#119000 From: "philip" Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 3:19 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Couple Married 72 Years Die Holding Hands plus Ajahn Brahm Dhamma Talk philofillet Hi Chuck No need to aplogize, perfectly good topics! Metta, Phil #119001 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 3:20 pm Subject: Perfections, in need of paperbooks. szmicio Dear friends, Great quotation. As usual I am in need of this and any other Nina and Khun Sujin books, since I gave all of them as a Dhamma dana to my friends. The last book, Survey of Paramattha Dhamma I gave to a monk from Australia, who seemed to be very interested in that, cause it talks about abhidhamma, and he admitted he never studied abhidhamma. Best wishes Lukas > >".... Patience is "a shore bounding the great ocean of hatred; a panel > > closing off the door to the plane of misery." > > Many people are afraid of unhappy planes and they perform kusala so > > that they will not be born there. However, if someone does not want > > to be reborn in an unhappy plane, he should be patient and refrain > > from akusala, because patience is "a panel closing off the door to > > the plane of misery." > .... #119002 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 3:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, >________________________________ >From: Robert E On dukkha >> >R: 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? >> .... >> S: Yes. That's why I think "stress" is misleading as a translation of dukkha. Kusala dhammas are inherently unsatisfactory because they are impermanent, but "stressful"? I don't think so. > >I see what you mean; but I take it, when translated that way, that even kusala dhammas are "stressful" through being impermanent because citta clings to the dhamma and there is pain when it fades or is taken away. Then craving for kusala dhammas is also stressful. So I think their impermanence does cause stress, in that way of looking at it. .... S: I see what you mean. Sabbe sankhara dukkha - all conditioned dhammas are dukkha. Would you describe the mental states of the Buddha as "stressful"? Yes, they are the subject of others' clinging, they are upadana khandha, but I think that whilst such clinging leads to "stress" in others, unsatisfactory or unworthy of being clung to makes more sense than "stressful". No need to agree. ... > >I think that saying they are "unsatisfactory" or "unsatisfying" because of their impermanence is also true. And it would also be true to say that the inability to control them and make them be there on command is also a source of stress. .... S: Only a source of stress for the ignorant and for those who haven't eradicated attachment to sensuous objects and aversion. ... > >I remember Buddha saying in some suttas that if dhammas were a part of self, we could make them come on command, do what we want, etc. And that it proved they were not a part of self that they were out of our control. And this is true of all the kandhas. We can't control thoughts or feelings either, and I can see how seeing this directly would cause detachment from dhammas that are not really either part of self, satisfying, lasting or controllable. .... S: Yes, exactly and well summarised. Understanding the anatta aspect and uncontrollability of dhammas leads to detachment, not attachment and stress. Could you kindly explain this to Alex when you have a chance! I was glad to read your appreciation of the passage from the Sammohavinodani - it really is the teaching of dhammas as anatta and not within anyone's control that is the heart of the Teachings. Metta Sarah p.s Each time we go to Kaeng Krajan with K.Sujin, Jon & I like to help arrange and sponsor one active DSG member to join the trip for the first time. The next one we'll be joiining is at the end Jan. Phil, Ann, Sukin, Rob K (I'm sure) will also be joining. If you or anyone else is able to get as far as Bangkok, let us know. ===== #119003 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 3:50 pm Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Phil, Scott, Ken H., pt, Alex, Chris, and all. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi all > > I like this post that quotes from a sutta which makes it clear that thinking we can control dhammas is wrong. Of course all the Strivers! here will deny that they believe they can "wield power over those feelings (etc) as may my feelings be thus, and not otherwise", so who is spinning this sutta, me or them? Only understanding can tell. You can hide behind "understanding alone knows" if you like; but you made a point of stating your own opinion before falling back on that positionless position. The truth is that you don't know what is in the mind of meditators or anyone else who thinks that purposeful action is important, not just involuntary mental forms. It's easy to create a straw man out of your own convenient images and then say that you know that people you have identified as Strivers -- a label is always convenient isn't it? -- secretly believe they can control dhammas, even if they "claim" they don't. Well, you are making this up. You obviously have a vested interest in disparaging and disarming those who disagree with your understanding, so you might want to look at your attachment to your own unexamined view. For intentional action and adopting specific practices, see Buddha's advice to Moggalana to overcome sleepiness in his meditation, as I recently noted to Jon: "Are you nodding, Moggallana, are you nodding?" — "Yes. Lord." — 1. "Well then, Moggallana, at whatever thought drowsiness befalls you, to that thought you should not give attention and not dwell on that thought. Then, by doing so, it is possible that your drowsiness will vanish. 2. "But if, by doing so, drowsiness does not vanish, then you should reflect upon the Teaching as you have heard and learned it, you should ponder over it and examine it closely in your mind. Then, by doing so, it is possible that your drowsiness will vanish. 3. "But if, by doing so, drowsiness does not vanish, then you should repeat in full detail the Teaching as you have heard and learned it. Then, by doing so, it is possible that drowsiness will vanish. 4. "But if, by doing so, drowsiness does not vanish, then you should pull both ear-lobes and rub your limbs with your hand. Then, by doing so, it is possible that drowsiness will vanish. 5. "But if, by doing so, drowsiness does not vanish, you should get up from your seat and, after washing your eyes with water, you should look around in all directions and upwards to the stars and constellations. Then, by doing so, it is possible that your drowsiness will vanish. 6. "But if, by doing so, drowsiness does not vanish, you should give attention to the perception of light, to the perception of day (-light): as by day so by night, as by night so by day. Thus, with your mind clear and unclouded, you should cultivate a mind that is full of brightness. Then, by doing so, it is possible that your drowsiness will vanish. 7. "But if, by doing so, drowsiness does not vanish, then, with your senses turned inward and your mind not straying outward, you should take to walking up and down, being aware of going to and fro. Then, by doing so, it is possible that your drowsiness will vanish. 8. "But if, by doing so, drowsiness does not vanish, you may, mindfully and clearly aware, lie down, lion-like, on your right side, placing foot on foot, keeping in mind the thought of rising; and on awakening, you should quickly get up, thinking 'I must not indulge in the comfort of resting and reclining, in the pleasure of sleeping.' "Thus, Moggallana, should you train yourself." — Anguttara Nikaya VII, 58 Why do you think Buddha gave this specific advice regarding overcoming a particular physical and mental problem? And what are the implications for the idea that "no-control" = "no practice?" Kind of tears that apart, doesn't it? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #119004 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 4:07 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Rob E > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > > > My understanding is that the hindrances are more deeply suppressed, worn away and eradicated with each of the jhanas, which are deeper, more concentrated and more equanimitous states. > > > > =============== > > > > > > J: The suppression of hindrances occasioned by highly developed kusala concentration is a temporary suppression only and does not, and cannot, constitute an eradication or even, as far as I know, a wearing away. Wearing away and eradication is the function of the panna of satipatthana/insight. > > > > [RE:] Oh....I've got to find that sutta that Alex quoted. It said that when you suppress the defilements for a period of time, like a monkey tied to a tree who gets out of the habit of wandering and doing bad things, thus getting trained, the defilements likewise wither away and eventually get eradicated. > > =============== > > J: Is this the sutta passage you have in mind (from a post of Alex's)? > > ..."Just as if a person, catching six animals of different ranges, of different habitats, were to bind them with a strong rope. Catching a snake, he would bind it with a strong rope. Catching a crocodile... a bird... a dog... a hyena... a monkey, he would bind it with a strong rope. Binding them all with a strong rope, he would tether them to a strong post or stake.[1] > ...In the same way, when a monk whose mindfulness immersed in the body is developed & pursued, the eye does not pull toward pleasing forms, and unpleasing forms are not repellent. The ear does not pull toward pleasing sounds... The nose does not pull toward pleasing aromas... The tongue does not pull toward pleasing flavors... The body does not pull toward pleasing tactile sensations... The intellect does not pull toward pleasing ideas, and unpleasing ideas are not repellent. This, monks, is restraint. > > "Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will develop mindfulness immersed in the body. We will pursue it, hand it the reins and take it as a basis, give it a grounding. We will steady it, consolidate it, and set about it properly.' That's how you should train yourselves." > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.206.than.html Yes, that is indeed it! Thank you, Jon. I think however you interpret it, it's a great sutta isn't it? Hopeful to hear that mindfulness can overcome the hindrances if citta is properly "tethered" through mindfulness of the body. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #119005 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 4:21 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > p.s Each time we go to Kaeng Krajan with K.Sujin, Jon & I like to help arrange and sponsor one active DSG member to join the trip for the first time. The next one we'll be joiining is at the end Jan. Phil, Ann, Sukin, Rob K (I'm sure) will also be joining. If you or anyone else is able to get as far as Bangkok, let us know. That is an awfully kind and generous offer. I would love to join you sometime. I'm sure it would be a more than amazing experience, and great to meet you all. I think at present it may be difficult to get away, but I will see what my family is up to and see if it is possible. If not now, I will hope to do this in the future. Thank you! On a lighter note, aren't you afraid that if Phil and I were there at the same time, we would either get into a fistfight or go out drinking? :-) Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #119006 From: "philip" Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 4:32 pm Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny philofillet Hi Rob E Without knowing the dhammas involved the notion of following instructions from the Buddha is pretty meaningless, I think. As I have said to Alex several times, if kusala virya and chanda rule your meditation, great, mudita! But if there is a notion of self trying to make sati arise, and lobha for results, you are just accumulating akusala. I can't understand how there could be anything but, and I think if your meditation was really rooted in understanding, you'd be beyond trying to sell it to people on the internet. Ok this is really really really really really the lastest last of the last things I'm ever ever ever going to say about meditation!!!!!!!! :) Metta, Phil #119007 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 6:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, >________________________________ >From: Robert E >On a lighter note, aren't you afraid that if Phil and I were there at the same time, we would either get into a fistfight or go out drinking? :-) ..... S: :-) Just some spicy discussions I'm sure. Now, if we could find a way for Scott to come too, it would be even more interesting! I'd love for Howard, Lukas, Alex, Dieter and all the other long-term regular posters we've not met to come too. Metta Sarah ===== #119008 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 3:40 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Couple Married 72 Years Die Holding Hands plus Ajahn Brahm Dhamma Talk dhammasaro Good friend Phil, et al Well, not according to my DSG censors... Been told to desist... [verily beeg Texican bummers] peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: philco777@... Hi Chuck No need to aplogize, perfectly good topics! <...> #119009 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 4:06 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Couple Married 72 Years Die Holding Hands plus Ajahn Brahm Dhamma Talk dhammasaro Good friend Phil, et al May I venture further... As a very lucky (I can not think of a better word) man; 1. I am very blessed to have the love of my life - a Thai-American woman - she, in her very quiet way, among her many Thai friends, quietly led me to Theravadan Buddhism... 2. She allowed me with no objection, to be a monk... she well knew I well be one for life... 3. Having been a monk, I well know the practical problems of being a Buddhist monk as well as being a Buddhist layperson... As this is not a sterile Buddhist message; I expect this very true loving Buddhist message will be deleted; so be it again... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck From: dhammasaro@... To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com; philco777@... Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Couple Married 72 Years Die Holding Hands plus Ajahn Brahm Dhamma Talk Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 00:40:54 -0400 Good friend Phil, et al Well, not according to my DSG censors... Been told to desist... [verily beeg Texican bummers] <...> #119010 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 4:27 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Couple Married 72 Years Die Holding Hands plus Ajahn Brahm Dhamma Talk dhammasaro Good friend Ken H, et al Warm thanks for for your very considered message... Please check the date of my membership... it seems there is some negative position of the the owners of this forum... it seems, very early on I offended someone and every time I try to be active; I am... [ahem] Good friend Ken H, et al... please understand... I am not without error... I just do not understand the constant barrage against me here at DSG!!! What did I do so dastard in the past? ...in the past here??? peace to all... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck Post script: I know Ken H; I, will again, will be censored in replying to you!!! [major Texican bummers!!!] #119011 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 4:39 pm Subject: Giving Grapes to a Bhikkhu and/or Bhikkhuni dhammasaro Good friends all, If I may... May i ask... A very practical question: When presenting grapes to a bhikkhu/bhukkuni; what is the proper procedure according to the Vinaya-pitaka? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119012 From: "philip" Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 7:32 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Couple Married 72 Years Die Holding Hands plus Ajahn Brahm Dhamma Talk philofillet Hi Chuck, > As this is not a sterile Buddhist message; I expect this very true loving Buddhist message will be deleted; so be it again... > You're imagining things, Chuck! Sometimes posts don't appear because of Yahoo tech problems, but never a deletion by Sarah and Jon, honestly. Ken H is a hardliner, but he is not mean-sprited, nobody here is. Well, we all are on occasions, the emphasis is on momentary states. Mudita for your marriage ! ! This place is crawling with happily married people, you're in good company! Unbummer! :) :) Metta, Phil #119013 From: "Christine" Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:29 pm Subject: Re: Giving Grapes to a Bhikkhu and/or Bhikkhuni christine_fo... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Maipenrai Dhammasaro wrote: > > A very practical question: > > When presenting grapes to a bhikkhu/bhukkuni; what is the proper procedure according to the Vinaya-pitaka? > Hello Chuck, This is what we do each day at Dhammagiri Forest Monastery near Brisbane, when presenting food dana to Bhante Dhammasiha – which often contains grapes and oranges: `'In accordance with the discipline, a monk is prohibited from eating fruit or vegetables containing fertile seeds. So, when offering such things, a layperson can either remove the seeds or make the fruit allowable slightly damaging it with a knife. This is done by piercing the fruit and saying at the same time 'Kappiyam bhante' or 'I am making this allowable, Venerable Sir' (the English translation). It is instructive to note that, rather than limiting what can be offered, the Vinaya lays emphasis on the mode of offering. Offering should be done in a respectful manner, making the act of offering a mindful and reflective one, irrespective of what one is giving.'' [......] http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/buddhistworld/layguide.htm A small sharp knife is placed near the fruit and `Kappiyam bhante' is said as the fruit is offered. with metta Chris #119014 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 10:09 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Jon (Rob E.), The Paa.li for: "...'Tethered to a stout post or pillar,' monks, denotes mindfulness as to body. Therefore, monks, this is how you must train yourselves: 'We shall practice mindfulness as to body, develop it, make it our vehicle, our dwelling-place, our resort, we will build it up and undertake it thoroughly.' This, monks, is how you must train yourselves." ...Da.lhe khiile vaa thambhe vaa'ti kho, bhikkhave, kaayagataaya satiyaa eta.m adhivacana.m. Tasmaatiha vo, bhikkhave, eva.m sikkhitabba.m - 'kaayagataa no sati bhaavitaa bhavissati bahuliikataa yaaniikataa vatthukataa anuṭṭhitaa paricitaa susamaaraddhaa'ti. Eva~nhi kho, bhikkhave, sikkhitabba''nti. Dasama.m. Scott. #119015 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 10:27 pm Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...You can hide behind 'understanding alone knows'..." Scott: Questions: 1. Are you suggesting that there is another mental factor - other than pa~n~naa - that is the functional element in bringing about the Path? 2.If so, what is it? 3. What are your sources of evidence? R: "For intentional action and adopting specific practices, see Buddha's advice to Moggalana to overcome sleepiness in his meditation..." Scott: A few more questions: 4. Can you give the context of this sutta? 