us - maybe very zen-like, but hardly inspiring!! That's a good point. I certainly get a good workout every time I come around! Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #118543 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 3:27 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Rob E, > > More "striving".... > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > S: Only confusing if such striving is assumed to be done by a Self or if there's the idea that right striving can be made to arise by will. > > > ... > > > >R: I see that as being somewhat beside the point. We all agree that there is no self to do anything by "its" will, but yet right intention/volition can be caused to arise by right conditions, and one of those conditions is hearing the Buddha say to "go for it!" > ..... > S: OK, "hearing the Buddha say to 'go for it' , if rightly understood only as referring to conditioned dhammas which are anatta, may be a condition right now for all the rights - beginning with the path factors. If the path factors are conditioned to arise, of course they will be supported by any universal wholesome factors in addition, including kusala cetana which co-ordinates and urges on the other factors. This is not the same as "striving/trying to have" kusala cetana arise. > > Do you understand the distinction I'm making? I understand the distinction, and I would agree with it in and of itself, but still think that following the "go for it" conventionally can lead to understanding through right practice [about which we probably don't agree.] > > It seems the Buddha thought that by cheering people on and telling them to work hard at focusing on the path, that he could motivate people to make progress and develop the enlightenment factors. That seems to be why he decided to teach, train and instruct people, as well as telling them to work at it continuously. Surely when he said those things *he* was not under the illusion that he was talking to a self that could get up and do it, but he knew that the minds of those he spoke to could take his words to heart and accelerate their attention to the path and their progress greatly. > .... > S: His words just acted as conditions for kusala dhammas to arise. No people to do anything or "accelerate their attention" in anyway. I know you're just speaking conventionally, but I think we do need to be very precise here. Yes, conditions for kusala dhammas to arise, and those include right effort and right practice - one way or the other, if they arise they have their affect and act as conditions for more kusala dhammas... > > The same is true for us. We can hear his words, heed his words, and let his words spur us on to right effort, including the practice of right concentration and right mindfulness, rather than inviting lacksadaisical and casual cittas that study Dhamma "just because its interesting" and are afraid of saying that they are really interested in making progress on the path - as we all secretly or not-so-secretly are. > .... > S: Again, if there's any idea of an "us" to be spurred on, to make any effort, to practice any concentration or mindfulness it's wrong. I don't think you have to invoke the self to engage the right actions that come out of the right cetana, etc. > Just hearing of particular sounds, wise attention and other wholesome dhammas, wise considering, Wise considering is conceptual is it not? Is there no idea of self considering? Just wondering. > and right understanding of realities which is the right practice. All conditioned dhammas. If this seems "lacksadaisical" or laid-back or a "do nothing approach", it would only be because of a taking of practice and path for being made by a Self. I think there's something inbetween doing nothing and being self-based, which is just doing what is called for, not because of an idea of control, but because it is the given assignment. > >Why not just admit it and follow those right volitions that arise when we hear the Buddha's words? > .... > S: No choice in the matter at all - all dhammas not in the control of an Atta. Whether there is 'secretly wishing', desire, wise attention, right view or wrong view, it just depends on conditions. Who is there to "follow those right volitions"? Who is having this conversation? [Not a rhetorical question.] Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #118544 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 3:50 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > >If we have the kusala impulse to go sit under a tree, or if we just have the sudden interest in seeing that the computer screen is a concept, then why not follow the Buddha's lead and follow those impulses with enthusiasm? We don't have to hold back from following the Buddha's admonitions out of fear that some imaginary self will try to take over. > ... > Whatever impulse there is and regardless of whether we go sit under the tree or not, just conditioned dhammas. Sure, but other conditioned dhammas can arise to inhibit or change direction from doing x, y or z. So the conditioned dhammas are fighting it out, and they may start conditioning things this way, or that way - hopefully they head in a kusala direction. > > Well if that is the case I wish the Buddha had explained himself a little bit more the way you do. He seemed to think that citta could take up his admonitions and run with them, not stop, resist, interpret and wait for something else to happen instead of doing what he said. I think the point is that the right factors *can* arise when we naturally follow his words and take them at face value. No reason for a self to get involved - especially if we move fast enough before the self-concept can arise. :-) [joke, sort of...] > .... > S: :) (I always enjoy your jokes, even the "sort-of" ones.) That is kind. :-) I wish my wife felt that way, but I guess she can only take so much... [Parenthetically, my wife finally noticed that I had a stack of Dhamma books piled up on the outgoing table and wanted to know how all those books had accumulated. I said my Dhamma friends had sent some of them and she really gave me a look and told me to put them somewhere else and to stop collecting so many books. I knew this would happen eventually! In addition to the lovely books that Nina has sent, including K. Sujin's 'Survey,' Ken O. sent me some suttas and commentaries recently which are really very good. Wow, you guys are good friends - now I just have to hide the books, and get rid of some more "non-Dhamma" books to make more space. Okay, end of emergency family-crisis Dhamma-book note.] > The Buddha clearly pointed out that all cittas are anatta, not under anyone's will, all rupas, all cetasikas..... all anatta. He also said that the teachings are very difficult, very subtle and only a few would have little enough dust in the eyes to appreciate the profundity of what he taught. We are very fortunate to even be able to have this discussion, I believe. I would certainly agree with that - very fortunate for me. And hopefully slowly sorting some things out, despite the difficulties. > > > S: He encouraged the development of the path with an understanding that in an ultimate sense there are no followers, no action, no Buddha, no 'own might'. > > > > Why didn't he say that? He easily could have said "Do not mistake my encouragements for calls to action by your self. > .... > S: I think he did say this very clearly and for those of us who need a lot of extra reinforced encouragement and reminders about the Truths, the Abhidhamma was taught and the ancient commentaries further clarified what we read in the Tipitaka. I don't know; it seems to me he said that for those who wanted to develop right concentration and mindfulness, they ought to find a quiet place, sit cross-legged and put mindfulness to the fore; then concentrate on the breath and develop sati and samatha through a series of practices that are clearly outlined in the appropriate suttas. In the satipatthana sutta he goes through the four frames of reference and shows how to regard each one in order to develop the discernment to directly discern each type of paramatha dhamma in turn. Why would he go through all that if he didn't mean those steps as actual practices? And why would Buddhaghosa go into such explicit detail, breaking down these suttas into various explicit exercises to develop the capacities outlined in the suttas, if these were not understood as explicit practices, meant to be practiced by actual practitioners? One of the problems with talking about these things and talking about paramatha dhammas, is that there is such a clear obvious sense in what is actually written and recorded, that these practices were meant to be studied and exercised, not ignored and retranslated into dhammas-only understandings. I think the two can live together and are both sides of the same coin, but apparently those strictly committed to a strict view of paramatha realities do not. I think that's a mistake, as it goes against the grain of the teachings in black and white. I think the practices of the conventional person lead to paramatha understandings, if done correctly according to instructions. Following instructions is not a 'self-based' enterprise. You can merely follow the instructions and 'just do it' as part of the path, based on what is written. > > I would say, don't kill the path in order to save it; don't refrain from the path in order to follow it. That kind of inverted thinking leads nowhere. Nothing wrong with leading with right understanding, as you would advocate, but we also should follow the path diligently in every way we can, even though there is no control and no self. No control and no self is not an excuse for ignoring conventional kusala. > .... > S: The more understanding of dhammas, the more kusala of all kinds it will lead to.... > For example, we might have had the idea before that "righteous anger" about this or that cause was good before or that there should be "metta to oneself". As understanding develops, we learn that a lot of what we take for "conventional kusala" are actually pretty gross akusala cittas, beginning with ignorance. That's a little bit different than a clearly described practice. Buddha never said anything good about righteous anger, or I would be a little confused about the path. Hopefully it's not internally inconsistent. > > [I add the disclaimer that I'm not any good at it either way - my right understanding includes the knowledge of how frail my adherence to the path is, but at least it's very obvious to me that I have no control...] > ..... > S: Well, it takes a certain amount of wisdom to appreciate this, to appreciate just how difficult the path is and that there really is no control. I appreciate your words. The path has to be a beginning again and again. Thanks. It's not easy to keep realizing how much of a beginner you continue to be, after decades; but I agree it's healthier than making stuff up! And it leaves a little more openness to the path, when you don't think you're "advanced" already. > p.s Jon & I fly to Sydney on Thursday. He's flat out at work til then and I'll be a little busy getting ready, so replies will be slower from us and there'll be a break for a few days until we are settled the other end. Hope you have a good trip, Sarah. And of course, "no rush" on any replies. Ha ha - I haven't used up the fun from that yet. Be well! Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #118545 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 3:54 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi RobE, > > > RE: I have to say, why make the personal remarks in the first place? Why traffick in derisive statements, which invites similar statements back? Aside from it definitely not being right speech, it raises more dust than light. > > pt: Yes, well, we all have problems that are bound to show up here in one way or another. As Azita mentioned recently, we're all worthy of compassion. Good answer, I think. Anyway, Scott and I have moved from derision to mutual eye-rolling. I think that's progress.... Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - #118546 From: "philip" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 4:03 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) philofillet Hi Rob > I haven't gotten much a critique from you, other than incomprehension and your usual undetailed astonishment. OMG! Someone actually spoke in their own words! How horrible. What will the parrot brigade Ph: When I read your ideas about vitekka and vicara I was, like, ohmigod rob might be right! I mean it's difficult to understand how vicara can perform its function with a single citta, not as hard to understand how vitekka does. But I see a big trap in a " go for it" attitude about forming our own theories to explain how dhammas function, based on how things woyld appear to work based on the common sense of conventional thinking. For intelligent thinkers like yourself it's interesting and satisying to aspire to peel away layers and try to get closer to the heartwood of Dhamma by thinking. I think you and Howard and others feel (based on Kalama sutta) that the Buddha gave us a mandate to "come and see for yourself" and that requires a lot of ecperimenting and testing theories. But can you get out of all that thinking with correct understanding of the texts? You'll say yes, in ways you were just writing to Sarah.On the other hand, the "parrot brigade" is probably a function of the recognition of the wisdom of repeating the teachings as received from the texts. Having said that, if you can establish through textual references (I don't think that "process" you found proves anything, but it could be a good starting point for you to start investigating the texts from) that what you wrote about vicara is anything other tham your theory, it will cause the universe to shift and may even cause several parrots to become ex-parrots! Personally, I don't know enough about Abhidhamma to fet unvolved in a debate, but will continue reading with interest. Metta, Phil #118547 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 4:17 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...If you don't know what an intention is then I can't explain it..." > > Scott: It certainly isn't clear-cut. In your practice, do you equate your own consciously-considered idea about doing something with cetanaa? I don't claim to track individual dhammas, of course, and I am talking more generally. If you want to take every word I use and ask how I mean it, we can write a dictionary. How about taking a turn saying how you think or experience kusala developing, and I'll cut it up into little pieces. I'm sort of sick of having my descriptions dissected. You could be talking about the sense of what I am saying, as I am not speaking in precise Abhidhamma language, but instead you are engaging what I think is really a fruitless activity, challenging every individual word or statement in general terms. > If so, how do you know it is kusala? It could be anything. I don't agree with that, and I don't have a mechanical answer to that question. I believe that akusala is not just some weird mystical object and neither is kusala. Kusala tends towards greater wholesome qualities, and those can be experienced. One can't ever comprehensively account for how they know anything. If I ask you how you know the floor is still there when your eyes are closed, the answer is that you don't. But your sense that it is there is good enough to allow you to take another step. One has an understanding of what is correct and follows it. > R: "...I mean direct perception or understanding, not based on 'thoughts about stuff,' so, no, the opposite..." > > Scott: How do you know it's 'direct perception'? How do you know that the body is just a concept? How do you know that visual object is visual object? How do you know what a strawberry tastes like? How do you know when the shower is on? How do you know the difference between a picture of an object and the object? Perception is as direct as it is. I don't see it in black and white. Clarity develops by degrees as one follows the path. > And how does this differ from ordinary 'paying attention'? It is a specialized application and bears the same relation to ordinary attention [when one is more expert than me; not talking about myself at the moment] that Vladimir Horowitz' piano playing has to yours or mine. > And how is it not just thinking about concepts? If concepts are there, then there are concepts at that time. So what? > What do you mean by 'understanding'? The function of pa~n~naa, or just thinking? It depends on how far it's developed, but I don't mean thinking. What do you mean by thinking? > How do you know it's not just you thinking you 'understand' - as in an understanding as an intellectual thing? How do you know you're not asleep right now, reading this in a dream? I mean aside from the fact that you really are in a dream right now, imagining that you are Scott and all that... > R: "...I'll say in general that a rupa is a rupa, and if it's associated with breathing then it's a rupa that is associated with breathing, such as the sensation of the breath..." > > Scott: Have you ever heard the 'buddhists' talking about a 'buddha rupa'? They are talking about a statue of the Buddha. No I'm not familiar with that and it's a weird example, Scott. You think I'm using rupa to mean exactly what? > Is it in the same sense that you mean 'breath rupa'? Yes, that's what I meant - a "breath statue." Thanks for lowering my intelligence level. I didn't know it could go down even lower. > I mean, isn't this just thinking about breathing? No, it's definitely not just thinking about breathing. If you were tracking a yellow-bellied sapsucker through the underbrush, and trying to keep your eye on it, would you call that "thinking about birds?" Could we just settle on the difference between focusing on something to "see" it and "thinking about it?" They're not remotely related, yet you keep bringing up thinking, thinking, thinking, as if an act of perception is some weird activity that doesn't really exist. > How do you make things go from this to the arising of functional kusala dhammas? I don't make anything go anywhere. I just sit and watch the breath. It's kinda like...."Duh....." Keep your eye on the ball and all that. It's simple but it trains the attention and develops mindfulness. I know you don't agree, so there you go! Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - #118548 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 4:39 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > Ph: When I read your ideas about vitekka and vicara I was, like, ohmigod rob might be right! I mean it's difficult to understand how vicara can perform its function with a single citta, not as hard to understand how vitekka does. But I see a big trap in a " go for it" attitude about forming our own theories to explain how dhammas function, based on how things woyld appear to work based on the common sense of conventional thinking. For intelligent thinkers like yourself it's interesting and satisying to aspire to peel away layers and try to get closer to the heartwood of Dhamma by thinking. I think you and Howard and others feel (based on Kalama sutta) that the Buddha gave us a mandate to "come and see for yourself" and that requires a lot of ecperimenting and testing theories. But can you get out of all that thinking with correct understanding of the texts? You'll say yes, in ways you were just writing to Sarah.On the other hand, the "parrot brigade" is probably a function of the recognition of the wisdom of repeating the teachings as received from the texts. > > Having said that, if you can establish through textual references (I don't think that "process" you found proves anything, but it could be a good starting point for you to start investigating the texts from) that what you wrote about vicara is anything other > tham your theory, it will cause the universe to shift and may even cause several parrots to become ex-parrots! Personally, I don't know enough about Abhidhamma to fet unvolved in a debate, but will continue reading with interest. I wasn't actually making any of that stuff up out of some sort of creative theorizing, even thought Scott thought it was all so funny he didn't bother to refute any of it. How convenient! Almost all of what I wrote was based on what I've read, though paraphrased at best. I have been very interested in vittaka for a few years, and some of the descriptions I gave to Scott were close paraphrases from either Vism or other commentaries, as well as discussions with Sarah and Nina when the subject came up here. The silly, funny attributes I gave for vittaka come straight out of Abhidhamma - how vittakha "pokes, shakes, beats, turns over" the object to get a sense of it. Vicara is a little more recent for me but I appreciate how it works together with vittaka to further understand the object. I will see if I can find some other references, but I think the full description of vicara from PTS was *very* process-oriented, talking about a *sustained* process, which to me is very "multi-moment." I am still waiting for a logical answer to the difficult idea that a cetasika that keeps the citta steadily on the dhamma in a 'sustained process' can take place within a single moment. A citta has three phases - rising, functioning and falling away. It only carries out its function, as I understand it, during its functional phase, so when would the sustained process take place? I don't think that functioning micro-moment when the citta performs its function can be subdivided. Anyway, I'll see what else I can find. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #118549 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 4:41 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Phil. Sorry I said "Hi pt" instead of "Phil." I think I substituted pt for Ph as I am tired. I know it's you! :-) Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi pt. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Ph: When I read your ideas about vitekka and vicara I was, like, ohmigod rob might be right! I mean it's difficult to understand how vicara can perform its function with a single citta, not as hard to understand how vitekka does. But I see a big trap in a " go for it" attitude about forming our own theories to explain how dhammas function, based on how things woyld appear to work based on the common sense of conventional thinking. For intelligent thinkers like yourself it's interesting and satisying to aspire to peel away layers and try to get closer to the heartwood of Dhamma by thinking. I think you and Howard and others feel (based on Kalama sutta) that the Buddha gave us a mandate to "come and see for yourself" and that requires a lot of ecperimenting and testing theories. But can you get out of all that thinking with correct understanding of the texts? You'll say yes, in ways you were just writing to Sarah.On the other hand, the "parrot brigade" is probably a function of the recognition of the wisdom of repeating the teachings as received from the texts. > > > > Having said that, if you can establish through textual references (I don't think that "process" you found proves anything, but it could be a good starting point for you to start investigating the texts from) that what you wrote about vicara is anything other > > tham your theory, it will cause the universe to shift and may even cause several parrots to become ex-parrots! Personally, I don't know enough about Abhidhamma to fet unvolved in a debate, but will continue reading with interest. > > I wasn't actually making any of that stuff up out of some sort of creative theorizing, even thought Scott thought it was all so funny he didn't bother to refute any of it. How convenient! Almost all of what I wrote was based on what I've read, though paraphrased at best. I have been very interested in vittaka for a few years, and some of the descriptions I gave to Scott were close paraphrases from either Vism or other commentaries, as well as discussions with Sarah and Nina when the subject came up here. The silly, funny attributes I gave for vittaka come straight out of Abhidhamma - how vittakha "pokes, shakes, beats, turns over" the object to get a sense of it. > > Vicara is a little more recent for me but I appreciate how it works together with vittaka to further understand the object. I will see if I can find some other references, but I think the full description of vicara from PTS was *very* process-oriented, talking about a *sustained* process, which to me is very "multi-moment." I am still waiting for a logical answer to the difficult idea that a cetasika that keeps the citta steadily on the dhamma in a 'sustained process' can take place within a single moment. A citta has three phases - rising, functioning and falling away. It only carries out its function, as I understand it, during its functional phase, so when would the sustained process take place? I don't think that functioning micro-moment when the citta performs its function can be subdivided. Anyway, I'll see what else I can find. > > Best, > Rob E. > > - - - - - - - - - - > #118550 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 4:42 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...I just sit and watch the breath...It's simple but it trains the attention and develops mindfulness..." Scott: Please explain *how* sitting and 'watching' the breath 'trains the attention' and 'develops mindfulness.' You aren't making this clear; you are simply repeating the assertion with no apparent idea as to how this is supposed to happen. This is supposed to be your practice. Scott. #118551 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 11:45 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Seeng enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. (Lukas) dhammasaro Good friends all, If I may... Good friend Phil; on this one sentence: A layman does not live the monk's life, he could not force himself to live as a monk. Laymen have lived as a monk by choice... one does need to force oneself... I know... I frequently live as a monk as a layman... In addition, one does not need to be a monk to become classed as an "arahant", true? Sincere warm thanks for allowing me to make a comment. peace... yours in the dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: philco777@... <...> More from Cetasikas, p.142: "The Buddha taught peopoe to be mindful of whatever reality appears. When akusala dhamma appears it can be object of awareness and right understanding. Some people may feel guilty when there is attachment to pleasant things and they nay be inclined to think they should not be mindful of lobha. If we have accumulations for arts such as painting or music sbould we give those up in order to develop vipassana? That would not be the right practice. We should know the realities of our daily life. One person has accumulations for art, another is skillful in cooking or writing, we all have different accumulations. A layman does not live the monk's life, he could not force himself to live as a monk. We should develop understanding in our daily life, because then we will see that whatever arises, does so because of its own conditions. " Ph: I think it is possible that even young men can have conditions to be strict about sensual gratification and decide successfully to graduate from them even sex. It is possible, maybe he was a monk with a high degree of renunciation in a past life. But probably trying to give up pleasures when our accumulations lie in the direction of enjoying them will only lead to wrong understanding of Dhamma, and wrong, painful and ultimately impossible akusala striving and struggling all wrapped up in atta. <....> #118552 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 7:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The 7 and the 5 and the 12 nilovg Dear Phil, Op 10-okt-2011, om 16:14 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Ph: Hmmm, I thought sabhava characteristics were necessary for > penetration, not that "my" panna is up to penetrating. But I > thought that was what Abhidhamma or commentary says. No? If subtle > rupas are asabhava, what could sati be aware of? ------ N: For us now it is hard to understand this. Kh Sujin explained that there can be, for instance, awareness and understanding of the space surrounding the groups of ruupas. She also explained that the groups, kalapas, of ruupas can be directly known. But we should not think too much of these. When time comes. Nina. #118553 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 7:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Panna and the not yet known nilovg Op 10-okt-2011, om 16:03 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Long ago I asked Kh Sujin: it may be easier to know ruupa, but how > > can naama be known? She then asnwered that when pa~n~naa knows > ruupas > > there are conditions for pa~n~naa also to... (oops cut too much > pretty sure last two woeds were "know naama") > > Ph: Could I ask you to add some thoughts on that? Perhaps it is > that panna knowing the characteristic of @any@ dhamma conditions > the arising of more understanding in cittas that follow, by some > aspect of contiguity? Panna is invigorated by knowing, and more > knowing follows... is contiguity an aspect of panna working its way? ------ N: Instead of contiguity: accumulation. Understanding is accumulated from moment to moment. It grows. Nina. #118554 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 9:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Breathing body, was: Just checking . nilovg Dear Rob, I answered before to a later post, Sept. 28. I snip repetitions in this post. Op 25-sep-2011, om 17:58 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom > wrote: > > > > Mindfulness of > > the realities appearing while breathing in order to know their true > > characteristics.> > ------- > > R: This seems to be saying that one is attending the rupas of both > breath and physical body with mindfulness as they arise for citta > in attending the breath. So there is at least this aspect of > attending the actual rupas for development of mindfulness of their > characteristics. Is this correct? > ------- N: Mindfulness of any ruupa that appears through the bodysense. At that moment one does not think of breathing body or physical body. First one learns the specific characteristics such as hardness, heat, and later on the three general characteristics. ------- > R: ....which is contemplation of it as a mere > > body only, by not contemplating it as containing anything that > can be > > apprehended as "I" or "mine" or "woman" or "man" all this is > > contemplation of the body. > > The above aspect of attending the breath seems to be more focused > on seeing the general characteristics of the breath as a concept. > Am I correct that this part is about contemplating breath as a > concept, and the other passage that I quoted above about the > "rupas" is contemplating bodily/breath rupas as objects of direct > mindfulness? > -------- N: The three general characteristics pertain to paramattha dhammas. In this sutta breath is not taught as a concept. ------- > > > > The mindfulness associated with that > > contemplation of the body...is the "development of the > > foundation (establishment) of mindfulness consisting in > contemplation > > of the body"(Pm. 261)>... Not only concentration, > > but realizing the three characteristics is the goal. Mindfulness of > > the realities appearing while breathing in order to know their true > > characteristics.> > > Here it is stated that both concentration and realization of the > three characteristics is the goal, through mindfulness of the > realities appearhing while breathing... > > So this seems like direct practice of satipatthana - realizing the > characteristics through direct mindfulness of paramatha dhammas, > while at the same time direct development of samatha/concentration. > Is this correct? > ------ N: This whole section is part of the satipa.t.thaanasutta, and as you say, the goal is realizing the characteristics through direct mindfulness of paramatha dhammas. For those who develop jhaana with this subject jhaana is the proximate cause or the basis for insight. Jhaana itself is not the goal. After emerging from jhaana one has to be aware of all naama and ruupa that appear, including the jhaanafactors that have just fallen away. Otherwise one takes jhaana for self. All this is extremely difficult. > > -------- Nina. #118555 From: "philip" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:51 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Seeng enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. (Lukas) philofillet Hello friend Chuck, > > Laymen have lived as a monk by choice... one does need to force oneself... I know... I frequently live as a monk as a layman... Ph: Yes, some people have monastic tendencies,for them it is less difficult to develop renunciation from certain semsual pleasures, it comes naturally. But other people want to try to behave like monks because they think that is the Buddhist thing to do! If it is completely against rheir accumulated tendencies, not a recipe for success - or even happiness. :) > In addition, one does not need to be a monk to become classed as an "arahant", true? Ph: Not according to the texts, but I don't think tgere are many (or any) arahants these days. By the way, interesting that Visudhimagga defines bhikkhu as anyone who is earnestly seeking to eradicate the defilements. But it has to kusala, no akusala longing. So are we bhikkhus in that sense, maybe at monents! Thanks Chuck. Metta, Phil > Sincere warm thanks for allowing me to make a comment. > > peace... > > yours in the dhamma-vinaya, > > Chuck > > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > From: philco777@... > <...> > More from Cetasikas, p.142: > > > > "The Buddha taught peopoe to be mindful of whatever reality appears. When akusala dhamma appears it can be object of awareness and right understanding. Some people may feel guilty when there is attachment to pleasant things and they nay be inclined to think they should not be mindful of lobha. If we have accumulations for arts such as painting or music sbould we give those up in order to develop vipassana? That would not be the right practice. We should know the realities of our daily life. One person has accumulations for art, another is skillful in cooking or writing, we all have different accumulations. A layman does not live the monk's life, he could not force himself to live as a monk. We should develop understanding in our daily life, because then we will see that whatever arises, does so because of its own conditions. " > > > > Ph: I think it is possible that even young men can have conditions to be strict about sensual gratification and decide successfully to graduate from them even sex. It is possible, maybe he was a monk with a high degree of renunciation in a past life. But probably trying to give up pleasures when our accumulations lie in the direction of > > enjoying them will only lead to wrong understanding of Dhamma, and wrong, painful and ultimately impossible akusala striving and struggling all wrapped up in atta. > <....