5. Who was Moggalana? 6. What were his 'accumulations?' 7. What did the Buddha know about Moggalana and how the particular levels of development to which the various operative mental factors available to him were constellated? 8. Does conventional language refer back to paramattha dhammas or to some separate 'reality' with a set of conditional laws that are somehow different from those which apply to paramattha dhammas? 9. Are you Moggalana? 10. Am I Moggalana? 11. What are the proofs you use to allow you to equate a modern-day person, such as you or I, to Moggalana? 12. What are the proofs you use to justify the assumption that 'instructions' are generic? Scott. #119016 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 10:38 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., (Jon), R: "...Hopeful to hear that mindfulness can overcome the hindrances if citta is properly 'tethered' through mindfulness of the body." Scott: It is a simple fact that when kusala citta is in ascendance - that is, has arisen and not yet fallen away - akusala is suppressed. No hindrances (akusala) arise when citta is kusala. Do you see this otherwise? If so, what evidence do you put forward to substantiate the alternative? It is merely an (incorrect) interpretation to impute some sort of effectiveness to a consciously formed thought about doing something called 'mindfulness of the body' (incorrectly labelled 'intention' but not the mental factor known as cetanaa). Scott. #119017 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 11:08 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Sarah, S: "I sent quite a long response to Scott's message which hasn't shown up and I didn't keep a copy....I was rushing, so probably made a mistake when posting..." Scott: I guess it's gone. I hate when that happens and would have liked the original prose. I'll respond to the point-form version. S: " - Scott, I'm very glad to have you around, so no need to 'project' otherwise!" Scott: Ah. 'Projection.' I can only say that I don't envy you having to assuage the egos of all of the discussants on either side of whatever fence we are positioned. Just stop giving Rob E. all the breaks and I'll, at least, be happy. Don't you want me to be happy too? Remember, Rob's a big boy too. But, thanks, I'm glad to be around (while many might feel otherwise). S: "- technical details and so on. Different accumulations. Yes, like you, I like to 'delve' and study. Others may develop an understanding of realities without ever opening a book. If we set any rule, any 'should' in this regard, it can become another ritual." Scott: True, but, not to be misunderstood, when I suggest that a fellow discussant do a little work and look up a few things on his own I'm hardly suggesting that he do so as a 'ritual' or setting a 'rule' or anything of the kind. This is a discussion list and interest in Dhamma might condition this sort of effort and it need not be shunted off into the category of 'ritual.' It's in the same vein as suggesting a level of politeness - and this varies as well. No, I see such a suggestion to be the same as one might give on any discussion list where expectations about higher levels of discourse are reasonable - including each discussant's efforts to work behind the scenes and bring some of the fruits of that work to a discussion and not just repetitive prose. S: "- KS's comments about how we should study the reality now, the kind of citta etc - all about direct understanding now, not about just accumulating book knowledge as you know and agree." Scott: Agreed and beside the (my) point. 'Book knowledge' is a part of the beginnings of pariyatti, as you know and agree. Others might not agree, and certainly continually misunderstand this, but I think that we can agree that, a) there is right understanding, b) the conceptual basis for this is found in the texts, c) these need to be studied at some point, and, d) this is not the 'study' referred to when talking about 'studying' dhammas since that refers to realities. I'm referring to the mundane discussing and using texts and scholarship aspect of the concern. S: "- I referred to comments she's made to some of us about trying to find out the detailed answers, the theory - thinking our way through. All conditioned by self, even if no wrong-view arising at the time. Attachment conditioned by wrong view tendency..." Scott: Yes, and there is a place for reading books, as I mentioned. I don't misunderstand what Kh. Sujin says about this. Others totally do (whether literally or tactically). S: "- personal details, practice ...... all gone . If someone thinks they experience jhana, for example, KS will just smile and ask about this moment. By understanding more about present dhammas, we'll all understand more about such so-called experiences and cling less to ideas of practice as anything other than the understanding of dhammas now." Scott: Again, agreed. I'd like to hear more from you about the way in which you understand the sort of 'should' implied in the above ('we should understand more about present dhammas') - as in the sorts of 'shoulds' that are found throughout Survey. I think others will and do totally misunderstand this. Scott. #119018 From: "philip" Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 11:25 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) philofillet Hi Rob E and all > > R: "...I will be *very* interested for anything that directly states your view from any ancient Buddhist commentary." > > > > Scott: We'll see what happens next, Rob and Phil. Bear with the length. Within this very concise and dense section you can find pretty well all of the various dsg pets. > > > > Here, from the Sammohavinodanii (The Dispeller of Delusion). Commentary to Vibha"nga: > > This is great! Thanks for the contribution, Scott. I will go through it, possibly slowly, and be happy to discuss it with you. I wish I had all the commentaries and subcommentaries. I actually always enjoy them, and despite my "bad attitude" I would read them all if I had the opportunity. Ph: I was looking forward to this discussion. Before you get further caught up in the six animals, Rob, any chance of coming back to this? If I've missed a decision to postpone/cancel this discussion amoung all the posts, my apology. And of course if you're no longer keen on it, fair enough. Keenness swings onto different objects all the time, I know that from my own experience (cross that out) cittas. Metta, Phil > = = = = = = = = = = > #119019 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 11:52 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Phil, Ph: "I was looking forward to this discussion..." Scott: I too am watching. Scott. #119020 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:05 am Subject: [dsg] Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts scottduncan2 Sarah, S: "...Now, if we could find a way for Scott to come too..." Scott: Of course I'd love it. Alas, no hope. I've a daughter who's moving to Melbourne and she despairs (rightly so) that I'll never get to see her. Just couldn't make it work... Scott. #119021 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections, was: Pt's Galaxy ... nilovg Dear Phil, Op 20-okt-2011, om 16:20 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Consciousness is said to be like the villager who sees the coin, > > because of its skill of apprehending some distinguishing marks with > > regard to the object. > > Understanding should be seen as said to be like the moneychanger who > > sees the coin, because it understands completely the distinguishing > > marks with regard to the object. > > Ph: Thank you, a bit hard to understand how vinnana "apprehends > some distinguishing marks", I thought it was bare cognition and > sanna would find distinguishing marks. Am I misunderstanding > something about vinnana? ----- N: Vi~n~naa.na: you have to think of the simile of seeing the coin: some, or (only) a few (ekacca) distinguishing marks, not much. Not like pa~n~naa who sees the true characteristic. Perception: sees it as a whole, knows even less than vi~n~naa.na. The simile indicates a coarse knowing, than less coarse and then refined, in all details. After that the vis. elaborates on pa~n~naa, the extent of its knowing, mundane and supramundane. ----- Nina. #119022 From: "philip" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:40 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) philofillet Hi Scott, Rob and all >"240. In such passages as 'Materiality, bhikkhus, is impermanent; what is impermanent is painful, what is painful is not self; what is not-self, that is not mine, that I am not, that is not myself' (S iii 82), he taught the characteristic of no-self by means of both the impermanent and suffering. "241. Why? Because of the obviousness of impermanence and suffering. For when a plate or a saucer or whatever it may be falls from the hand and breaks, they say: 'Ah, Impermanence,' thus impermanence is obvious. But as regards the person (attabhaava), when boils and carbuncles and the like have sprung up, or when pierced by splinters and thorns, etc., they say 'Ah! The pain.' Thus pain is obvious. The characteristic of no-self is unobvious, dark, unclear, difficult to penetrate, difficult to illustrate, difficult to make known. Ph: Let me take a stab at being Rob and see if I can do as well as he did when he imitated Ken: "If we study impermanence of a plate or saucer or "whatever it may be" at a level that is obvious, sati can gradually sink deeper towards the core of that conceptual object to uncover subtleties that lay within, so that through developing our understanding of impermanence at that level, our minds develop towards perception of more momentary impermanence, a gradual refining of understanding towards the paramattha via the conceptual, as understanding deepens and germinates, and then the Buddha's gradual teaching blossoms and the path unfolds." Something like that? Sorry Rob, that was naughty! You are not that facile.... Metta, Phil #119023 From: "philip" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Perfections, was: Pt's Galaxy ... philofillet Hi Nina > Perception: sees it as a whole, knows even less than vi~n~naa.na. Thanks, becoming a little clearer. After studying Sarah's explanation of sanna and memory, I will come back to this. Metta, Phil #119024 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Model discussion. nilovg Dear Scott, thanks for the transcription of this very good and thorough discussion. Nina. Op 21-okt-2011, om 3:02 heeft scottduncan2 het volgende geschreven: > Consider the following discussion vignette (dsg.org, Bangkok 28, 29 > & 30 July 2001 (Erik and friends, 28 July, morning): > > E: "My Theravada has been the Visuddhimagga and I have not finished > reading the entire Visuddhimagga but I have been studying it for > for a few months now. #119025 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 1:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Music and Abhidhamma nilovg Dear Vince, Op 21-okt-2011, om 4:58 heeft Vince het volgende geschreven: > We can be detached easily when we hear just sounds. > However, How can we explain, in Abhidhamma terms, the strange speed > of strong attachment we can develop when hearing music? ------- N: We like the melody, consisting of many sounds, and each moment of hearing sound is followed by javana cittas which are akusala in the case of attachment. This can remind us that countless processes of cittas experiencing an object through a sense-door and then through the mind-door succeed one another incredibly fast. We cannot imagine to what extent akusala is accumulating and accumulating. We cannot force ourselves not to like music, but we can come to understand more different realities, little by little. Nina. #119026 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 1:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Couple Married 72 Years Die Holding Hands plus Ajahn Brahm Dhamma Talk nilovg Dear Chuck, I agree with Phil, we lead worldly lives and these topics are suitable and worth considering. Nina. Op 21-okt-2011, om 6:19 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Hi Chuck > > No need to aplogize, perfectly good topics! #119027 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 1:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Striving. was: Meditation. nilovg Dear Alex, Op 20-okt-2011, om 18:08 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > Samadhi is the way, no samadhi is no way at all - AN6.64 > Jhana Leads to 4 fruits: From Stream to Arhatship. (DN29) > Jhana IS the path to awakening - MN36 ----- N: It would be helpful if you could just quote a few lines of one of these or of each sutta you refer to. You write: Of course sati, etc, will develop without any Self, as a selfless result. But appropriate causes need to be set. ------- N: If you see the value of right understanding of realities, this in itself will condition the right kind of effort. Effort that is balanced by pa~n~naa: not strained and over much, and not too weak. All the Path factors arise together when there is a moment of right understanding, samaadhi and sammaa vayaama included. Some time ago you indicated that there is also dry insight and that jhaana is not indispensable. You also quoted some texts. What do you think about this topic now? Nina. #119029 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 2:31 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Rob E > > Without knowing the dhammas involved the notion of following instructions from the Buddha is pretty meaningless, I think. As I have said to Alex several times, if kusala virya and chanda rule your meditation, great, mudita! But if there is a notion of self trying to make sati arise, and lobha for results, you are just accumulating akusala. I can't understand how there could be anything but, and I think if your meditation was really rooted in understanding, you'd be beyond trying to sell it to people on the internet. > > Ok this is really really really really really the lastest last of the last things I'm ever ever ever going to say about meditation!!!!!!!! :) I'm not trying to sell anything. YOu have a knack for putting things in the most insulting terms possible - I guess it's a talent. I don't think everyone or anyone should meditate. These conversations started years ago with list members roundly attacking others' meditation practice, and it continues on under one excuse or another, including your own. If you can't "see how it could be anything other than akusala," you are part of a long line of list members who coincidentally have the exact same opinion - and that's all it is, because you have no idea whether what you're saying is true or not. It's just a plain out-and-out bias based on your own chosen philosophy. As Buddhist one would think that you would not treasure your opinion about things you don't know quite so strongly, and cling to your own opinionated views quite so strongly, like a monkey desperately clinging to a favorite banana, but I guess we're human first and Buddhist when it's convenient. If this is really really really really the last thing you ever say about meditation, it will be a blessing. I may talk about it less too when the meditation-involved threads stop cropping up, and as long as people leave the meditators alone. Don't poke the monkeys in the meditation cage, and they won't get so agitated. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #119030 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 2:58 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott, and Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Jon (Rob E.), > > The Paa.li for: > > "...'Tethered to a stout post or pillar,' monks, denotes mindfulness as to body. Therefore, monks, this is how you must train yourselves: 'We shall practice mindfulness as to body, develop it, make it our vehicle, our dwelling-place, our resort, we will build it up and undertake it thoroughly.' This, monks, is how you must train yourselves." > > ...Da.lhe khiile vaa thambhe vaa'ti kho, bhikkhave, kaayagataaya satiyaa eta.m adhivacana.m. Tasmaatiha vo, bhikkhave, eva.m sikkhitabba.m - 'kaayagataa no sati bhaavitaa bhavissati bahuliikataa yaaniikataa vatthukataa anuṭṭhitaa paricitaa susamaaraddhaa'ti. Eva~nhi kho, bhikkhave, sikkhitabba''nti. Dasama.m. I would also like to know how you would interpret the active sense in which the translation proposes, starting with "This is how you must train yourselves," then "we shall practice mindfulness...," "develop it, make it our vehicle, our dwelling place...," "we will build it up and undertake it...," and then again, "This...is how you must train yourselves." Do you feel this active imperative sense is not a correct reflection of the Pali? Or do you agree that this appears to be a set of direct admonitions or instructions from the Buddha to the monks? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #119031 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 3:00 am Subject: Striving. was: Meditation. moellerdieter ----- Original Message ----- From: Dieter Moeller To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 5:28 PM Subject: Re: Striving. was: Meditation. Hi Alex (and Nina), just between.. you wrote: : 'One should do what needs to be done and without Self Views. Set the causes and effects will follow all by themselves. Of course sati, etc, will develop without any Self, as a selfless result. But appropriate causes need to be set.' I think that samma sati is perfectly described by the Bahiya sutta (one of Howard's favorite signatures)"Then, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bahiya, there is no you in terms of that. When there is no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress." well, the advise to Bahiya is valid for those with quite advanced mind development and was brief due to inappropriate timing. I think you agree with me that for us 'commoners', the appropriate cause which need to be set is the fourfold training of mindfulness as described by the Maha Satipatthana Sutta. And that starts with a certain level of tranquillity ( as it does for the Jhanas) , where volition /action/intention for wordly matters is put aside. Whereas the 7th step of the Noble Path aims for insight of the true nature of our world , the 8th aims for insight what is behind.. with Metta Dieter #119032 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 3:05 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny truth_aerator Hello Phil, all, >P: As I have said to Alex several times, if kusala virya and chanda >rule your meditation, great, mudita! But if there is a notion of self >trying to make sati arise, and lobha for results, you are just >accumulating akusala. >================================================ Wrong Idea of permanent Self is an obstacle, not a factor in meditation. The more idea of self is put away, the more successes. Sati arises when there are causes for it. As for akusala. It seems that not-meditating provides more akusala than sitting down and watching namarupa in the present moment. With best wishes, Alex #119033 From: "connie" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 3:17 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny nichiconn to no one in particular, > > I guess we're human first and Buddhist when it's convenient. > I guess they are the same person... the one we approve of and the one that irritates us. Better to stick to minding my own cittas, I think. connie #119034 From: A T Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 3:30 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Striving. was: Meditation. truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, >N:Some time ago you indicated that there is also dry insight and that >jhaana is not indispensable. You also quoted some texts. What do >you think about this topic now? >========================================== I've checked some commentaries, read some more suttas, contemplated more. As I understand it that level of vipassana is preliminary stage. In any case there are far more material that totally and unambiguously makes Jhana required. (N8P is required which contains jhanas). As for specific quotes, there are many: "There bhikkhus, I declare the knowledge of the possibility as the possibility and the impossibility as the impossibility, to the concentrated, not to the distracted. So also, the situational results of actions in the past, future, present; the higher states of the mind, releases, concentrations, attainments with their defiling natures, purities and the risings from them; recollecting previous births; knowing the disappearing and appearing of beings; and the destruction of desires (ÄsavÄnaṃ khayÄ). All these are to the concentrated not to the distracted (samÄdhi maggo, asamÄdhi kummaggo). - SÄ«hanÄdasuttaṃ http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara-Nikaya/Anguttara4/6-chakkanipa\ ta/006-mahavaggo-e.html As translation was imperfect, I've checked the pali. It clearly says that destruction of taints,ÄsavÄnaṃ khayÄ, is only when you have samÄdhi. And samÄdhi is defined as 4 jhÄnas, which result in 4 paths and fruits (DN29). "24...These are the four modes of being addicted and devoted to pleasure, Cunda, which conduce absolutely to unworldliness, to passionlessness, to cessation, to peace, to higher knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbana. What are the four ? Firstly, Cunda, when a brother, aloof from sensuous appetites, aloof from evil ideas, enters into and abides in the First Jhfina" "25...For those who live addicted and devoted to these four modes of pleasure, brother, how much fruit, how many advantages are to be expected ? Them ye should answer thus : Four kinds of fruit, brother, four advantages are to be expected. What are the four [alex: 4 jhanas]" http://tipitaka.wikia.com/wiki/Pasadika_Sutta Then there is Upanisasuttaṃ: "And what is the supporting condition for the knowledge and vision of things as they really are? 'Concentration' should be the reply." "concentration is the supporting condition for the knowledge and vision of things as they really are" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.023.bodh.html The evidence is overwhelming, and no amount of "samÄdhi doesn't require jhÄna" would work because jhÄna makes up the part of Noble Eightfold path and AN4.41 includes jhÄna and other developments of samÄdhi. With best wishes, Alex #119035 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 3:41 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., Regarding: "...'Tethered to a stout post or pillar,' monks, denotes mindfulness as to body. Therefore, monks, this is how you must train yourselves: 'We shall practice mindfulness as to body, develop it, make it our vehicle, our dwelling-place, our resort, we will build it up and undertake it thoroughly.' This, monks, is how you must train yourselves." "...Da.lhe khiile vaa thambhe vaa'ti kho, bhikkhave, kaayagataaya satiyaa eta.m adhivacana.m. Tasmaatiha vo, bhikkhave, eva.m sikkhitabba.m - 'kaayagataa no sati bhaavitaa bhavissati bahuliikataa yaaniikataa vatthukataa anu.t.thiita; paricitaa; paricitaa susamaaraddhaa'ti. Eva~nhi kho, bhikkhave, sikkhitabba''nti. Dasama.m." Scott: I fixed two words I'd messed up on in trying to do the Velthuis. R: "I would also like to know how you would interpret the active sense in which the translation proposes, starting with 'This is how you must train yourselves,' then 'we shall practice mindfulness...,' 'develop it, make it our vehicle, our dwelling place...,' 'we will build it up and undertake it...,' and then again, 'This...is how you must train yourselves.'" Scott: 'This is how you must train yourselves,': sikkhitabba.m. 'we shall practice mindfulness...,' 'develop it, make it our vehicle, our dwelling place...,' 'we will build it up and undertake it...,': kaayagataa no sati bhaavitaa bhavissati bahuliikataa yaaniikataa vatthukataa anu.t.thiita; paricitaa; paricitaa susamaaraddhaa'ti. Eva~nhi kho, bhikkhave, sikkhitabba''nti. You can see the conjugations of 'bhaavanaa' in the above. The term is commonly translated as 'meditation' to reflect modern opinions. Plug some of these terms into the PTS PED and see what you get. Nina could do the best job of considering the Paa.li. The 'active sense' you refer to is interpreted by you to mean that it is a self who is active - 'I must be active,' or, 'the Buddha is instructing me to be active.' To me it is a reflection of the naturally active sense of dhammas developing. I don't misread conventional speech. The active sense refers only to the nature of these dhammas as development - an active sort of thing - procedes. One's ability to properly understand conventional speech is a function of one's understanding of the fundamental nature of reality. With this in place, one is not mistaken about 'instructions' and can see the forest for the trees. Does kusala develop? Yes. Is it necessary for this development to proceed that certain conditions obtain? Yes. These facts are encapsulated by 'you must train.' It means while sati develops there are no hindrances because with kusala there is no akusala. Before kusala, or after kusala maybe, but not during. This is all the sutta means. You can't to anything to 'train' - unless you are golfing or swimming or driving cars into trees, of course. R: "Do you feel this active imperative sense is not a correct reflection of the Pali? Or do you agree that this appears to be a set of direct admonitions or instructions from the Buddha to the monks?" Scott: The Paa.li reflects the activity of developing dhammas. The 'imperative' ('I am being instructed to act') is an imputation of your own (and possibly other translators by way of 'translatory editorialization') and is a function of sakkaaya di.t.thi which causes a misreading of the meaning. This is active in the translation as well. Also, Paa.li is not English and English seems to be limited in expressing various subtle nuances. Also, the Commentaries expand on the Paa.li and are a truer source closer to a much better acquaintance with the language (under the same caveats as would any translation fall). Scott. #119036 From: "connie" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 3:49 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny nichiconn friends, > It seems that not-meditating provides more akusala than sitting down and watching namarupa in the present moment. > I'm of the opinion/belief that as long as we haven't reached the stage where "we know" the difference between nama and rupa, it is (at the very least) darned near impossible to really know when a moment is kusala and when it's otherwise. I'm also of the firm belief that "we" don't know "the present moment" but live, as it were, in the past / reactively, along our own story lines. Along those lines, we tend to think "happy = good" and otherwise confuse 'what i like / makes me feel good' with 'kusala'. We undervalue akusala. I'd suggest, to an extent, that the more miserable we are, the better... at least then, most of us aren't so inclined to be self-congratulatory. I'd say if most of the day is akusala, that's what's to be known. yours in ignorance, connie #119037 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:01 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...Don't poke the monkeys in the meditation cage, and they won't get so agitated." Scott: To use your own rationalization, you are such an excellent straigth-man that I absolutely had to say - was forced by you to say: Why is it that the meditation that is being done by these monkeys in the cage isn't preventing all of these flip-outs you keep having? Isn't it suppose to wear this sort of thing down? And this proves that I, and not Phil, 'have a knack for putting things in the most insulting terms possible.' Say it's me, Rob, because Phil is just a wannabe insulter. You and I both know that I am a constant, permanent, inveterate, unrepentant, full-time, hard-on, total, balls-to-the-wall, non-buddhist, and world-class insulter. Tell Phil. Say it's me. Proclaim me king. And, by the way, 'meditation' or not, we are all in the same boat - so just keep discussing Rob. Scott. P.S. If you can't tell this is *mostly* tongue in cheek, read it again before flipping out. And join me on my serious reply on the other thread. Scott. #119038 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:05 am Subject: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas truth_aerator Hello Scott, all, >S: You can't to anything to 'train' - unless you are golfing or >swimming >or driving cars into trees, of course. >============================================ Please note present active verb, sikkhati. "...He trains (sikkhati) himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to the entire body.'[2] He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to the entire body.' [4] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming bodily fabrication.'[3] He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming bodily fabrication.' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.118.than.html Please note all the "he trains", sikkhati. With best wishes, Alex #119039 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:12 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 connie, c: "...I'm also of the firm belief that 'we' don't know 'the present moment' but live, as it were, in the past / reactively, along our own story lines...I'd say if most of the day is akusala, that's what's to be known." Scott: While I dug your entire statment, I particularily appreciate the above, which I have cleverly elided. I've thought the same thing about Always Being The Last To Know - this is born out by living. That's why I won't 'meditate' like we're told to because in the time it takes for me to be thinking of doing something, it's already long done. Like housework, I'm always, always, always playing catch up. And, yeah, it's mostly bad, bad, bad... Scott. #119040 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:31 am Subject: Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas scottduncan2 Alex, My reply was eaten. If it comes through later you can digest it twice. A: "Please note present active verb, sikkhati...Please note all the 'he trains', sikkhati." Scott: Yes, Alex, I saw that. All the 'he trains' like over and over and over again. And the Paa.li is 'sikkhati.' I shudder to ask, not being known for my patience, but what is a 'present active verb?' Please use some sort of Paa.li grammar reference text in your reply. Or we could ask Nina, a woman of vertiginous patience, to assist us both. Scott. #119041 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:42 am Subject: Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas truth_aerator Hello Scott, all, Sikkhati is active, present verb in 3rd person. Please note it is supposed to happen in the present (as one actively does anapanasati), not as some passive result in the future. If the Buddha would use words in passive tense, then I would have no problem with "it just happens without any intentional action in the present" . But the Buddha kept saying using active form. I can't believe that even though He says "do this" all He really means is that one should NOT actually do it... What a Teacher! With best wishes, Alex #119042 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:43 am Subject: Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas scottduncan2 Alex, Me: "My reply was eaten..." I forgot a really funny part of it. I said that it must have been the reference to 'cars driving into trees' that attracted your reply. I'm sorry I used the now famous Alexian Analogy without referencing you. Funny, eh? I suck... On a process level, while I'm at it, I find it very hard to discuss Dhamma with you due to the tendency you have to simply repeat your same message over and over and over and over again. What needs to happen in order for a discussion with you to ever proceed in some sort of linear fashion? Not a rhetorical question. Scott. #119044 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:46 am Subject: Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas scottduncan2 Alex, A: "Sikkhati is active, present verb in 3rd person..." Scott: I asked that you provide some sort of textual support. I don't want to hear your opinion on this. Scott. #119045 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:47 am Subject: Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas truth_aerator Hi Scott, all, >S:On a process level, while I'm at it, I find it very hard to discuss >Dhamma with you due to the tendency you have to simply repeat your >same message over and over and over and over again. What needs to >happen in order for a discussion with you to ever proceed in some sort >of linear fashion? Not a rhetorical question. >============================================================= I have raised very serious questions that were not answered. I understand your tendency to move onto something else and don't think about problems of "When the Buddha said X what He really meant was not-X". I understand the difficulty in reading the suttas while holding such a position. It is hard to read in "don't do anything" whenever the Buddha frequently says "do this, avoid that". With best wishes, Alex #119046 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:48 am Subject: Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas scottduncan2 Alex, Me: "My reply was eaten...I forgot a really funny part of it..." Scott: Sorry, Alex, now this one comes twice. What the heck? Scott. #119047 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:51 am Subject: Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas scottduncan2 Alex, A: "I have raised very serious questions that were not answered..." Scott: Oh, okay. So you keep repeating the same thing over and over and over because you feel your 'very serious questions' aren't being answered. Would it surprise you to hear that you come across as making statements, not asking questions? Scott. #119049 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 5:01 am Subject: Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas scottduncan2 Alex, A: "Do you have a pali program that can conjugate verbs? I use pali lookup." Scott: So do I, and so that qualifies neither of us as Paa.li experts. I asked for you to provide some grammatical reference. At the risk of igniting yet another fire-storm, please increase your scholarship and stop firing of repetive replies. Slow down, do a bit of research, and maybe the discussion might improve. Until then, I'm going to stop. I know you won't on this for another reply or two but that's fine... Scott. #119050 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 5:35 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., (Jon), > > R: "...Hopeful to hear that mindfulness can overcome the hindrances if citta is properly 'tethered' through mindfulness of the body." > > Scott: It is a simple fact that when kusala citta is in ascendance - that is, has arisen and not yet fallen away - akusala is suppressed. No hindrances (akusala) arise when citta is kusala. > > Do you see this otherwise? > > If so, what evidence do you put forward to substantiate the alternative? Most of my evidence is what the Buddha says. I don't have any extraterrestrial or forensic evidence that something "does not mean" something other than what it says. It's impossible to prove a negative by the way. Prove that there are no unicorns in existence. I believe that cittas arise in patterns and that the groupings are sensible, based on shifting conditions. Conditions and accumulations do not bounce around randomly, but cause patterns to arise. Sure, there may be many different kinds of cittas in the middle of a series of cittas, but if one is skilled in mindfulness, for instance, there will be many more moments arising with sati present than someone who is not equally practiced or developed. So the idea that a certain practice produces a certain kind of result through the accumulation of that particular quality or cetasika does not contradict the idea that there are single cittas arising according to conditions and accumulations. In fact it is the fulfillment of that idea. The idea of a single-citta universe that is totally independent of the one before it, and is totally unrelated to the one after it, does not make sense and is not even the way the arising of cittas is described in anything I've seen. That's some kind of super-monadic idea on your part. So yes, it's very possible that, as the sutta says, a particular practice or development of a particular kind of cetasika or application of that cetasika, such as sati focusing citta on the rupas of the physical form, can in fact act like a "tether" over a series of cittas, and through repeated accumulation, to have an overall, gradual effect on the hindrances. It's not just a one-moment/one citta isolated condition, then totally replaced by something completely different. If that were the case, the ideas that are so prominent in the Abhidhamma and discussed at length here, such as accumulations and latent tendencies, would make absolutely no sense and would have no meaning. They are the core of how both kusala and akusala conditions don't just arise but accumulate and cause overall patterns and tendencies that affect the general quality of arising cittas, not just one all by itself. > It is merely an (incorrect) interpretation to impute some sort of effectiveness to a consciously formed thought about doing something called 'mindfulness of the body' (incorrectly labelled 'intention' but not the mental factor known as cetanaa). I don't know who's labeling anything as "intention." If I did you can point it out to me. But you contradict the Buddha's words, you seemingly have no qualms at all about ignoring them completely. It is not "drawing a wrong conclusion" to take the Buddha at his word. It is not drawing an incorrect conclusion to listen to the Buddha's teaching. It is a wrong conclusion to substitute your own interpretation for what the Buddha says. He is the one that said that mindfulness of the body tethers citta in a way that pulls the mind away from the defilements, not me. If you have a problem with that, take it up with the Buddha, whose teaching you obviously do not believe unless it agrees with your own self-based understanding. Why not just call yourself a Commentarialist instead of a Buddhist and be done with it? Abhidhamma is reconcilable with sutta in a sensible and seamless manner, but only if you accept the teachings as a whole and not inject your own prejudice into what is really there. The Buddha did teach the momentary and temporary nature of dhammas and the breakdown of experience into khandhas with no self at their core, but he also taught how to live, how to practice and how to promote conditions that would lead to enlightenment through conventional practices including lifestyle choices, reading and study, and meditation. If you don't accept this dual nature of the path, that is your problem. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #119051 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 5:44 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Here, from the Sammohavinodanii (The Dispeller of Delusion). Commentary to Vibha"nga: > > > > This is great! Thanks for the contribution, Scott. I will go through it, possibly slowly, and be happy to discuss it with you. I wish I had all the commentaries and subcommentaries. I actually always enjoy them, and despite my "bad attitude" I would read them all if I had the opportunity. > > > Ph: I was looking forward to this discussion. Before you get further caught up in the six animals, Rob, any chance of coming back to this? > > If I've missed a decision to postpone/cancel this discussion amoung all the posts, my apology. And of course if you're no longer keen on it, fair enough. Keenness swings onto different objects all the time, I know that from my own experience (cross that out) cittas. Oh, no, I'm totally into this passage, just trying to find a time when I can get into it more, and also there's so much of interest there I'm sort of unsure about what to start with. I'm looking forward to it too. I'm just a little slow. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = #119052 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 5:47 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Phil, > > Ph: "I was looking forward to this discussion..." > > Scott: I too am watching. You're *watching?* That's kind of ridiculous. Don't watch from behind a corner okay? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #119053 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 11:41 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Giving Grapes to a Bhikkhu and/or Bhikkhuni dhammasaro Good friend Chris, Excellent!!! peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119054 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Fri Oct 21, 2011 11:52 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Couple Married 72 Years Die Holding Hands plus Ajahn Brahm Dhamma Talk dhammasaro Good friend Phil, Thank you... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck <....> #119055 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:12 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Couple Married 72 Years Die Holding Hands plus Ajahn Brahm Dhamma Talk dhammasaro Good friends all, I have no criticism about the first one because the old people weren't claiming to be Dhamma teachers Thank you... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck <....> #119056 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 5:50 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > > Hi Scott, Rob and all > > > > >"240. In such passages as 'Materiality, bhikkhus, is impermanent; what is > impermanent is painful, what is painful is not self; what is not-self, that is > not mine, that I am not, that is not myself' (S iii 82), he taught the > characteristic of no-self by means of both the impermanent and suffering. > > "241. Why? Because of the obviousness of impermanence and suffering. For when > a plate or a saucer or whatever it may be falls from the hand and breaks, they > say: 'Ah, Impermanence,' thus impermanence is obvious. But as regards the > person (attabhaava), when boils and carbuncles and the like have sprung up, or > when pierced by splinters and thorns, etc., they say 'Ah! The pain.' Thus pain > is obvious. The characteristic of no-self is unobvious, dark, unclear, > difficult to penetrate, difficult to illustrate, difficult to make known. > > Ph: Let me take a stab at being Rob and see if I can do as well as he did when he imitated Ken: "If we study impermanence of a plate or saucer or "whatever it may be" at a level that is obvious, sati can gradually sink deeper towards the core of that conceptual object to uncover subtleties that lay within, so that through developing our understanding of impermanence at that level, our minds develop towards perception of more momentary impermanence, a gradual refining of understanding towards the paramattha via the conceptual, as understanding deepens and germinates, and then the Buddha's gradual teaching blossoms and the path unfolds." Something like that? Sorry Rob, that was naughty! You are not that facile.... I don't know, Phil, I thought that was pretty damned good! A lot better organized than your usual posts. :-))) Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #119057 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 1:52 am Subject: In the Shape of a Circle dhammasaro Good friends all, When it comes to the Dhamma, we have to understand that our opinions are one thing; the Dhamma is something else. More at: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/chah/shapeofacircle.html peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119058 From: "charlest" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 2:05 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Couple Married 72 Years Die Holding Hands plus Ajahn Brahm Dhamma Talk dhammasaro Polite smiles... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > Hi Chuck, > > > As this is not a sterile Buddhist message; I expect this very true loving Buddhist message will be deleted; so be it again... > > > > You're imagining things, Chuck! Sometimes posts don't appear because of Yahoo tech problems, but never a deletion by Sarah and Jon, honestly. Ken H is a hardliner, but he is not mean-sprited, nobody here is. Well, we all are on occasions, the emphasis is on momentary states. > > Mudita for your marriage ! ! This place is crawling with happily married people, you're in good company! Unbummer! :) :) > > Metta, > Phil > #119059 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:07 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...Don't poke the monkeys in the meditation cage, and they won't get so agitated." > > Scott: To use your own rationalization, you are such an excellent straigth-man that I absolutely had to say - was forced by you to say: > > Why is it that the meditation that is being done by these monkeys in the cage isn't preventing all of these flip-outs you keep having? Isn't it suppose to wear this sort of thing down? > And this proves that I, and not Phil, 'have a knack for putting things in the most insulting terms possible.' Say it's me, Rob, because Phil is just a wannabe insulter. True, he is copying you, as I told him. > You and I both know that I am a constant, permanent, inveterate, unrepentant, full-time, hard-on, total, balls-to-the-wall, non-buddhist, and world-class insulter. Tell Phil. Say it's me. Proclaim me king. Nah, you still have to work harder. Strive unremittingly, with great determination and constant attention, putting mindfulness in front of you to arouse great cetana to the task. Work ceaselessly and strive most intentionally with all the fervor of your giant Atta, until you have achieved this laudable goal! > And, by the way, 'meditation' or not, we are all in the same boat - so just keep discussing Rob. Thanks, Scott, that is true. I will even bashfully admit that I like you from time to time. But it only lasts a moment and then is replaced by more kusala cittas. :-) > P.S. If you can't tell this is *mostly* tongue in cheek, read it again before flipping out. And join me on my serious reply on the other thread. I can see how frightened you are that I might take it seriously - you're backtracking more than usual. But don't worry - I know you really mean it. (;-/ Best, Rob E. "about to flip out big time" - - - - - - - - - - - - - #119060 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas nilovg Dear Scott, Op 21-okt-2011, om 19:31 heeft scottduncan2 het volgende geschreven: > Or we could ask Nina, a woman of vertiginous patience, to assist us > both. ------ N: Ha, ha. It is bedtime for me and I am sleepy. Look into your thread later on. Nina. #119061 From: "philip" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:57 am Subject: Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas philofillet - Hi Alex > Please note present active verb, sikkhati. > > "...He trains (sikkhati) himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to the entire body.'[2] He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to the entire body.' [4] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming bodily fabrication.'[3] He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming bodily fabrication.' > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.118.than.html > > Please note all the "he trains", sikkhati. The point is not grammar, the point is thst you do not understand what "trains" means in a. context of right understanding. You like the metaphor of a person with weak muscles going to a gym and training to get strong muscles, you believe that striving and pressing to be aware of and understand dhammas will lead to the development of sati and panna, and that is incorrect. Metta, Phil #119062 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 7:00 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...Thanks, Scott, that is true. I will even bashfully admit that I like you from time to time. But it only lasts a moment and then is replaced by more kusala cittas..." Scott: Bwaahahaha! Good one. Scott. #119063 From: "philip" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 7:15 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) philofillet Hi Rob > I don't know, Phil, I thought that was pretty damned good! A lot better organized than your usual posts. :-))) > Nah, there was something Howardian abput the grand tone, you are more jolly. Btw, re the KK trip my big moral concern when I go to Thailand iis neither drinking nor fighting, it's something else that we're pretty sure not to be in danger of doing, not with each other at least! So please do comr along, it would be nice to meet you in person. Metta, Phil #119064 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 7:32 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Connie. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > to no one in particular, > > > > > I guess we're human first and Buddhist when it's convenient. > > > > I guess they are the same person... the one we approve of and the one that irritates us. Better to stick to minding my own cittas, I think. I think you're right that they should be the same person - on the other hand neither one exists... I think I'll join you in the "citta room." Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #119065 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 7:33 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny kenhowardau Hi Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Phil, Scott, Ken H., pt, Alex, Chris, and all. > <. . .> > For intentional action and adopting specific practices, see Buddha's advice to Moggalana to overcome sleepiness in his meditation, as I recently noted to Jon: <. . .> > Why do you think Buddha gave this specific advice regarding overcoming a particular physical and mental problem? And what are the implications for the idea that "no-control" = "no practice?" Kind of tears that apart, doesn't it? -------------- KH: You've almost got us there, Robert. But what if the Buddha was right and there really were only dhammas? Consider that possibility for a little while and you might agree that the quoted sutta was actually about dhammas – right effort, for example – and not about concepts at all. Don't you think that is at least possible? Ken H #119066 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 7:35 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas scottduncan2 Dear Nina, N: "Ha, ha. It is bedtime for me and I am sleepy. Look into your thread later on." Nighty-night. Scott. #119067 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 7:42 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., Answer this now. Stop fooling around. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/119015 Scott. #119068 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 7:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Computer on it's death bed upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 10/19/2011 9:28:29 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, all - > > It's very likely that my computer is beyond resuscitation, so > don't be surprised if nothing is heard from me for a while. That will > be the only reason. Get a new one soon, Howard. I don't like having you off list. :-) ------------------------------------------------- HCW: Thanks! :-) I DO have a new one now, but there is much to set up! Also, I have 342 unread emails in my AOL inbox. So this will be very slow going. ;-) ------------------------------------------------- Best, Rob E. ==================================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #119069 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 7:59 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., I know you'll just ask me to answer my own questions first, so: 1. Are you suggesting that there is another mental factor - other than pa~n~naa - that is the functional element in bringing about the Path? Scott: No. There is no other such functional element. 2.If so, what is it? Scott: Didn't you read my answer above? 3. What are your sources of evidence? Scott: See above re: above. 4. Can you give the context of this sutta? Scott: No. 5. Who was Moggalana? Scott: I don't know. One of the Buddha's first disciples? 6. What were his 'accumulations?' Scott: I don't know. 7. What did the Buddha know about Moggalana and how the particular levels of development to which the various operative mental factors available to him were constellated? Scott: I don't know. 8. Does conventional language refer back to paramattha dhammas or to some separate 'reality' with a set of conditional laws that are somehow different from those which apply to paramattha dhammas? Scott: It refers back to paramattha dhammas. Finally something I know. 9. Are you Moggalana? Scott: No. Duh. 10. Am I Moggalana? Scott: NO. Duh. 11. What are the proofs you use to allow you to equate a modern-day person, such as you or I, to Moggalana? Scott: I don't know. 12. What are the proofs you use to justify the assumption that 'instructions' are generic? Scott: I don't know. Conclusion: I don't have a 'practice.' Scott. #119070 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 8:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Computer on it's death bed upasaka_howard Hi, Chuck - In a message dated 10/19/2011 9:57:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, dhammasaro@... writes: Good friend Howard, et al, Great news.... What did you acquire? ---------------------------------------------- HCW: A Dell XPS8300. It is pretty powerful, with an Intel Core i7 chip and Windows 7. Quite a to-do in the setting up, though. ------------------------------------------------ If you have no plans for your ole wun... I collect old computers for possible antique resale ---- for my grandson... [grins] If you are interested, I will buy from you - please clean your hard disk or remove... --------------------------------------------------- HCW: I'm sorry. There are a couple hardware guys in my (Reform Jewish) temple who might work with it to give to the Youth Group. I'm not at all sure it is redeemable, though. ---------------------------------------------------- Please advise... peace... Chuck ================================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #119071 From: "Christine" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 8:19 am Subject: Borers in framework of roof christine_fo... Hello all, I am concerned because an inspection seems to indicate that my home has borers in the framework of the roof. I need to eradicate them or they will destroy the house. What to do? I've had a few sleepless nights worrying about this. I would be grateful for any thoughts on this, with textual links if possible. with metta Chris #119072 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 8:23 am Subject: Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas truth_aerator Hi Phil, all, >A: Please note present active verb, sikkhati. > > > > "...He trains (sikkhati) himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to >the entire body.'[2] He trains himself, 'I will breathe out >sensitive to the entire body.' [4] He trains himself, 'I will >breathe in calming bodily fabrication.'