> > #118556 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 11:12 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...I don't claim to track individual dhammas, of course, and I am talking more generally..." Scott: What do you do specifically, and why? I remember discussing jhaana with the jhaanaphiles a couple of years ago only to discover that, after all of the being told that jhaana was the only way to go, not a single one had ever, ever actually 'practiced' jhaana. Not a one had attained the state. You are a leading advocate of the work-hard-and-get-busy-and-do-what-the-suttas-tell-us 'practice' on the list and yet, apart from generalities, I don't feel any closer to seeing what it is you actually 'practice.' More importantly, I have yet to see details of what this 'practice' is actually 'doing.' Apart from a whole lot of complaining, I'm not getting much by way of a clear description of the mechanics and, more importantly, experience of this 'practice.' Scott. #118557 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 11:26 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Seeng enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. (Lukas) dhammasaro Good friend Phil, Warm thanks for your response and for your clarification. peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: philco777@... <...> > Laymen have lived as a monk by choice... one does need to force oneself... I know... I frequently live as a monk as a layman... Ph: Yes, some people have monastic tendencies,for them it is less difficult to develop renunciation from certain semsual pleasures, it comes naturally. But other people want to try to behave like monks because they think that is the Buddhist thing to do! If it is completely against rheir accumulated tendencies, not a recipe for success - or even happiness. :) <...> #118558 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Seeng enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. (Lukas) nilovg Dear Phil and Chuck, Op 11-okt-2011, om 13:51 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > In addition, one does not need to be a monk to become classed as > an "arahant", true? > > Ph: Not according to the texts, but I don't think there are many > (or any) arahants these days. ------- N: When a layfollower reaches arahatship he/she has to enter monkhood or else die that day. it is impossible to lead the lay life when one is an arahat. This is according to the texts. There are no more arahats in this world today. At this day and age there can only be ariyans up to the degree of the anaagaami. Nina. #118559 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:06 am Subject: the Black Curtain, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, Kh. Sujin: As soon as people hear about satipa.t.thaana they like to do it, they try so hard to have it. So long as one is trying so hard to develop understanding, even for years, it does not work, it will not bring any result at all. It is pa~n~naa that can detach from wrong view, from the inclination to going away from the reality of this moment, selecting other objects for right understanding. When people learn about the aayatanas, the elements (dhaatus), the Dependent Origination, they may memorize all this, but they may not understand that when anything appears, such as visible object or sound, that object is also aayatana. Eyesense and earsense are aayatanas. Without the coming together of the aayatanas there cannot be seeing, hearing, or any experience in the world. We should understand aayatana, not merely in theory but by awareness and understanding the characteristic of reality. Understanding is more profound at the moment when a reality appears. We can say that hardness is an element without any understanding. But when there is awareness of it when it appears, pa~n~naa develops and it realizes it as an element without there being the need for any words. At the moment of enlightenment the Buddha and the ariyans did not need any words; there was no thinking but the direct experience of the true nature of realities. The truth of realities was not concealed anymore. ****** Nina. #118560 From: "philip" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Panna and the not yet known philofillet Hi Nina > N: Instead of contiguity: accumulation. Understanding is accumulated > from moment to moment. It grows. > > Nina. Thanks for this explanation, and also re subtle rupa without sabhava (abhava?) and also re the arahant. Metta, Phil #118561 From: "philip" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:37 am Subject: Re: the Black Curtain, no 3. philofillet Hi Nina --Without the coming together of the aayatanas there cannot > be seeing, hearing, or any experience in the world. Today I heard A Sujin say this is like a miracle. But maybe if we say it is a miracle we ascribe beauty of some kind to it. At other times we hear that all these cittas that arise are useless, yet we place so much interest in them. A useless miracle! I also like another deep thing that A Sujin said (if I understood correctly) ..... we wish to have sights, sounds, tastes, touches, smells... but the vipaka now is proof that we've already had (already have) what we're wishing for all the time now, lots of useless sense object gratification, aeons worth. I guess that's what she meant... Useless cittas. Useless miracles of co-nascent (?) arising. metta, phil #118562 From: "connie" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:47 am Subject: Sangiitisutta, Nines, suttas 5 and 6 nichiconn dear friends, CSCD 343. <nti vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatana.m upasampajja viharati. Sabbaso vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatana.m samatikkamma ti aaki~nca~n~naayatana.m upasampajja viharati. Sabbaso aaki~nca~n~naayatana.m samatikkamma nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatana.m upasampajja viharati. Sabbaso nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatana.m samatikkamma sa~n~naavedayitanirodha.m upasampajja viharati. Walshe DN 33.3.2(5) 'Nine successive abidings: [the jhaanas and Spheres of Infinite Space, Infinite Consciousness, No-Thingness, Neither-Perception-Nor-Non-Perception, and Cessation of Perception and Feeling]. [iii 266] Olds [ 9.5 ] Nine habitats, one-after-the-other:[ 9.5 ] Here friends a bhikkhu, separating himself from sense pleasures, separating himself from unskillful things, still thinking and reacting with the pleasurable enthusiasm born of detachment enters into and makes a habitat of the First Burning, Then, with thinking and reacting having calmed down, attaining tranquillity, becoming single-minded, without thinking and reacting, with the pleasurable enthusiasm born of Highgetting he enters into and makes a habitat of the Second Burning, then, dispassionate and detached from enthusiasm, living conscious and aware of bodily sense-reactions suchas those described by the aristocrats when they say 'Detached, with satisfied mind, he lives pleasantly,' he enters into and makes a habitat of the Third Burning. Then, letting go of his former experiences of pleasure and pain, allowing his experience of mental ease and discomfort to subside on their own, without pleasure or pain, with utterly pure detachment of mind, he enters into and mades a habitat of the Fourth Burning. elevating himself above all perceptions of materiality, allowing perceptions of resistance to subside, and not scrutinizing perceptions of diversity, thinking[ 4.7.1 ]: 'Un-ending is space.' enters into and makes a habitat of the Space-dimension. Then, elevating himself completely above the Space-dimension, thinking: 'Un-ending is consciousness.' he enters into and makes a habitat of the Consciousness-dimension. Then, elevating himself completely above the Consciousness-dimension, thinking: 'There is nothing.' he enters into and makes a habitat of the No-thing-there[4.7.2] dimension. Then, elevating himself completely above the No-thing-there-dimension he enters into and makes a habitat of the Dimension of Neither-perception-nor-non-perception. Then, elevating himself completely above the Dimension of Neither-perception-nor-non-perception, he enters into and makes a habitat of the ending of perception and sense experience. RDs [ 266 ][ 9.5 ] Nine successional states, to wit, the Four Jhaanas [of Ruupa-world consciousness], the Four Jhaanas of Aruupa-world consciousness and complete trance.9.5 ***rd: 9.5Cf. above I, II, iv., and 3, I, xi. (4-8). CSCD 344. < Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma in practice: mindfulness of vipaka to prevent kamma nilovg Dear Phil, Op 15-sep-2011, om 15:57 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > ------ > > N: As to being aware of vipaakacitta, yes, seeing is vipaaka and it > > can be object of awareness. > > Ph: Certainly. But to suggest such awareness can be the rule for > worldlings rather than an exceptional arising will only lead to > misplaced expectations, expectations. We know that lobha arises > almost always after moments of seeing etc. > ------- N: I am with you here, and you give good examples. Still, when we listen enough and consider enough, there can be more understanding of just seeing, different from recognizing shape and form. This can condition a beginning awareness. Provided we do not cling to it. When people complain that there is no awareness she gives as a reason that we did not listen enough yet. ------ > > > Ph: Akusala citta is the rule rather than the exception, so if it > could not be object of awareness there would be no hope, we would > be swamped in it, and indeed most beings are. But the Buddha taught > us not 'how to' be aware of dhammas but taught us about the dhammas > so that awareness can be fostered, at least that is my current > understanding. > ------- N: He taught us all dhammas so that we can consider them and in this way there can be intellectual understanding. Pariyatti is understanding of the reality appearing now. It is not yet pa.tipatti, practice or direct awareness. As Kh Sujin often repeats: the Buddha taught us to develop 'our own' understanding, not just following anybody else. Nobody else can develop it for us. We should be our own refuge. It is implied that the words our own and ourselves do not mean that there is a self. ------- Nina. > > > Howard and Alex, back to you on Saturday. > > Metta, > Phil > > > #118564 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the Black Curtain, no 3. nilovg Dear Phil, Op 11-okt-2011, om 16:37 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Today I heard A Sujin say this is like a miracle. But maybe if we > say it is a miracle we ascribe beauty of some kind to it. At other > times we hear that all these cittas that arise are useless, yet we > place so much interest in them. A useless miracle! -------- N: The way conditions operate together is amazing and it is amazing that the Buddha in his omniscence could fathom all this. ------ > > Ph: I also like another deep thing that A Sujin said (if I > understood correctly) ..... we wish to have sights, sounds, tastes, > touches, smells... but the vipaka now is proof that we've already > had (already have) what we're wishing for all the time now, lots of > useless sense object gratification, aeons worth. I guess that's > what she meant... > > Useless cittas. Useless miracles of co-nascent (?) arising. ----- N: They arise and fall away and thus they are dukkha, not worth clinging to. ----- Nina. #118565 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 2:00 am Subject: Sangiitisutta, Nines, suttas 5 and 6, and commentary. nilovg Dear friends, Book of the Nines, sutta 5: DN 33.3.2(5) 'Nine successive abidings: [the jhaanas and Spheres of Infinite Space, Infinite Consciousness, No-Thingness, Neither- Perception-Nor-Non-Perception, and Cessation of Perception and Feeling]. [iii 266] -------- N: The co glosses: the abidings that can be attained in succession. The tiika: as to in succession: gradually (anukkamena). After having attained them he is endowed with them and he can dwell in those abidings. -------- Sutta 6: DN 33.3.2(6) 'Nine successive cessations (anupubba-nirodhaa): By the attainment of the first jhaana, perceptions of sensuality (kaama- sa~n~naa) cease; by the attainment of the second jhaana, thinking (vitakka) and pondering (vicaara) cease; by the attainment of the third jhaana, delight (piiti) ceases; by the attainment of the fourth jhaana, in- and out-breathing ceases; by the attainment of the Sphere of Infinite Space, the perception of materiality ceases; by the attainment of the Sphere of No-Thingness, the perception of the Sphere of Infinite Consciousness ceases; by the attainment of the Sphere of Neither-Perception-Nor-Non-Perception, the perception of the Sphere of No-Thingness ceases; by the attainment of the Cessation- of-Perception-and-Feeling, perception and feeling cease. -------- N: The Co: cessations in succession. The Tika: Cessation made to occur in succession, gradually. Conclusion: The cessation of perception and feeling can only be attained by anagaamis and arahats who have developed insight and samatha to the degree of jhaana. It is not sufficient to develop samatha just for the sake of the attainment of jhaana, but insight should be developed as well. In order to reach higher jhaanas in succession, there should be a fine discrimination of the different jhaanafactors and this is very difficult. For example, if someone wants to attain the third jhaana (of the fourfold system) he should abandon enthusiasm, piiti, and for the attainment of the fourth jhaana he should abandon sukha, happy feeling. He should know the difference between enthusiasm and happy feeling. These two cetasikas arise together in the case of sense sphere cittas and it is hard to differentiate between them. They have different characteristics. In sutta 6 the cessation of the jhaanafactors has been shown, one afer the other. Great detachment is needed to let go of enthusiasm and after that of happy feeling. From the beginning of the development of jhaana until the end detachment is the goal. Only when jhaana and insight are being developed together there can be complete detachment from all realities. It is right understanding that conditions detachment. *********** Nina. #118566 From: "connie" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 3:43 am Subject: Re: part 2! Guide to CR/Patthana nichiconn Hi Sarah, > > I thought the downloading hadn't worked and then while I was writing to Chuck it suddenly appeared. So, in brief, this would be part 2 to the Narada Guide to CR, following on from part 1 which was published decades ago now? I really should read subject headings!! Has it been published or is it just available on-line? > c: like i 'should' be less cryptic/ambiguous. PTS does not sell Guide to CR part 2; it was published by the Department of Religious Affairs, Rangoon, Burma, 1986 [3000 first -and only??- impressions; the pdf is evidently a copy of one of those. (insert long ramble on Buddhist decline/degeneracy here)]. yes, part 1 of the Guide to CR only covers the first 12 (of 526) pages of CR1; GCR2 goes thru p141. > > > > How about sharing some short extracts, maybe even a series, so that we get a taste first and can possibly discuss together? > i'll give it some thought... definitely not starting with part 2! People "should" check out Nina's CONDITIONS & Chew's Patthana blog. connie #118567 From: "connie" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 4:14 am Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts nichiconn Rob, > > Does anyone start the path with pariyatti? I wouldn't think so... > you're probably right: most make up their own 'Buddhism'. connie #118568 From: "connie" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 4:27 am Subject: Re: Off-topic: Thanks to budaedu.org nichiconn Hi Chuck, > > I am very indebted to The Corporate Body of the Buddha Educational Foundation in Taiwan (Republic of China). They freely provided the first two Theravada books I studied in the 1990's. > > Web site: http://www.budaedu.org/en/ > > Please support their great work. > They gave me "The Path of Purification". My friend assures me she'll return it to me for Christmas this year... firmly duct-taped back together. :) connie #118569 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 5:14 am Subject: Listening. nilovg Dear Phil and all, Phil, I just want to add this quote from Dh in Keang Kracan I read to Lodewijk tonight. It pertains to our recent discussions. < We may be impatient, frustrated, when sati does not often arise, there is a great deal of clinging to "I". We should be very sincere, very honest, to see when we are deluded by our attachment to result, to quick progress. We have to understand that pa develops when there are the right conditions for its development: association with the right friend in Dhamma, listening, considering, asking questions, applying what one has heard. During our stay in Thailand we experienced the benefit of listening and discussing the Dhamma. It was most valuable to be reminded that when we read Suttas we have to understand dhamma appearing at this moment. In this way the messages contained in the Suttas become very relevant to our personal life. The Buddha taught Dhamma so that we can develop our own understanding. In Kaeng Kracan we had all our meals outside and after dinner, when it was already dark, a small group of us were sitting in a corner under a beautifully carved wooden canopy, discussing again Dhamma. Acharn Sujin reminded us that we should appreciate a moment of right understanding and not wish for more. Such a moment is very precious, it is accumulated so that understanding can grow. We read in the Dhammapada, vs 182: Difficult it is to be born human, difficult is the life of a man, difficult it is listening to the true Dhamma, difficult is the arising of enlightened ones. We can still listen to the Dhamma and consider what we heard, because today the teachings are still available to us. These verses remind us that we should not be neglectful, but use every opportunity to listen, to study and to develop right understanding of what appears now. We were reminded time and again during our discussions that there are dhammas appearing right now and that they can be objects of sati sampajaa. > ******* Nina. #118570 From: "philip" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:37 am Subject: Cetasika as external philofillet Hi all Returning to this subject which Sarah explained to me, cetasika considered to be "external.". I sense that understanding how vedana, for example, that we know from text definitions "tastes" the object as its function when co-arising with the other universal cittas, understanding how it can be external could be helpful. This from Abhidhamma in Practice (not one of Nina's): "Strictly speaking a mental object can be an internal phenomenon, such as a feeling, a thought, or an idea, but as forming the objective sphere of experience they are all classed as external." Is it when cetasika is dhammaraamana (mind object) that it is considered external? Sarah, what was the context of cetasika being "external."? This topic might be a naama parallel to the 7 and 5 rupas that I find so helpful, cetasika as agent of experience and object of experience. Metta, Phil #118571 From: "philip" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:07 am Subject: Re: Listening. philofillet Hi Nina Thank you for posting that. I remember that wooden canopy so well, just from one trip. You must remember it so clearly from many trips. But for me, everything I heard that night is gone. Why don't we remember what we heard as clearly as the visual memory of the canopy? Thankfully there are the recordings. These days I am listening a lot, like a few years ago, and reading a lot, and it !does! condition reflection, which seems to arise with various degrees of trying to figure it out. I guess it's safe to say that the more struggling to understand tgere is, the less correct understanding will result, but if there is no struggle whatsoever, ever, maybe tgat coyld indicate a lack of kusala virya arising. I think of Lukas sometimes because he says for him these days tgere is not much interest in Dhamma. For me it's the opposite, my Japanese studies and half-finished writing projects must take a back seat. Our interest in Dhamma is conditioned, I kniw now that it is the most valuable thing in life. unquestionably, so strike whule tge iron is hot. The Japanese version of that proverb, zen wa isoge (different zen) is literally "goodness hurries." Maybe we can say "kusala hurries". because when there is not the rare arising of the dhammas that must co-arise for a moment of kusala (maybe !that! is what we should call a miracle rather than a moment of seeing etc) there is akusala, lots and lots and lots of it. And while our brains are still functioning to allow us to listen and understand and remember. I know it is dhammas tgat do tgat, but I fear Alzheimers after seeing what it did to my morger. So there is surely dosa, and wanting results, seeking protection involved in all my listening tgese days. But that is natural and can be object of satipatthana. Metta, Phil #118572 From: "Christine" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Any Aussies/others interested in Pilgrimage to India and Nepal Feb. 2012? christine_fo... Hello all, Can hardly wait! The Pilgrimage departure date is only four months away. Time to be getting any necessary injections - must also buy some medication from the Travel Doctor - ''starters'', ''stoppers'', and ''anti-nausea'' tablets. Strange how even sitting in the office of the Nepalese and Indian consulate for an hour or so is felt as ''exciting''. A couple of people signed up last week after I told them about it at the Bodhi Forest Retreat last month. Still a few vacancies if anyone else is interested. with metta Chris > #118573 From: "philip" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:39 am Subject: Re: Listening. philofillet Hi again, >--Why don't we remember what we heard as clearly as the visual memory of the canopy? Thankfully there are the recordings. Interesting that although I went to Thailand to listen to A Sujin, and listened intently, I don't remember anything, it's all gone, but I remember what Sukin said as we took a taxi and ate in a crowded, noisy shopping mall, but at the time I was just listening politely, convinced he was wrong - but he was right. The understanding that results from listening comes in a very unpredictable way, no cintrol. Well, not even about what we listen to, no control there either.. Metta, Phil #118574 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:26 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...I just sit and watch the breath...It's simple but it trains the attention and develops mindfulness..." > > Scott: Please explain *how* sitting and 'watching' the breath 'trains the attention' and 'develops mindfulness.' You aren't making this clear; you are simply repeating the assertion with no apparent idea as to how this is supposed to happen. This is supposed to be your practice. A lot of it is repetition, Scott, because I've already described this as best I can in several of these posts. Being a practitioner of something - even though my practice is not too consistent right now anyway - does not mean that every nuance that you demand can be described adequately for your understanding, or that any such explanation will satisfy you, particularly with your very specific technical understanding coming from a particular discipline of thought - not that you always correctly understand the elements of that system that you subscribe to, because often you don't. Your understanding of sati, vitakkha and vicara, among others, and your whimsically embarrassed response to my descriptions of these shows a real lack of in-depth understanding on your part, and how these functions may really exist and operate. Your definitions and knowledge of these cetasikas are superficial, unimaginative and lacking in any integrated sense of what they are for or do. But let's leave that aside, since your knowledge of Abhidhamma is obviously not open to question - you'd rather focus everything on how precisely I can describe my "practice" which is never going to be described adequately in your black-and-white dhamma terms, and in any case will always turn out to be a mistaken notion from your perspective. But whatever - if you want to put a little more effort into tripping me up and pointing out how weird it is to attempt to practice anything, and how incredibly correct your simplistic notion of experience and the path is, I'll give you a few more shots. Such basic concepts as putting the attention on something to train the concentration is self-evident in ordinary understanding. If you demand some greater nuance for that, I am at a loss. As far as it developing mindfulness, it is a question of continuing to be aware of the object, and as one continues to put the attention on the object and be aware of it, the degree of detail and degree of awareness gradually increases. If that sort of process doesn't make sense to you, then I can't say much more about it. To me it is no different than practicing scales to strengthen the fingers and get more consistent playing ability. The attention is also something that can be trained, and so can awareness. I'm sure you will disagree with all of this completely, since you believe that attention, awareness, concentration, etc., are all single-moment little entities that arise up by themselves like bubbles in a stream, but I don't believe that's how dhammas work, in isolation and with no consistent relation to what we do or think, so we're not bound to reach an agreement on such a process. I do think that single-moment experiences arise without control, but not without influence. And the influence of activities that direct the attention or exercise volition towards a particular end, are part of the conditionality that causes particular sorts of cittas and dhammas to arise. Over time, increments of one or another result will accrue. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #118575 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:30 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...I don't claim to track individual dhammas, of course, and I am talking more generally..." > > Scott: What do you do specifically, and why? > > I remember discussing jhaana with the jhaanaphiles a couple of years ago only to discover that, after all of the being told that jhaana was the only way to go, not a single one had ever, ever actually 'practiced' jhaana. Not a one had attained the state. > > You are a leading advocate of the work-hard-and-get-busy-and-do-what-the-suttas-tell-us 'practice' on the list and yet, apart from generalities, I don't feel any closer to seeing what it is you actually 'practice.' More importantly, I have yet to see details of what this 'practice' is actually 'doing.' > > Apart from a whole lot of complaining, I'm not getting much by way of a clear description of the mechanics and, more importantly, experience of this 'practice.' I've told you what the basic practice is and what is done. I've talked about my experiences to a certain extent. I wouldn't really know how to make the basic mechanics more clear than I've already done, and I don't want to repeat myself endlessly. In my original posts, I spoke of some of the ways I've practiced, some of the variations, and some of the experiences I've had. Maybe you can review them. For more details, read the anapanasati sutta. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #118576 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:32 am Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts epsteinrob Hi Connie. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > Rob, > > > > Does anyone start the path with pariyatti? I wouldn't think so... > > > > you're probably right: most make up their own 'Buddhism'. That's an interesting presumption. You mean that they don't find the one right Buddhism that you are aware of? What would that be? Whether the find the Buddhism, your Buddhism or some other Buddhism, they will still start out without pariyatti. And so, the path begins with relative ignorance for everyone. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #118577 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:00 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...putting the attention on something to train the concentration ...continuing to be aware of the object, and as one continues to put the attention on the object and be aware of it, the degree of detail and degree of awareness gradually increases....I do think that single-moment experiences arise without control, but not without influence. And the influence of activities that direct the attention or exercise volition towards a particular end, are part of the conditionality that causes particular sorts of cittas and dhammas to arise. Over time, increments of one or another result will accrue." Scott: Believing as you do in activities and experiences as realities, such a 'practice' - however meagre the description - makes sense. Conditionality, at least as it was set out in the Pa.t.thaana, is about dhammas which serve as conditions and are conditioned by dhammas. Neither 'self', nor 'activities', nor 'experience' are dhammas. Scott. #118578 From: "philip" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 12:03 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) philofillet Hi Scott Sc: Neither 'self', nor 'activities', nor 'experience' are dhammas. "Experience" as a countable noun, which if I recall correctly is how Rob used it ("single moment experiences") could refer to a dhamma or nimitta of dhammas, no? Metta, Phil #118579 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 2:41 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Phil, P: "Experience' as a countable noun, which if I recall correctly is how Rob used it ('single moment experiences') could refer to a dhamma or nimitta of dhammas, no?" Scott: I think you'll find that Rob discounts the whole single-moment thing. Those who favour 'practice' will misuse terms in obfuscatory ways. If you push, you'll find that these terms have been redefined to fit the mould of a belief in the conscious manipulation of conditions. If you consider Rob's idea that a mental factor can persist while the rest of consciousness falls away, you'll see that the general term 'experience' will stand for permanent or quasi-permanent wholes which are primarily the content of thought. Ask him and see. Scott. #118580 From: "philip" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 3:20 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) philofillet Hi Scott (and Rob E) I'm just interested in whether we can call the arising of dhammas, say a moment of seeing, an experience. Well, why not, we can call it anything we want, it is just dhammas. And perhaps calling it an experience can help us to communicate Abhidhamma better. "Incident" is probably better, suggests less self-involvement and might discourage thinking that an "experience" at the sense doors can be anything other than useless in the end. (We hear of wonderful experiences, but not wonderful incidents. ) Yes, I like "incident" better. The usual "arising" is fine of course. Nevermind,just an issue of word usage. As for Rob I would rather arrogantly say that he has been making a sincere effort to get things across but until there is a stripping down closer to strictly understood Abhidhamma terms there will always be too much speculation and theorizing. That goes for anyone, of course, not just Rob E. Metta, Phil . #118581 From: "philip" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 3:34 pm Subject: Re: The Black Curtain, 2. philofillet Hi Nina I intersperse some comments, questions. > The Black Curtain, 2. > When we speak about naama and ruupa we do not speak about theory that > is "in the bookE but we speak about this moment. After rebirth- > consciousness there are many different types of cittas. Ph: I heard that the first javanas after the rebirth consiciousness are always lobha-rooted. Why do we know that is true? >If these are > not understood there are ignorance and wrong view of self. Ph: Is that true? Is there always wrong view of self when cittas are not understood. Can't there be mohamula cittas, just restlessness. Or lobha without wrong view? I guess A.Sujin meant "if these are not understood ignorance and wrong view of self is inevitable." > We should > continue to develop understanding in order to become detached from > wanting to do something, wanting something else but developing > understanding, which is the only way. Only understanding can work its > way to become detached from the reality which appears. Ph: I do believe in moments of detachment now more than I did before. I don't know why. There must have been a moment of detachment and understanding of it accumulated or something. You said there are many degrees of alobha, the ones accompanied by panna are of a higher degree. It is hard to understand detachment without panna. So some degrees of alobha are not what we would call "detachment?" > There are two types of reality: naama which experiences an object and > ruupa which cannot experience anything. Ruupa is the object that is > experienced and to which one has attachment instantly. Ph: If there is wise attention, does it mean there is no attachment to the arisen rupa, or does it mean the lobha-rooted cittas fall away quickly, for example, after one series of javanas? No, it must mean there is no lobha at all when there is wise attention to a rupa. >If there is no > understanding the ruupas appearing through the six doorways are there > just for attachment. Ph: They are useless, just drag us through lifetime after lifetime. I at some moments feel a kind of distrust, disenchantment with sense door objects these days, more than before. Of course that is lobha thinking that, dosa, all kinds of akusala. And I'm not saying that I think any kind of meaningful "revulsion" (nibidda?) is taking place. But indeed at some point cittas and cetasikas begin to turn away from sense door objects, towawrds nibbana, I heard that. Perhaps we can get hints of that beginning to happen a little bit, a little bit more often. Or no, just thinking. No way for you to answer that. Only panna can know. Metta, Phil #118582 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 3:49 pm Subject: Re: Breathing body, was: Just checking . epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > ------ > N: This whole section is part of the satipa.t.thaanasutta, and as you > say, the goal is realizing the characteristics through direct > mindfulness of paramatha dhammas. For those who develop jhaana with > this subject jhaana is the proximate cause or the basis for insight. > Jhaana itself is not the goal. After emerging from jhaana one has to > be aware of all naama and ruupa that appear, including the > jhaanafactors that have just fallen away. Otherwise one takes jhaana > for self. All this is extremely difficult. Thank for all the comments on this subject. It made things a little more clear for me, and this last part as you know is very much of interest for me. I take it that 'jhana' consists of both the jhana-cittas and the jhana-factors that accompany those cittas? Is the object of the jhana-citta the subtle breath, and the rupas involved in or associated with the breath? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - #118583 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 4:01 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...putting the attention on something to train the concentration ...continuing to be aware of the object, and as one continues to put the attention on the object and be aware of it, the degree of detail and degree of awareness gradually increases....I do think that single-moment experiences arise without control, but not without influence. And the influence of activities that direct the attention or exercise volition towards a particular end, are part of the conditionality that causes particular sorts of cittas and dhammas to arise. Over time, increments of one or another result will accrue." > > Scott: Believing as you do in activities and experiences as realities, such a 'practice' - however meagre the description - makes sense. Conditionality, at least as it was set out in the Pa.t.thaana, is about dhammas which serve as conditions and are conditioned by dhammas. Neither 'self', nor 'activities', nor 'experience' are dhammas. I understand the distinction, and the radical view that is taken towards that distinction. It basically comes down to the belief that all of the things of life that we normally perceive do not in fact exist. There is a less radical way of looking at dhammas, without violating the technical distinctions of the Abhidhamma, but it is less popular here, and that is that the individual dhammas that appear to citta are on a continuum with the conventional objects and activities that we encounter in everyday life. In this view, both the conventional view and the conventional teaching, which Buddha did deliver in many suttas, are valid as ways to conduct oneself and to practice, and through practice and adoption of the Buddha's advice on how to develop kusala in life, the more refined understanding of paramatha dhammas will develop and the view of life will gradually be transformed. This is the view I subscribe to. It unifies sutta and Abhidhamma under one roof. One with "little dust in their eyes" may instantly see the paramatha view inherent in the Buddha's conventional teaching, but others will also have a way to practice that develops kusala. In this view, the Buddha performed quite an amazing balancing act, which allows everyone to follow the path from where they are. In the opposing view, any practice that does not completely allow for the natural arising of dhammas and the path will lead to akusala and self-view. In that view, there are no gradations of the path, and the only way to "practice" is to understand the unpatterned arising of individual dhammas. Through becoming aware of this selfless reality, the path will gradually, over aeons, form by itself, moving from intellecutal understanding to true pariyatti to patipatti, which is not any practice that is done, but is another type of citta arising, and nothing more. This view is unproven, does not match the Buddha's pronouncements in the suttas, but does match the pronouncements of teachers who interpret the commentaries and sub-commentaries of the Abhidhamma and suttas as giving a dhammas-only view of practice. And that's where it stands. Just remember that the dhammas-only view does not allow *any* reality for conventional living. In truth, if you truly believe that this is the case, you would give your stuff away and stop participating in conventional life. It's hard to imagine a real belief in dhammas-only and in the full unreality of conventional living expressing itself as a thorough enjoyment of conventional living while merely talking about -- paying lip service to -- the sole reality of paramatha dhammas. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #118584 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 4:05 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > Hi Scott (and Rob E) > > I'm just interested in whether we can call the arising of dhammas, say a moment of seeing, an experience. Well, why not, we can call it anything we want, it is just dhammas. And perhaps calling it an experience can help us to communicate Abhidhamma better. "Incident" is probably better, suggests less self-involvement and might discourage thinking that an "experience" at the sense doors can be anything other than useless in the end. (We hear of wonderful experiences, but not wonderful incidents. ) Yes, I like "incident" better. The usual "arising" is fine of course. > > Nevermind,just an issue of word usage. Appreciate your comments. I prefer "experience" because it emphasize the importance of citta, which is the experiencing element in the equation. Without the "experiencing" of citta, the other arising rupas and namas are inconsequential. It is citta which is really the heart of the path. > As for Rob I would rather arrogantly say that he has been making a sincere effort to get things across but until there is a stripping down closer to strictly understood Abhidhamma terms there will always be too much speculation and theorizing. That goes for anyone, of course, not just Rob E. Yeah, I may have to get back to you on that in a couple of decades. At the current rate, my ability to translate what I'm talking about into strict Abhidhamma terms may be a long time in coming. But I get your point. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #118585 From: "philip" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 4:06 pm Subject: Re: The Black Curtain, 2. philofillet Hi again I hurry to take this back: >I at some moments feel a kind of distrust, disenchantment with sense door objects these days, more than before. Of course that is lobha thinking that, dosa, all kinds of akusala. And I'm not saying that I think any kind of meaningful "revulsion" (nibidda?) is taking place. But indeed at some point cittas and cetasikas begin to turn away from sense door objects, towawrds nibbana, I heard that. Perhaps we can get hints of that beginning to happen a little bit, a little bit more often. Ph: Just thinking, wishful thinking. For the "cittas and cetasikas begin to turn away from objects towards nibbana" to take place, there would have to be first understanding of the characteristics of dhammas, just to begin with. And then knowing nama from rupa, other stages of insight. When A.Sujin talks about citta and cetasika turning away from objects, does she mean following vipassana-nana? Still, thinking about sense objects being useless, khandas being traitors etc, this sinks in and probably helps to develop understanding. Metta, Phil #118586 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 4:18 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Phil. Just jumpin' in... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Scott > > Sc: Neither 'self', nor 'activities', nor 'experience' are dhammas. > > "Experience" as a countable noun, which if I recall correctly is how Rob used it ("single moment experiences") could refer to a dhamma or nimitta of dhammas, no? I'm sure I meant it as a moment of citta. Citta does experience its object - that's its function. I don't see why that threw Scott off. I guess because Scott knows that I don't know what I'm talking about, he's apt to challenge anything I say, even when I'm correct. I hate to keep dragging Nina into this, but here are some quotes from her "Abhidhamma in Daily Life." "The Buddha pointed out the dangers of being infatuated by the objects we experience through the six doors. He taught people to develop the wisdom which knows the realities experienced through the six doors as nama and rupa, phenomena which are impermanent and not self." Note the word "experience" in there for what happens through the six doors, and that realities are "experienced" as nama and rupa. "There are sense-door processes and mind-door processes time and again, and objects are experienced during these processes of citta." That's citta having an experience, Dudes. "A door or 'dvara' is the means through which citta experiences an object...They are doors only when they are the means through which citta experiences an object." "Cittas arising in a process which experience an object through one of the six doors are vithi-cittas (vithi means: way, course, process)." Notice that "process" is in there too, which Scott also didn't like. Unless there's some crime in using "experience" as a noun with regard to citta, I think "single-moment experience" is a pretty good way of talking about the events above in the general statement I was making. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #118587 From: "philip" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 4:30 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) philofillet Hi Rob E ohmigodohmigodohmigodoh my GOD!!!! > Note the word "experience" in there for what happens through the six doors, and that realities are "experienced" as nama and rupa. > > "There are sense-door processes and mind-door processes time and again, and objects are experienced during these processes of citta." > > That's citta having an experience, Dudes. Sure, but as soon as *you* talk about it, it becomes self. Seriously, as soon as we talk about our experiences, the cut and dry, objective description of dhamma processes such as our found in ADL are out the door, don't you think? You have kind of been in a tough trap, because Scott (and I) asked you to tell us about your practice, *your* experiences, and as soon as we start talking about them, well, you know....from the beginning, perhaps it would have been best to refuse to answer and go, as you have done now, to Abhidhamma related texts that describe dhamma processes in an impersonal way, which is how they actually happen...or something like that. And by developing a thorough understanding of dhamma processes as taught in Abhidhamma, tentatively,tentatively, ventured into your own experiences, strictly in line with Abhidhamma explanation. This is DSG, after all, that is kind of the ground DSG was founded on. But I think you have been quite admirable in your effort to explain things. Metta, Phil #118588 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 4:37 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Seeng enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. (Lukas) dhammasaro Good friend Nina, Thank you for your response and your clarification. peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: vangorko@... <...> ------- N: When a layfollower reaches arahatship he/she has to enter monkhood or else die that day. it is impossible to lead the lay life when one is an arahat. This is according to the texts. There are no more arahats in this world today. At this day and age there can only be ariyans up to the degree of the anaagaami. #118589 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:30 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Listening. dhammasaro Good friend Phil, et al If I may... Yes, it does seem we have no control in remembering... In my Educational Psychology Courses, we usually were taught to use as many senses possible so, hopefully, our students would remember and could parrot what we taught. Warm thanks, again... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: philco777@... <....> >--Why don't we remember what we heard as clearly as the visual memory of the canopy? Thankfully there are the recordings. Interesting that although I went to Thailand to listen to A Sujin, and listened intently, I don't remember anything, it's all gone, but I remember what Sukin said as we took a taxi and ate in a crowded, noisy shopping mall, but at the time I was just listening politely, convinced he was wrong - but he was right. The understanding that results from listening comes in a very unpredictable way, no cintrol. Well, not even about what we listen to, no control there either.. <...> #118590 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:48 am Subject: The 4 Able Fruits! bhikkhu5 Friends: What are the Fruits of the 5 Mental Abilities? The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, there are these 5 mental abilities (indriya ). What five? The ability of Faith (saddhā ) The ability of Energy (viriya ) The ability of Awareness (sati ) The ability of Concentration (samādhi ) The ability of Understanding (pañña ) These are the five abilities. One who has completed and fulfilled these five abilities is an Arahat . If they are weaker than that, then one is practising for the fruit of Arahat-ship ; if still weaker, one is a non-returner ; if still weaker, then one is practising for the reaching the fruit of non-returning ; if still weaker, one is a once-returner ; if still weaker, one is training for the realization of the fruit of once-return ; if still weaker, one is a stream-enterer ; if still weaker, one is striving for stream-entry ! Thus, Bhikkhus, one who activates the 5 abilities fully succeeds fully; one who activates them partly succeeds partly. Therefore, I tell you: These five abilities, Bhikkhus, are not barren of resulting fruition... But, I tell you, that one in whom these five abilities are completely & totally absent is an outsider, one who remains an ordinary worldling! <...> Source of reference (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikāya. Book [V: 202] 48 The Mental Abilities: 18 Training.. Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * <...> #118591 From: "connie" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:04 pm Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts nichiconn Hi again Rob, R: Does anyone start the path with pariyatti? I wouldn't think so... c: you're probably right: most make up their own 'Buddhism'. R: That's an interesting presumption. You mean that they don't find the one right Buddhism that you are aware of? What would that be? Whether the find the Buddhism, your Buddhism or some other Buddhism, they will still start out without pariyatti. And so, the path begins with relative ignorance for everyone. ------- c: Pariyatti is (beginning) Dhamma. The only way is sati - there is no 'other Buddhism'. I'm no real Buddhist - no 8fold Path moments here, and none of those begin with ignorance. my 2 cents - keep the change, connie #118592 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Black Curtain, 2. nilovg Dear Phil, Op 12-okt-2011, om 7:06 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > When A.Sujin talks about citta and cetasika turning away from > objects, does she mean following vipassana-nana ------ N: We are just learning that the objects that are experienced are only dhammas, conditioned dhammas, and there can be intellectual understanding of this fact. This can condition later on awareness of them. It will not be soon that there is turning away from them, but if we are on the right Path it will lead to this. ----- Nina. #118593 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Black Curtain, 2. nilovg Dear Phil, Op 12-okt-2011, om 6:34 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Ph: I heard that the first javanas after the rebirth consiciousness > are always lobha-rooted. Why do we know that is true? ------ N: I think in the co. There is clinging to life. ------- > Ph: > > >If these are > > not understood there are ignorance and wrong view of self. > > Ph: Is that true? Is there always wrong view of self when cittas > are not understood. Can't there be mohamula cittas, just > restlessness. Or lobha without wrong view? I guess A.Sujin meant > "if these are not understood ignorance and wrong view of self is > inevitable." ------ N: Yes, these are bound to arise very often. ------ > > > Ph: You said there are many degrees of alobha, the ones accompanied > by panna are of a higher degree. It is hard to understand > detachment without panna. So some degrees of alobha are not what we > would call "detachment?" ------- N: You may be giving without understanding of cause and result. At the moment of giving you do not think of yourself, your own comfort. This is a degree of detachment. ------- > > > There are two types of reality: naama which experiences an object > and > > ruupa which cannot experience anything. Ruupa is the object that is > > experienced and to which one has attachment instantly. > > Ph: If there is wise attention, does it mean there is no attachment > to the arisen rupa, or does it mean the lobha-rooted cittas fall > away quickly, for example, after one series of javanas? No, it must > mean there is no lobha at all when there is wise attention to a rupa. -------- N: Different moments, and after the moment of wise attention other moments follow that may be with lobha. ------ > Nina. #118594 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cetasika as external nilovg Dear Phil, Op 11-okt-2011, om 21:37 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Is it when cetasika is dhammaraamana (mind object) that it is > considered external? Sarah, what was the context of cetasika being > "external."? ------- N: Sarah is busy preparing for the journey. The aayatans is the context. We discussed this before and it is not easy to understand. ------ Nina. > > #118595 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Listening. nilovg Dear Phil, Op 11-okt-2011, om 22:07 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > Thank you for posting that. I remember that wooden canopy so well, > just from one trip. You must remember it so clearly from many > trips. But for me, everything I heard that night is gone. > ----- N: But you spoke about the dome of lobha that encloses us. Kh S said that while sitting there, under the dome or canopy. ------ > > Ph: These days I am listening a lot, like a few years ago, and > reading a lot, and it !does! condition reflection, which seems to > arise with various degrees of trying to figure it out. > ------ N: Kh S often said that listening conditions thinking of dhamma, and then we do not think of other (useless) things. ------ > > > Ph: I think of Lukas sometimes because he says for him these days > tgere is not much interest in Dhamma. For me it's the opposite, my > Japanese studies and half-finished writing projects must take a > back seat. > ----- N: I meant to ask you how you got on with the stories for children you meant to write. -------- Nina. #118596 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Breathing body, was: Just checking . nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 12-okt-2011, om 6:49 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > I take it that 'jhana' consists of both the jhana-cittas and the > jhana-factors that accompany those cittas? Is the object of the > jhana-citta the subtle breath, and the rupas involved in or > associated with the breath? ------ N: First sentence is correct. The object: breath, a ruupa conditioned by citta. Awareness and understanding of it also while developing jhaana with this subject, but not understanding of the degree of realizing anattaa. You mention now and then thinking of impermanence. I thought of you while listening to Kh Sujin going over the commentary on ageing which is dukkha. Vis. XX, 73, natural materiality, that is external materiality. "It becomes evident to him by means of an asoka tree shoot..." Kh Sujin said that if you like trees you can see differences when it ages. This can remind us of the truth of impermanence of ruupas. The Vis. describes the different colours a tree takes. Dark green leaves become withered foliage and then falls from its stem. We know that thinking is not the same of awareness of naama and ruupa, but we are so forgetful and it is good to have reminders all around us. ------ Nina. #118597 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 12-okt-2011, om 7:05 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > Rob to Phil: Yeah, I may have to get back to you on that in a > couple of decades. At the current rate, my ability to translate > what I'm talking about into strict Abhidhamma terms may be a long > time in coming. But I get your point. ----- N: Do not worry about names and terms. Abhidhamma is not in the book as Kh Sujin often says. It pertains to reality here and now. No need to think of classifications. ------ Nina. #118598 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:59 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > Thanks, Sarah! I hope that the moments of good humour create some kusala kamma for those involved, even though I'm not sure if it's on the official list of kusala cetasikas... :-) .... S: :-) Well, to be very nit-picky about it, I think you are meaning kusala vipaka (result of kusala kamma). Even then, the kusala vipaka can only ever be the result of our kusala kamma, not the result of someone else's good humour. For example, the seeing of pleasant visible object now is the result of past kusala kamma primarily. As for the good humour and kusala cittas - as usual, only panna can know. Lots of lobha in between the moments of kindness and consideration for others, I find. OK, brief answers only - I'm supervising a TV technician as I write and pack...... Metta Sarah ===== #118599 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 12-okt-2011, om 7:18 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > I hate to keep dragging Nina into this, but here are some quotes > from her "Abhidhamma in Daily Life." > > "The Buddha pointed out the dangers of being infatuated by the > objects we experience through the six doors. He taught people to > develop the wisdom which knows the realities experienced through > the six doors as nama and rupa, phenomena which are impermanent and > not self." ------ N: The term experience is very wide, it can be cognized. BUt I did not follow the long discussions you had with Scott. ------ Nina.