[3] He trains himself, 'I >will breathe out calming bodily fabrication.' >http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.118.than.html > >Please note all the "he trains", sikkhati. > > >P:The point is not grammar, the point is thst you do not understand >what "trains" means in a. context of right understanding. >=================================== If it says "trains" then I believe the Buddha really meant that and not that "one should *not* train". I am really unconvinced that whenever the Buddha has clearly said "do this" what He really meant was that "you should NOT do this" . I can't believe that Buddha was such a sloppy teacher who couldn't clearly say "Do not do anything! Just study! Don't do intentional actions!" Why couldn't He clearly explain no-training teaching to his listeners, especially if it was so unique? Why did He tell them to run off to the seclusion, sit under the tree and develop satipatthana? Are there suttas where He recommends developing satipatthana while cooking? Don't get me wrong. I would love "arhatship while cooking", but something tells me that it is not what He taught... With best wishes, Alex #119073 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 8:58 am Subject: impermanence in the suttas truth_aerator Hello RobertE, >R:The Buddha did teach the momentary and temporary nature of dhammas >============================================== The impermanence in the suttas: In MN28 Ven. Sariputta talks about impermanence: "Now there comes a time, friends, when the external liquid property is provoked and washes away village, town, city, district, & country. There comes a time when the water in the great ocean drops down one hundred leagues,...There comes a time when the water in the great ocean is not even the depth of the first joint of a finger. "So when even in the external liquid property — so vast — inconstancy will be discerned, destructibility will be discerned, a tendency to decay will be discerned, changeability will be discerned, then what in this short-lasting body, sustained by clinging, is 'I' or 'mine' or 'what I am'? It has here only a 'no.'" - MN28 Please note the timescale for Anicca. It would take billions of years (about 5 or so) for all water to dry up when the Sun expands. "Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more." - SN12.61 Please note that the Buddha does NOT talk about billions of rupas arising and ceasing per second. And even when it comes to the mind, he doesn't say that trillions of cittas arise per second. "But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another." - SN12.61 It is far from trillions of cittas per second. Again, you will not find radical momentariness even in canonical Abhidhamma. It is later teaching which doesn't make it wrong, but neither does it make it what the Historic Buddha actually said or intended to say but didn't say it for some reason only He knows. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.028.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.061.than.html With best wishes, Alex #119074 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 9:57 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...Thanks, Scott, that is true. I will even bashfully admit that I like you from time to time. But it only lasts a moment and then is replaced by more kusala cittas..." > > Scott: Bwaahahaha! Good one. :-) Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - #119075 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 10:01 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Rob > > > I don't know, Phil, I thought that was pretty damned good! A lot better organized than your usual posts. :-))) > > > > > Nah, there was something Howardian abput the grand tone, you are more jolly. Btw, re the KK trip my big moral concern when I go to Thailand iis neither drinking nor fighting, it's something else that we're pretty sure not to be in danger of doing, not with each other at least! So please do comr along, it would be nice to meet you in person. That's very sweet, Phil. I appreciate it. If I don't make it this time, I will try to arrange it in the future. I would enjoy meeting you too, not to mention the other illustrious folks I've been bothering for ten years. [Side note: Somehow I can't imagine Scott not drinking a beer or two, but I'm always open to a surprise.] Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - #119076 From: "philip" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 10:43 am Subject: Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas philofillet Hi Alex I think the point is, again, that you don't understand what "trains" means, you compare it to going to the gym. You don't understand bhavana, even intwllectually. The wise ones who listened to the Buddha didn't believe that they should force things to happen, surely. You do. Metta, Phil #119077 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 10:55 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > Hi Robert, > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Phil, Scott, Ken H., pt, Alex, Chris, and all. > > > <. . .> > > For intentional action and adopting specific practices, see Buddha's advice to Moggalana to overcome sleepiness in his meditation, as I recently noted to Jon: > > <. . .> > > > Why do you think Buddha gave this specific advice regarding overcoming a particular physical and mental problem? And what are the implications for the idea that "no-control" = "no practice?" Kind of tears that apart, doesn't it? > -------------- > > KH: You've almost got us there, Robert. But what if the Buddha was right and there really were only dhammas? Consider that possibility for a little while and you might agree that the quoted sutta was actually about dhammas – right effort, for example – and not about concepts at all. > > Don't you think that is at least possible? Well, let's remember that there are only dhammas, ie, namas and rupas, but also...concepts/conventional realities. They may not be "real," ultimately speaking, and yet they are what we experience most of the time, and it is said that they are very distorted mental conglomerations of the dhammas that actually exists. That is the version of "concepts" that I subscribe to, based on everything I've read. So, why does Buddha talk in terms of conventional realities, rather than ultimates in so many of the suttas? Is it because he is talking in code, or trying to entice those with too much dust in their eyes? I don't think Buddha aimed to do that, and more or less lied about what kinds of activities could activate the path. That would be misleading even to those who could be helped only through conventional concepts. He wouldn't encourage them to meditate or strive hard on the path, or do good "conventional" things in life, while secretly feeling that this was all impossible and really those folks should just be understanding dhammas. So we have to pay some attention to the way the Buddha actually spoke and see what the purpose was. My thought is: that the teaching on conditions and kandhas and dhammas and their nature is the higher teaching, but the way to get there is *not* only through direct understanding and right concept via pariyatti, but is also through kusala activities within the conventional world. Buddha understood what created kusala conditions and outcomes, and he spent an awful lot of time encouraging people to do worldly activities that would promote kusala. So I think it's both; it's the ultimate teaching and the conventional vehicle until the paramatha vehicle kicks in. That makes sense of all the teachings in sutta, but doesn't deny the truth that is revealed in Abhidhamma. Buddha could have said "right effort arises with the right mental conditions. It is a mental factor." Instead, in so many suttas he said "practice right effort, do kusala things, avoid akusala activities, people and involvements." All worldly concerns, not arising mental factors. So you have to answer the question, why would he talk in those terms if they were untrue and of no use? I'm not sure you've ever thought about that adequately and pondered why Buddha would speak this way instead of about dhammas. I think it's something that has to be accounted for. If Buddha hadn't spoken that way, we wouldn't have this strange conflict about what the teaching really is, would we, about whether worldly activities are part of the path or not? It wouldn't be an issue. So it's a real and important problem to be thought about in the teachings. You can't just take everything the Buddha says about avoiding alcohol, not killing or harming "conventional" people in the real world, avoiding unsavory people, not playing dice, and all these meditative procedures for developing right mindfulness and right concentration, and translate it into what you *think* it should mean. It should concern you that he spopke this way on so many occasions and literally advocated all kinds of social and meditative behaviors and activities. To me, it indicates that the Buddha has a paramatha message at the point where one can understand it, but he sees a path that encompasses all life activities, as well as technical means for developing kusala in meditation, and that conventional choices do condition kusala and understanding because they represent the various dhammas that are arising and that are conditioning the qualities of future cittas, even if it is not yet directly experienced. You say isn't it possible that what the Buddha spoke about was really about paramatha dhammas and not about conventional activities and realities. And my answer is that it *is* about dhammas, but it's also about conventional activities. Because the concepts that arise for citta, the conventional realities that we deal with every day, contain the seed of what is really being experienced by citta, and there is a way to discern that without retreating from the conventional world and getting totally absorbed by teachings that are not experienced. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #119078 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 11:05 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...You can hide behind 'understanding alone knows'..." > > Scott: Questions: > > 1. Are you suggesting that there is another mental factor - other than pa~n~naa - that is the functional element in bringing about the Path? > > 2.If so, what is it? > > 3. What are your sources of evidence? > > R: "For intentional action and adopting specific practices, see Buddha's advice to Moggalana to overcome sleepiness in his meditation..." > > Scott: A few more questions: > > 4. Can you give the context of this sutta? > > 5. Who was Moggalana? > > 6. What were his 'accumulations?' > > 7. What did the Buddha know about Moggalana and how the particular levels of development to which the various operative mental factors available to him were constellated? > > 8. Does conventional language refer back to paramattha dhammas or to some separate 'reality' with a set of conditional laws that are somehow different from those which apply to paramattha dhammas? > > 9. Are you Moggalana? > > 10. Am I Moggalana? > > 11. What are the proofs you use to allow you to equate a modern-day person, such as you or I, to Moggalana? > > 12. What are the proofs you use to justify the assumption that 'instructions' are generic? I answered this thoroughly, explaining my position and what the sutta demonstrated to me. I'm not going to answer your list of questions as if it were a quiz, particularly since half the questions are rhetorical. If there are one or two of these that you especially want to explore, let me know. I may just tell you that I don't know the answer, if that is the case and it is not relevant to my original claim, which still stands. I think you should answer my post and what I did say, rather than insist that I fill out your "form." I'm not here to take a quiz, but to discuss the issues as I see them and as they appear to be relevant to what is being discussed. Answer my actual post now! :-/ Best, Rob E. = = = = = = #119079 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 11:07 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Computer on it's death bed epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > > It's very likely that my computer is beyond resuscitation, so > > don't be surprised if nothing is heard from me for a while. That will > > be the only reason. > > Get a new one soon, Howard. I don't like having you off list. :-) > ------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Thanks! :-) I DO have a new one now, but there is much to set up! > Also, I have 342 unread emails in my AOL inbox. So this will be very slow > going. ;-) > ------------------------------------------------- Yikes, that sounds familiar! I wish you the best slogging through that inbox! Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #119080 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 11:21 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. Thanks for the detailed examples, although "I don't know" is pretty easy to come by. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > I know you'll just ask me to answer my own questions first, so: Not really. I just don't want to ask or answer them. > 1. Are you suggesting that there is another mental factor - other than pa~n~naa - that is the functional element in bringing about the Path? > > Scott: No. There is no other such functional element. Rob: yes. Although I do not know the technically correct answer to any of these question, as I am not a scholar, my understanding is that the path cannot be activate by right understanding only and that panna cannot be fully developed merely by knowledge of technical factors. It is necessary to experience and develop right mindfulness and concentration, as well as other factors, for the path to be fully developed. > 2.If so, what is it? > > Scott: Didn't you read my answer above? > Rob: Didn't you read my answer above? > 3. What are your sources of evidence? > > Scott: See above re: above. Rob: Plenty of evidence in sutta. Read a sutta. > > 4. Can you give the context of this sutta? > > Scott: No. Rob: Yes, it's a student of Buddhist practice asking advice from his teacher, the founder of the discipline, and getting specific advice on how to overcome a hindrance. > > 5. Who was Moggalana? > > Scott: I don't know. One of the Buddha's first disciples? > Rob: He was a disciple of the Buddha's. Look it up. > 6. What were his 'accumulations?' > > Scott: I don't know. Rob: All that is relevant is that he had a propensity for sloth and torpor as a hindrance. Buddha instructed him successfully how to overcome this so he could get on with his meditation. He eventually became an arahat in record time, a testimony to the efficacy of Buddha's teaching and instruction on meditation. > > 7. What did the Buddha know about Moggalana and how the particular levels of development to which the various operative mental factors available to him were constellated? > > Scott: I don't know. > Rob: He knew that his level and factors were such that he had a problem staying awake. Buddha instructed him how to overcome this in the most varied and creative terms, and Moggalana was able to get on with his practice, which Buddha obviously approved and supported. > 8. Does conventional language refer back to paramattha dhammas or to some separate 'reality' with a set of conditional laws that are somehow different from those which apply to paramattha dhammas? > > Scott: It refers back to paramattha dhammas. Finally something I know. Rob: Obviously it referred to his conventional meditation activity; otherwise Buddha would not have given him all this advice about how to continue his meditation without falling asleep! Why would he give all this advice for a useless, imaginary activity? I mean, Duh! > > 9. Are you Moggalana? > > Scott: No. Duh. > > 10. Am I Moggalana? > > Scott: NO. Duh. Rob: Yes, we are ALL Moggalana. Look for my forthcoming film: "I am Moggalana." > > 11. What are the proofs you use to allow you to equate a modern-day person, such as you or I, to Moggalana? > > Scott: I don't know. Rob: He had a familiar and easy-to-understand problem, and Buddha's solutions were also not difficult to understand. There's no special equating necessary; it's obvious. > > 12. What are the proofs you use to justify the assumption that 'instructions' are generic? > > Scott: I don't know. Rob: Don't know what this means, but I did alrady answer this question. Read my post! > > Conclusion: I don't have a 'practice.' Rob: Neither do I. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #119081 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 11:26 am Subject: Re: Borers in framework of roof epsteinrob Hi Chris. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine" wrote: > > Hello all, > > I am concerned because an inspection seems to indicate that my home has borers in the framework of the roof. I need to eradicate them or they will destroy the house. What to do? I've had a few sleepless nights worrying about this. I would be grateful for any thoughts on this, with textual links if possible. I would consult an expert and ask if there is a way to drive them out without killing them. Another possibility would be ridiculously expensive, but I'll mention it just for fun: replace the affected roof-beams and let the borers "have them" but in another location. Last but not least, if all else fails, you can ask the contractor to "get the borers out of the house by whatever means are necessary" and not specify how to do it. That way, if it is necessary to kill them, it won't be your direct decision, and you can hold out the possibility that they will block off the roof/drive them out if possible. Not a perfect solution, but better than ordering them to be killed yourself. I had a friend/teacher who wouldn't kill cockroaches, but would drop them out the window, leaving it to chance how and where they wound up. No intention to kill. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #119082 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 11:31 am Subject: Re: impermanence in the suttas epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, > > >R:The Buddha did teach the momentary and temporary nature of dhammas > >============================================== > > The impermanence in the suttas: > > In MN28 Ven. Sariputta talks about impermanence: > > "Now there comes a time, friends, when the external liquid property is provoked and washes away village, town, city, district, & country. There comes a time when the water in the great ocean drops down one hundred leagues,...There comes a time when the water in the great ocean is not even the depth of the first joint of a finger. > > "So when even in the external liquid property — so vast — inconstancy will be discerned, destructibility will be discerned, a tendency to decay will be discerned, changeability will be discerned, then what in this short-lasting body, sustained by clinging, is 'I' or 'mine' or 'what I am'? It has here only a 'no.'" - MN28 > > Please note the timescale for Anicca. It would take billions of years (about 5 or so) for all water to dry up when the Sun expands. > > "Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more." - SN12.61 > > Please note that the Buddha does NOT talk about billions of rupas arising and ceasing per second. And even when it comes to the mind, he doesn't say that trillions of cittas arise per second. > > "But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another." - SN12.61 > > It is far from trillions of cittas per second. This confirms my understanding that all of the properties of dhammas that Buddha talked about can be observed on a number of different scales and with different levels of momentariness. I think the Buddha meant for us to observe all of them, not just the most microscopic, as they are part of the continuum of the sentient realm. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #119083 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 11:33 am Subject: Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Alex > > I think the point is, again, that you don't understand what "trains" means, you compare it to going to the gym. You don't understand bhavana, even intwllectually. The wise ones who listened to the Buddha didn't believe that they should force things to happen, surely. You do. Why even use the word "trains" if that is the case? How do you interpret the actual word, how do you think it was meant to be understood when it is said "thus you should train yourself?" How do you understand that phrase? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #119084 From: "philip" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:04 pm Subject: Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas philofillet Hi Rob E Re "trains", the term in Pali, sekke, something like that, I don't claim to understand it. But you and Alex and others jump on conventional meanings of English words, and clog up the airwaves with lengthy speculations based on that. Or base your "practices" on them. Tgat's why I think Scott is doing you a huge favour, encouraging you to study more, learn about the teaching and what words like " train" actually mean. Yes, me too, I know, I know... Metta, Phil #119085 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:42 pm Subject: Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas truth_aerator Hi Phil, >P:Hi Alex > >I think the point is, again, that you don't understand what >"trains" means, you compare it to going to the gym. You don't >understand bhavana, even intwllectually. The wise ones who listened >to the Buddha didn't believe that they should force things to >happen, surely. You do. >======================================================= If the Buddha meant that something passively just happens, then why wouldn't He tell us so? Why did He choose to say "He trains himself"? And taken also in the context of Right Effort, I can't believe how to make a no out of yes and expect me to understand that. I have quite an imagination, but not that far. Was He such an incompetent teacher who couldn't clearly explain what He really meant? He could have said that these things passively arise as results of past causes and no intentional action is to be done. Doesn't it seem to be far-stretched to claim that Buddha meant something totally opposite of what He has said? With best wishes, Alex #119086 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:44 pm Subject: Re: impermanence in the suttas truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >R:This confirms my understanding that all of the properties of dhammas >that Buddha talked about can be observed on a number of different >scales and with different levels of momentariness. >=================== Right. >R:I think the Buddha meant for us to observe all of them, not just the >most microscopic, as they are part of the continuum of the sentient >realm. >======================= Right. And even satipatthana sutta contains these more longer timescale contemplations, like contemplation of death (corpses in decay). These are valid objects of satipatthana. With best wishes, Alex #119087 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:44 pm Subject: Re: Borers in framework of roof scottduncan2 Chris, C: "I am concerned because an inspection seems to indicate that my home has borers in the framework of the roof. I need to eradicate them or they will destroy the house. What to do? I've had a few sleepless nights worrying about this. I would be grateful for any thoughts on this, with textual links if possible." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.105.than.html Scott. #119088 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 9:45 am Subject: The Good Disciple... bhikkhu5 Friends: How to be a Worthy Lay Disciple! The Buddha once explained how: I will tell you the way of life of a householder, who becomes a good disciple. Laying aside all violence, he would not kill a living creature, nor cause to kill, nor allow others to kill. He should deliberately avoid taking anything, which has not been freely given. Neither should he cause to steal, nor allow others to steal. He should not transgress against another's wife. When gone to the audience hall, court or assembly, he should neither speak falsely himself, nor cause others to speak falsely, deceive or pretend. He should avoid all untruth. He should also avoid intoxicating drinks and drugs, nor cause to drink, nor allow others to drink or take drugs, since intoxication causes carelessness! Intoxication makes negligent fools commit evil deeds accumulating demerit. He should neither eat food at night, nor wear jewellery, nor use perfume... He should sleep on a low couch or on the ground on a mat. For this they say is the eight-fold fast day observance, declared by the Buddha, who has gone beyond all suffering. Having kept this fast day every fortnight, with a clear mind, rejoicing, he should in the morning share suitable food with the Sangha of Bhikkhus. He should support his mother & father by making honest trade. A vigilant householder living this Noble way of life is reborn among the devas who shines bright... Sn 393-404 <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <...> #119089 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 10:00 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Computer on it's death bed dhammasaro Good friend Howard, Well, if it does not land in a landfill.... [smiles] I still have a 3.1 Windows Operating System desk top tower computer back home in Texas. Here in Havertown, PA I have three laptops and a desk top. One laptop is dedicated to my Magic Jack phone; the second is dedicated to recording off the air TV. The one I am using now is the newest - My wife has an identical laptop - I told she had to learn to use one and e-mail as her grandchildren (read as pre-teens) all use the computer. In fact, they had fun teaching her how to use the laptop. BTY, the new desk top uses Ubuntu Operating system which is free open shareware. I mainly use it to listen to the radio - currently, I am listening to WOAI in San Antonio, Texas. They and I are relegated to the basement.... [bummers] Do not forget, you have an obligation... be our guests for dinner at my wife's restaurant and a night out this way... next month my wife will fly to Thailand and I plan to check on my Texas property... your Dhamma friend, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: upasaka@... ----------------------------------- HCW: A Dell XPS8300. It is pretty powerful, with an Intel Core i7 chip and Windows 7. Quite a to-do in the setting up, though. ------------------------------------------------ <...> #119090 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 10:20 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Borers in framework of roof dhammasaro Good friend Chris, et al If the borers are the same as USA termites; they need to daily return to the earth for water(?)... Hence, if their path is blocked, they die... See: http://www.ehow.com/how_4910226_kill-termites.html On another borer - carpenter ants: http://www.ehow.com/how_4507250_kill-carpenter-ants.html We had the carpenter ants for a few years... [bummer] Fortunately, no termites, yet... [smiles] peace... Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: cjforsyth1@... <...> I am concerned because an inspection seems to indicate that my home has borers in the framework of the roof. I need to eradicate them or they will destroy the house. What to do? I've had a few sleepless nights worrying about this. I would be grateful for any thoughts on this, with textual links if possible. <...> #119091 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 11:33 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Borers in framework of roof dhammasaro Good friends all, On: I had a friend/teacher who wouldn't kill cockroaches, but would drop them out the window, leaving it to chance how and where they wound up. No intention to kill. We do the same when in Thailand... seems they love us... on the second floor... peace...Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: epsteinrob@... <....> I had a friend/teacher who wouldn't kill cockroaches, but would drop them out the window, leaving it to chance how and where they wound up. No intention to kill. <...> #119092 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 1:23 pm Subject: Re: "You can't to anything to 'train'" and the suttas epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Rob E > > Re "trains", the term in Pali, sekke, something like that, I don't claim to understand it. But you and Alex and others jump on conventional meanings of English words, and clog up the airwaves with lengthy speculations based on that. Or base your "practices" on them. Tgat's why I think Scott is doing you a huge favour, encouraging you to study more, learn about the teaching and what words like " train" actually mean. Yes, me too, I know, I know... I know what "train" means, Phil - it is a large vehicle with a number of cars that runs on "tracks." Gee, man, don't you know anything...? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - #119093 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 1:33 pm Subject: Re: impermanence in the suttas epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > > >R:This confirms my understanding that all of the properties of dhammas >that Buddha talked about can be observed on a number of different >scales and with different levels of momentariness. > >=================== > > Right. > > > >R:I think the Buddha meant for us to observe all of them, not just the >most microscopic, as they are part of the continuum of the sentient >realm. > >======================= > > Right. And even satipatthana sutta contains these more longer timescale contemplations, like contemplation of death (corpses in decay). These are valid objects of satipatthana. Well you can always translate those contemplations into some form or another of individual nama-rupa; but the point is that the Buddha introduced them in the way he did, so that one would start from some of the familiar areas of life, and then break it down from there. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #119094 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 1:37 pm Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...'I don't know' is pretty easy to come by." Scott: Actually, 'I don' know' isn't said enough - especially when that is the right answer. Scott. #119095 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 1:44 pm Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...'I don't know' is pretty easy to come by." > > Scott: Actually, 'I don't know' isn't said enough - especially when that is the right answer. Oh Graceful Heavens, that is so profound! Well, Scott, go ahead and say it more often then. Have-fun-with-that. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #119096 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 2:16 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Scott Many thanks for taking the trouble to post this translation (will be interested to compare with the one posted by Alex). And for your subsequent contribution to the discussion on this thread. Jon PS Apologies to you and all for the Yahoo problems of late. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Jon (Rob E.), > > I'll send this again. Yahoo must be eating posts. > > Walshe's version: > > "Suppose, monks, a man catches six animals of different domains and different resorts of living — a snake, a crocodile, a bird, a dog, a jackal and a monkey, tethering each with a stout rope. ... > > "'Tethered to a stout post or pillar,' monks, denotes mindfulness as to body. Therefore, monks, this is how you must train yourselves: 'We shall practice mindfulness as to body, develop it, make it our vehicle, our dwelling-place, our resort, we will build it up and undertake it thoroughly.' This, monks, is how you must train yourselves." > > Scott. #119097 From: "Christine" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 2:29 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Borers in framework of roof christine_fo... Hello all, Thank you all for your responses. No, Chuck, these borers do not return to the earth - they stay with in the beam, munching - and there are hundreds of them. http://www.csiro.au/resources/WoodBorers.html I recently had the Possum Man in to trap and remove two adult possums and a baby - possums are protected in Australia and will die if move more than a few hundred yards from their home ... other possums won't let them feed. So they were moved to a 'nest' within that distance, and the chimney was netted to keep them out. I also catch any field-mice and rats in a non-harming trap, and remove them to a paddock with a creek and undergrowth a few miles away, cockroaches I catch and put outside. But I haven't found any non-harming way to deal with borers/termites. Hoping for more ideas, with metta Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Maipenrai Dhammasaro wrote: > > Good friends all, > > On: I had a friend/teacher who wouldn't kill cockroaches, but would drop > them out the window, leaving it to chance how and where they wound up. > No intention to kill. > > We do the same when in Thailand... seems they love us... on the second floor... > > peace...Chuck > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > From: epsteinrob@... > <....> > > > I had a friend/teacher who wouldn't kill cockroaches, but would drop them out the window, leaving it to chance how and where they wound up. No intention to kill. > <...> > #119098 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 1:24 pm Subject: RE: When Can A Monk Ask Me for Something? dhammasaro The answer is in the Vinaya-pitaka... I will gladly provide, if asked... (peace to all) From: dhammasaro@... To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: When Can A Monk Ask Me for Something? Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:46:44 -0400 When can a monk ask me for something? #119099 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 1:46 pm Subject: Couple Married 72 Years Die Holding Hands plus Ajahn Brahm Dhamma Talk dhammasaro Good friends all, Just my life... and, to be... holding hands... Sorry it is not a DSG sterile discussion... Please for give dis ole Texican vun... as always, yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck Post script: any bets this will pass my censors??? #119100 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 2:42 pm Subject: Re: Giving Grapes to a Bhikkhu and/or Bhikkhuni jonoabb Hi Chuck --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Maipenrai Dhammasaro wrote: > > Good friends all, > ... > When presenting grapes to a bhikkhu/bhukkuni; what is the proper procedure according to the Vinaya-pitaka? > =============== As you of course know, the vinaya applies to monks not to laypersons, so there are no actual 'rules' to be observed by layfollowers when interacting with monks. Although of course some knowledge of vinaya on the part of the layfollower will probably make things easier for the receiving monk. But I think the short answer would be 'with kusala citta' as far as possible :-)) Perhaps you could elaborate on your particular concern here. Does it, for example, relate to the manner of presenting, time of day, nature of thing being offered? Jon #119101 From: "connie" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 3:42 pm Subject: Re: When Can A Monk Ask Me for Something? nichiconn hi Chuck, do you mean you will provide the answer or you will provide what the monk asks for? if it's the answer, when can he? connie > > The answer is in the Vinaya-pitaka... I will gladly provide, if asked... (peace to all) > > > > When can a monk ask me for something? > #119102 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 3:53 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: When Can A Monk Ask Me for Something? dhammasaro Good friend Connie, Please forgive me for not being clear... currently, under medication, I can not provide the exact answer... [bummers] Basically, a layperson can inform a monk to ask for anything within a week, month etc... Please forgive as I am somewhat medicated which I try not to be... Please understand. Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: nichicon@... <...> do you mean you will provide the answer or you will provide what the monk asks for? if it's the answer, when can he? <...> #119103 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 3:21 pm Subject: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger dhammasaro Good friends all, Once, when hitchhiking to high school, a Texas Ranger stopped and took me to my school... it is my only contact with a Texas Ranger... he was polite... he asked me about school... he listened... he suggested... I am sure he drove out of his way to take me to my high school... I relate as I just watched a movie about a Texas Ranger... and, I remembered a real Texas Ranger, in my youth... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck Post script: If you believe in "merit" please chant/meditate/pray for my unknown Texas Ranger... he truly, in a few minutes, was a very positive in my youth... #119104 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:21 pm Subject: Re: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger kenhowardau Hi Chuck, Number one rule of the internet - not just of DSG: never send an email when under the influence of medication. :-) Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Maipenrai Dhammasaro wrote: > > > Good friends all, > > Once, when hitchhiking to high school, a Texas Ranger stopped and took me to my school... it is my only contact with a Texas Ranger... he was polite... he asked me about school... he listened... he suggested... > > I am sure he drove out of his way to take me to my high school... > > I relate as I just watched a movie about a Texas Ranger... and, I remembered a real Texas Ranger, in my youth... #119105 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:42 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Rob E (and Scott) Scott,many thanks for the Pali. (119030) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Scott, and Jon. > > > [Scott:] The Paa.li for: > > > > "...'Tethered to a stout post or pillar,' monks, denotes mindfulness as to body. Therefore, monks, this is how you must train yourselves: 'We shall practice mindfulness as to body, develop it, make it our vehicle, our dwelling-place, our resort, we will build it up and undertake it thoroughly.' This, monks, is how you must train yourselves." > > > > ...Da.lhe khiile vaa thambhe vaa'ti kho, bhikkhave, kaayagataaya satiyaa eta.m adhivacana.m. Tasmaatiha vo, bhikkhave, eva.m sikkhitabba.m - 'kaayagataa no sati bhaavitaa bhavissati bahuliikataa yaaniikataa vatthukataa anuṭṭhitaa paricitaa susamaaraddhaa'ti. Eva~nhi kho, bhikkhave, sikkhitabba''nti. Dasama.m. > > [RE:] I would also like to know how you would interpret the active sense in which the translation proposes, starting with "This is how you must train yourselves," then "we shall practice mindfulness...," "develop it, make it our vehicle, our dwelling place...," "we will build it up and undertake it...," and then again, "This...is how you must train yourselves." > > Do you feel this active imperative sense is not a correct reflection of the Pali? Or do you agree that this appears to be a set of direct admonitions or instructions from the Buddha to the monks? > =============== J: I notice that the Pali uses the "-abba" suffix ("sikkhitabba.m", "sikkhitabba''nti") which, as far as I know, is not an imperative tense (and I'm not sure whether it changes to indicate the appropriate person (1st, 2nd, 3rd)). A more literal translation might be "is to be trained", etc. However, I don't quibble with the translation, as it generally reflects current day usage. I'm more interested in what the training being recommended is. What is your reading of the sutta on this point, Rob? Jon #119106 From: Vince Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 5:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Music and Abhidhamma cerovzt@... Send Email Send Email Dear Nina you wrote: > N: We like the melody, consisting of many sounds Why it's so?. What's the nature of beauty? We hear just one sound. We don't like it neither we dislike it. Later, we hear a sustained repetition of that sound, and our attachment grows. Later we hear more sounds of different nature appearing in the middle, and then the attachment is unavoidable. And then we say "that's beauty". I have found inside a Sutta how the Buddha says to a musician his music was well performed. Buddha was not attached to sounds neither to the melody. However, he was appreciative of the beauty of the process. From the Atthasalini, inside "Abhidhamma in daily life": "Through this artistic design there arise operations of the mind (or artistic operations) accomplishing such things as sketching the outline, putting on the paint, touching up, and embellishing... Thus all classes of arts in the world, specific or generic, are achieved by the mind. And owing to its capacity thus to produce a variety or diversity of effects in action, the mind, which achieves all these arts, is itself artistic like the arts themselves. Nay, it is even more artistic than the art itself, because the latter cannot execute every design perfectly. For that reason the Blessed One has said, 'Monks, have you seen a masterpiece of painting?' 'Yes, Lord.' 'Monks, that masterpiece of art is designed by the mind. Indeed, monks, the mind is even more artistic than that masterpiece.'" If beauty it's a characteristic of the mind free of ignorance, Why the attachment to the beauty is akusala?. Or it is the ignorance of impermanence and -self what qualify this like akusala? best, #119107 From: "philip" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:09 pm Subject: Re: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger philofillet Hi Chuck Interesting. In Dhamma such messengers are different from tge idea og guardian angels we find in other relugiins, they are devas (heavenly beings) that come to the human realm to help us wake up to ageing, illness, death and the way of liberation. Metta, Phil > > > > > #119108 From: "philip" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 8:21 pm Subject: Re: Sanna and memory philofillet Hi Sarah Thanks for this. > > I find it difficult to understand how sanna functions. > .... > S: Just briefly, as you know, sanna has two functions: remembering and marking. It arises with every single citta, remembering and marking the object of citta. Ph: Recently I heard someone say that it is difficult to know the characteristic of sanna, compared to knowing the characteristic of vedana, for example. The characteristic seems hidden. A.Sujin just asked "do you know me?" from "Abhidhamma in Practice" > >When the mind first cognizes an object through the senses, perception "picks out" the object's distinctive mark. When the same object is met with on a subsequent occasion, perception again notices that its distinctive mark is identical with the previous one. It "grasps" the identity of the distinctive marks. This "grasping" is a complex series of thought processes, one of which connects the present object with the previous one and another attaches to the present object the previous one's name. Memory will be good if this "grasping" functions well, and "grasping" will function well if the initial "picking out" of the object's distinctive marks was clear, not obscured by irrelevant thoughts. Clear perception comes through attention. > .... > S: Yes, sanna marks the "distinctive mark" of the object and it is recognised again and again. I wouldn't use "grasping" here, as the marking occurs regardless of the kind of citta is accompanies. As for the comments about "good memory" if the "grasping functions well" and so on, this doesn't make much sense to me. Regardless of the conventional good or bad memory, sanna is marking the objects regardless. Just conditions to think differently according to accumulations. Even in the case of someone who seems to have no memory, sanna is marking and remembering at each instant. I think there's a tendency amongst writers to mix modern psychology with abhidhamma. I understand that. > > > > Ph: How can sanna "pick out a distinctive mark of an object" if objects don't exist in reality? Does the author mean visible object when he says 'an object'? > ... > S: What is meant is that sanna marks the particular characteristic of an object, such as visible object. It marks and remembers not only that it's seen, but just how this visible object is, never to be forgotten. This is how it knows that this is what we call a computer or a sea-scape. Even concepts - sanna marks and remembers each time a concept is thought about. For example, it's because of sanna that we remember that this is called a computer and so on. > Ph: I find this difficult. If there is a "particular characteristc of an object, such as bisible object", what is the object? If there are no objects, in reality, are there not only kalapas arising? I can understand that a pencil can't be seen, a pencil can't be touched, only visible object, hardness, but I can't understand that there is no object that is called a pencil. I heard difficult things about atta ditthi and sakkaya ditthi again today, you said dhammasanhini says they are synonymous, A.Sujin said differently, but I couldn't follow. Not to get frustrated, this is just beyond me. That's ok, when I first came to DSG, I coulnd't understand why people were talking about such things as concept and reality, and sabhava of realities, now I at least understand why it is important. Understanding will have to grow gradually. No need to comment or explain further, this is just over my head now. Thanks Sarah. It looks like I am better off with Nina's books, and Vism, of course, than with this book. I won't read any further. Metta, Phil #119109 From: "philip" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 8:55 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) philofillet Hi Rib > That's very sweet, Phil. I appreciate it. If I don't make it this time, I will try to arrange it in the future. I would enjoy meeting you too, not to mention the other illustrious folks I've been bothering for ten years. [Side note: Somehow I can't imagine Scott not drinking a beer or two, but I'm always open to a surprise.] Ph: I can't imagine he does, nor do I. When I said that it wasn't a moral concern , I meant that I have graduated from that particular foolishness, once and for all, not that I now feel relaxed about indulging in it. Mana obliges me to clarify that. Metta, Phil #119110 From: "philip" Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 9:37 pm Subject: Re: Sanna and memory philofillet Hi Sarah I just heard that every time sanna arises it makes a sign, nimitta karana (?) and this is the same nimitta we talk about each reality having. I guess that this is related to sanna vipalassa that makes us believe in permanence of things. nicca sanna? Could I ask you, when you have time, to write a few thoughts on that? Thanks. Only when you have time, I hope to be away for a week or so. Metta, Phil #119111 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 12:56 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "[Side note: Somehow I can't imagine Scott not drinking a beer or two, but I'm always open to a surprise.]" Scott: What, do you imagine me to be some sort of redneck or something? Silly boy. Me, it's straight to the opium dens. Man, I love those dreams... Scott. #119112 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 1:14 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...that is so profound!..." Scott: Not really. It's why I don't 'have a meditation practice.' I'm honest about it. When I wrote 'I don't know' in answer to those questions, I really meant 'I don't know.' Some of the information can be looked up with a little effort, true. But that is just book study. No, when *I don't know* what a Buddha knows, when *I don't know* what aspect of Moggalana's actual situation at the time was, when *I don't know* that suttas are instruction manuals, when *I don't know* that what the Buddha says to one guy hundreds of years ago is meant to apply to me, I *do* know that it is simply folly to go imagining that the sutta amounts to a set of instructions for me (read: anyone; include yourself on the list). You think that you 'know' enough to make a set of instructions out of the suttas. Knock yourself out. Me, I don't mind not knowing. And for sure, all books aside, I know that there is not adequate penetration of dhammas for me to 'know' kusala from akusala when it comes, say, to the intricate matter of jhaana. This is a matter of undeveloped pa~n~naa and, rather than fake-it and go along with all the malevolent buddhist peer-pressure to 'meditate' and act all buddhisty, I'll 'do' what amounts to waiting for things to unfold according to conditions, some of which can be known - once in awhile - now. Scott. #119113 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 1:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Borers in framework of roof nilovg Dear Chris, Op 21-okt-2011, om 23:19 heeft Christine het volgende geschreven: > I am concerned because an inspection seems to indicate that my home > has borers in the framework of the roof. I need to eradicate them > or they will destroy the house. What to do? I've had a few > sleepless nights worrying about this. I would be grateful for any > thoughts on this, with textual links if possible. ----- N: I can feel so much with you. A difficult problem. As Kh sujin said, so long as we are not sotaapanna we may still kill. We are laypeople and we may be in difficult situations. It depends on the moment of citta that decides to do this or that. Or maybe there will be conditions that you do not have to do anything at all. Or maybe just parts of the roof can be taken out and replaced. Let us know what happened, Nina. #119114 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 3:23 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., Rob: "...Obviously it referred to his conventional meditation activity; otherwise Buddha would not have given him all this advice about how to continue his meditation without falling asleep! Why would he give all this advice for a useless, imaginary activity? I mean, Duh!" Scott: You very much misunderstand me. The problem lies with your notion of 'conventional meditation activity.' To what does this term apply? Was Moggalana able to attain jhaana? Let's say this is the case. I have no doubt as to the so-called 'reality' of jhaana. If the Buddha is talking in this case to someone (and I'm using conventional *language* here - language couched in ordinary terms but always - always - referring to dhammas; the term 'conventional meditation activities' is meaningless) capable of attain jhaana, then this automatically is not you nor I. Again, your belief in something so loosely construed and ill-considered as 'conventional meditation activity' automatically rules you out from possibly gaining any so-called 'benefit' from such 'activity' - and by this I mean anything beyond relaxation and self-satisfaction. Such 'activity' will, in my opinion, remain at the ordinary, every-day level of, say, learning to play the piano, or learning a language. It will never, ever be in accordance with Dhamma - no matter what colour the cushion is, no matter what sort of incense is burned, no matter what sort of ritual is engaged in. The blind, top-down application of 'activities' which appear like someone's day-dream about what 'meditation' is, the thoughts about what one is doing or experiencing will be nothing special since the foundation is missing. Scott. #119115 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 11:13 pm Subject: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger dhammasaro Good friend Ken H, 1. Please forgive my breaking your rule. 2. The medication has dissipated... 3. I again ask all to remember this man - as a teenager, I was in awe... a real Texas Ranger in his car... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119116 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sat Oct 22, 2011 11:29 pm Subject: Buddhism in Action: was Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger dhammasaro Good friend Phil, et al Yes, I guess one could say I was somewhat depressed when I missed the city bus... the Texas Ranger stopped and took me to my high school, Central Catholic High School... he did not need to stop... I am sure he went out of his way to take me to my school... and, although I was a teenager; he did not speak down to me... he asked me questions and listened attentively... I am sure he was not a Buddhist; however, I would say it was Buddhism in action... What do you think? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119117 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 12:27 am Subject: Yhe Vinaya-pitaka Does Not Apply to Laypersons? dhammasaro Good friends all, In recent days, both on-line and off-line I have been castigated about the Vinaya-pitaka and it's application to us laypersons... In addition, the vinaya-pitaka was recently written on this Yahoo that the vinaya-pitaka does not apply to us laypersons!!! What ignorance from a so-called Dhamma-vinaya expert!!! An extract: The monastic tradition and the rules upon which it is built are sometimes naïvely criticized — particularly here in the West — as irrelevant to the "modern" practice of Buddhism. Some see the Vinaya as a throwback to an archaic patriarchy, based on a hodge-podge of ancient rules and customs — quaint cultural relics that only obscure the essence of "true" Buddhist practice. This misguided view overlooks one crucial fact: it is thanks to the unbroken lineage of monastics who have consistently upheld and protected the rules of the Vinaya for almost 2,600 years that we find ourselves today with the luxury of receiving the priceless teachings of Dhamma. Were it not for the Vinaya, and for those who continue to keep it alive to this day, there would be no Buddhism. It helps to keep in mind that the name the Buddha gave to the spiritual path he taught was "Dhamma-vinaya" — the Doctrine (Dhamma) and Discipline (Vinaya) — suggesting an integrated body of wisdom and ethical training. The Vinaya is thus an indispensable facet and foundation of all the Buddha's teachings, inseparable from the Dhamma, and worthy of study by all followers — lay and ordained, alike. Lay practitioners wlll find in the Vinaya Pitaka many valuable lessons concerning human nature, guidance on how to establish and maintain a harmonious community or organization, and many profound teachings of the Dhamma itself. But its greatest value, perhaps, lies in its power to inspire the layperson to consider the extraordinary possibilities presented by a life of true renunciation, a life lived fully in tune with the Dhamma. End extract, Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/vin/ Discussion? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck Post script: Please forgive the above out burst... I claim no special knowledge... I am but a mere student of the Dhamma-vinaya... [bummers] #119118 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 1:13 am Subject: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger dhammasaro Good friend Phil, Yes, I agree... one never knows when an angel, deva or other will provide a positive experience... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119119 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 1:32 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Borers in framework of roof dhammasaro Good friends all, Even monks kill when they sweep the grounds of the temple... I am sure I have when sweeping the grounds when I was a monk at Bangkok's Wat Bowon... Even, in washing one's face, one kills... Where does one draw the line, heh? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119120 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 2:36 am Subject: When is dhamma not dhamma? dhammasaro Good friends all, [Hopefully this message will pass our censorettes...] When is dhamma not dhamma? See: Dhamma (Pali: धमà¥à¤®) or Dharma (Sanskrit: धरà¥à¤®) in Buddhism has three meanings: The Universal Law of Nature.The teachings of the Buddha which apply an understanding of this law to the conduct of human life.A phenomenon and/or its properties. Etymologically, the word Dhamma (Sanskrit: Dharma) is derived from the root "dham," meaning "to uphold" or "to support," and the commentary further explains that it is that which upholds or supports the practitioner (of Dhamma) and prevents him or her from falling into states of misery or birth in a woeful existence. Of all Buddhist terminology, the word Dhamma commands the widest, most comprehensive meaning [1] . Dharma is to cultivate the knowledge and practice of laws and principles that holds together the fabric of reality, natural phenomena and personality of human beings in dynamic interdependence and harmony. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharma_%28Buddhism%29..............................\ ........................................................................... At each stage of this "gradual training" (anupubbi-sikkha), the practitioner discovers a new and important dimension of the law of cause-and-effect — kamma, the cornerstone of Right View. It is thus a very useful organizing framework with which to view the entirety of the Buddha's teachings. The gradual training begins with the practice of generosity, which helps begin the long process of weakening the unawakened practitioner's habitual tendencies to cling — to views, to sensuality, and to unskillful modes of thought and behavior Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/......................................\ .......................................................... Question: When is a dhamma not an appropriate dhamma discussion here, heh???????? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119121 From: "charlest" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:10 am Subject: Vinaya-pitaka; was: Giving Grapes to a Bhikkhu and/or Bhikkhuni dhammasaro Good friends all, Do you all agree the first of the Tipitaka, The Vinaya-pitaka, does not apply to us laypersons at all? It only applies monks? What say you? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119122 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:00 am Subject: Vinaya was intended for the monks. dhammasaro Good friends all. A very good and respected Buddhist friend wrote: Vinaya was intended for the monks. That said, however, I still think it is good for laity to learn about – which is also somewhat controversial since, as you probably know, there are always those who say it is not to be taught to laity. Question: Do you agree the Vinaya-pitaka is only for monks? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119123 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:03 am Subject: RE: Vinaya was intended for the monks. dhammasaro Did not the Historic Buddha teach; he did not teach with a closed fist (no secrets)??? <....> peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119124 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:33 am Subject: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger dhammasaro Good friend Ken H, et al I think I already thanked you; but, if I am still in an altered state... [bummers] To me, the Texas Ranger, although, I am sure he was not a Buddhist, did perform a Buddhist act... He befriended me... he in his gentle questions and his attentive listening; helped me in my early youth... Hence, my question: Can a non-Buddhist act positively as a [label] Buddhist? Warm thanks for your considered replies... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck <....> #119125 From: "connie" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 6:02 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger nichiconn hi Chuck, > > Can a non-Buddhist act positively as a [label] Buddhist? > What would be the point in applying the label? It is already enough that you felt/feel appreciative, I'd think. What is "a Buddhist" anyway? connie #119126 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 6:24 am Subject: Re: Vinaya was intended for the monks. scottduncan2 Chuck, C: "Question: Do you agree the Vinaya-pitaka is only for monks?" Scott: I can read it if I want. I'm not a monk. The rules for monks would be only for monks (or 'buddhists' who want to play at being monk-like). Scott. #119127 From: "Dieter" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 6:49 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger moellerdieter Hi Connie, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: What is "a Buddhist" anyway? wouldn't you agree with A.N.VIII, 26 ? with Metta Dieter "I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying in Rajagaha, at Jivaka's Mango Grove. Then Jivaka Komarabhacca went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "Lord, to what extent is one a lay follower?" "Jivaka, when one has gone to the Buddha for refuge, has gone to the Dhamma for refuge, and has gone to the Sangha for refuge, then to that extent is one a lay follower." "And to what extent, lord, is one a virtuous lay follower?" "Jivaka, when one abstains from taking life, from stealing, from sexual misconduct, from lying, and from fermented & distilled drinks that lead to heedlessness, then to that extent is one a virtuous lay follower." "And to what extent, lord, is one a lay follower who practices for his own benefit but not that of others?" "Jivaka, when a lay follower himself is consummate in conviction but does not encourage others in the consummation of conviction; when he himself is consummate in virtue but does not encourage others in the consummation of virtue; when he himself is consummate in generosity but does not encourage others in the consummation of generosity; when he himself desires to see the monks but does not encourage others to see the monks; when he himself wants to hear the true Dhamma but does not encourage others to hear the true Dhamma; when he himself habitually remembers the Dhamma he has heard but does not encourage others to remember the Dhamma they have heard; when he himself explores the meaning of the Dhamma he has heard but does not encourage others to explore the meaning of the Dhamma they have heard; when he himself, knowing both the Dhamma & its meaning, practices the Dhamma in line with the Dhamma, but does not encourage others to practice the Dhamma in line with the Dhamma: then to that extent he is a lay follower who practices for his own benefit but not for the benefit of others." "And to what extent, lord, is one a lay follower who practices both for his own benefit & the benefit of others?" "Jivaka, when a lay follower himself is consummate in conviction and encourages others in the consummation of conviction; when he himself is consummate in virtue and encourages others in the consummation of virtue; when he himself is consummate in generosity and encourages others in the consummation of generosity; when he himself desires to see the monks and encourages others to see the monks; when he himself wants to hear the true Dhamma and encourages others to hear the true Dhamma; when he himself habitually remembers the Dhamma he has heard and encourages others to remember the Dhamma they have heard; when he himself explores the meaning of the Dhamma he has heard and encourages others to explore the meaning of the Dhamma they have heard; when he himself, knowing both the Dhamma & its meaning, practices the Dhamma in line with the Dhamma and encourages others to practice the Dhamma in line with the Dhamma: then to that extent he is a lay follower who practices both for his own benefit and for the benefit of others." (translation Thanissaro Bhikkhu) #119128 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 7:30 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger scottduncan2 Dieter, Regarding: "...when one has gone to the Buddha for refuge, has gone to the Dhamma for refuge, and has gone to the Sangha for refuge, then to that extent is one a lay follower." Scott: What exactly does it mean, in this day and age, to 'go to the Buddha?' And, having shown that, how does that make one 'a buddhist?' Scott. #119129 From: "connie" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 7:30 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger nichiconn Hi Dieter, >c: What is "a Buddhist" anyway? > >D: wouldn't you agree with A.N.VIII, 26 ? ...snip... >AN: "Jivaka, when one has gone to the Buddha for refuge, has gone to the Dhamma for refuge, and has gone to the Sangha for refuge, then to that extent is one a lay follower." > c: Sure - & i seriously doubt the Ranger in question was one even 'to that extent'. At the same time that I might agree to call someone else "a lay follower", I'll stick to my opinion that it takes an ariyan to truly be 'Buddhist', but also acknowledge that's not the 'common usage'. Is taking refuge simply a matter of repeating a phrase or do you suppose there might be something more to it? What does 'refuge' mean to you? curious, connie #119130 From: "connie" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:03 am Subject: Re: Vinaya was intended for the monks. nichiconn Hi Chuck, Scott, > > C: "Question: Do you agree the Vinaya-pitaka is only for monks?" > > Scott: I can read it if I want. I'm not a monk. The rules for monks would be only for monks (or 'buddhists' who want to play at being monk-like). > c: I'd agree as far as my wanting to follow those rules myself might go... that it would do me well to consider (not just whether the slow walking monkey has learned to do some kind of meditation but) the Vism saying, of all the ascetic practices under discussion there, that "two, namely, the one-sessioner's practice and the bowl-food-eater's practice, are proper for male and female lay followers to employ." If I wanted / expected to be around any monks, I might also like to know what was allowable for them so that I didn't put them on the spot... or would, perhaps, know when to. I'd be curious to know how, for instance, A. Brahm travels from country to country. Right now, I'm wondering whether it's really appropriate for a monk to sing, as part of a "dhamma talk", a reworded protest song asking "where have all the buddhists gone, long time ago..". There's probably an answer in the books. And what about those females "ordaining" - are they really Old School 'by the book' or are we being asked to accept / ignore that they're of some Reform School? connie #119131 From: "Dieter" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:12 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger moellerdieter Hi Connie, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > Hi Dieter,> > >c: What is "a Buddhist" anyway? > > > >D: wouldn't you agree with A.N.VIII, 26 ? > ...snip... > >AN: "Jivaka, when one has gone to the Buddha for refuge, has gone to the Dhamma for refuge, and has gone to the Sangha for refuge, then to that extent is one a lay follower." > > > > c: Sure - & i seriously doubt the Ranger in question was one even 'to that extent'. D: I only had in mind your question ;-) C: At the same time that I might agree to call someone else "a lay follower", I'll stick to my opinion that it takes an ariyan to truly be 'Buddhist', but also acknowledge that's not the 'common usage'. D: well, I doubt that one can become an ariyan without being a lay follower or disciple before . C: Is taking refuge simply a matter of repeating a phrase or do you suppose there might be something more to it? D: you mean being serious in contrast to lip service ? C: What does 'refuge' mean to you? curious, D:for me it means : .. 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 (as emphasized in D.N.16) with Metta Dieter #119132 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:31 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Jon, (Rob E.), J: "...I'm more interested in what the training being recommended is..." Scott: Sammohavinodanii, 1934: "Now in order to point out those kinds of training by means of the apportionment of which these five precepts of trainings were stated, this section begins with 'Katame dhammaa sikkhaa?' ('Which states are trainings?'). Herein, since all profitable states in the four planes are training because they should be trained in..." Scott: I like this: 'which states are training?' This demonstrates the way of considering 'training' and it is much the same as the way to consider 'development' (bhaavanaa); that is, training is when any of the profitable states in the four planes arise. And, to be consistent, these states, having the characteristic of anatta, are not subject to control. Scott. #119133 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:38 am Subject: Re: Vinaya was intended for the monks. scottduncan2 connie, Chuck, c: "two, namely, the one-sessioner's practice and the bowl-food-eater's practice, are proper for male and female lay followers to employ." Scott: Cool. c: "If I wanted / expected to be around any monks, I might also like to know what was allowable for them so that I didn't put them on the spot..." Scott: Also a good point. I was around one once or twice and did sort feel a bit like I did changing a diaper for the very first time. Not that I was changing his diaper - I just didn't quite know what was the right thing to do. It was weird. Then we went for a walk and a chat and it was normal. Scott. #119134 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:25 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > > > > "...'Tethered to a stout post or pillar,' monks, denotes mindfulness as to body. Therefore, monks, this is how you must train yourselves: 'We shall practice mindfulness as to body, develop it, make it our vehicle, our dwelling-place, our resort, we will build it up and undertake it thoroughly.' This, monks, is how you must train yourselves." > > > > > > ...Da.lhe khiile vaa thambhe vaa'ti kho, bhikkhave, kaayagataaya satiyaa eta.m adhivacana.m. Tasmaatiha vo, bhikkhave, eva.m sikkhitabba.m - 'kaayagataa no sati bhaavitaa bhavissati bahuliikataa yaaniikataa vatthukataa anuṭṭhitaa paricitaa susamaaraddhaa'ti. Eva~nhi kho, bhikkhave, sikkhitabba''nti. Dasama.m. > > > > [RE:] I would also like to know how you would interpret the active sense in which the translation proposes, starting with "This is how you must train yourselves," then "we shall practice mindfulness...," "develop it, make it our vehicle, our dwelling place...," "we will build it up and undertake it...," and then again, "This...is how you must train yourselves." > J: I notice that the Pali uses the "-abba" suffix ("sikkhitabba.m", "sikkhitabba''nti") which, as far as I know, is not an imperative tense (and I'm not sure whether it changes to indicate the appropriate person (1st, 2nd, 3rd)). A more literal translation might be "is to be trained", etc. > I'm more interested in what the training being recommended is. What is your reading of the sutta on this point, Rob? Great question, Jon. I would go back to the actual statement to derive this point. "Therefore, monks, this is how you must train yourselves: 'We shall practice mindfulness as to body, develop it, make it our vehicle, our dwelling-place, our resort, we will build it up and undertake it thoroughly.'" Taking the most relevant portion, the instruction is to "train oneself to develop mindfulness by practicing mindfulness of the body." The other admonitions have to do with how thoroughly and completely one will do this single task: We will "...make it our vehicle, our dwelling-place, our resort, we will build it up and undertake it thoroughly.'" So the actual practice being instructed as a way to develop mindfulness is to practice Kayagatasati, mindfulness of the body. I don't quite get the term "mindfulness as to body" in this translation. I don't really know what that would mean. I take it that it is "mindfulness of the body" as that is the normal translation [I think] of Kayagatasati, and a practice discussed elsewhere by the Buddha in the Kayagatasati sutta: In Thanissaro's translation, the term is translated like this: "And how is mindfulness immersed in the body developed, how is it pursued, so as to be of great fruit & great benefit?" And then goes on to the normal anapansati practice: "Breathing in long, he discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out long, he discerns that he is breathing out long. Or breathing in short, he discerns that he is breathing in short; or breathing out short, he discerns that he is breathing out short. He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to the entire body and to breathe out sensitive to the entire body. He trains himself to breathe in calming bodily fabrication (the breath) and to breathe out calming bodily fabrication." And then on to the physical positions: "Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns that he is walking. When standing, he discerns that he is standing. When sitting, he discerns that he is sitting. When lying down, he discerns that he is lying down. Or however his body is disposed, that is how he discerns it." And then goes on to being mindful of all physical activities: "Furthermore, when going forward & returning, he makes himself fully alert; when looking toward & looking away... when bending & extending his limbs... when carrying his outer cloak, his upper robe & his bowl... when eating, drinking, chewing, & savoring... when urinating & defecating... when walking, standing, sitting, falling asleep, waking up, talking, & remaining silent, he makes himself fully alert." And then the contemplation on the contents of the body: "Furthermore, the monk reflects on this very body from the soles of the feet on up, from the crown of the head on down, surrounded by skin and full of various kinds of unclean things: 'In this body there are head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, gorge, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, skin-oil, saliva, mucus, fluid in the joints, urine.'" Then he contemplates the body as composed of the 4GE: "Furthermore, the monk contemplates this very body — however it stands, however it is disposed — in terms of properties: 'In this body there is the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, & the wind property.' ... the monk contemplates this very body — however it stands, however it is disposed — in terms of properties: 'In this body there is the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, & the wind property.'" Then corpse contemplations. After that it goes beyond mindfulness of the body to the development of the 4 jhanas, and then concludes that kayagatasati will lead to clear knowing: "Monks, whoever develops & pursues mindfulness immersed in the body encompasses whatever skillful qualities are on the side of clear knowing. Just as whoever pervades the great ocean with his awareness encompasses whatever rivulets flow down into the ocean, in the same way, whoever develops & pursues mindfulness immersed in the body encompasses whatever skillful qualities are on the side of clear knowing." http://tipitaka.wikia.com/wiki/Kayagatasati_Sutta On another site where they combined translations of Bhikkhus Nanamoli, Bodhi and Thanissaro, they translate it in what I think would be a more normal way: "And how is mindfulness of the body developed, how is it pursued, so as to be of great fruit and great benefit?" I would go with "mindfulness of the body" as stated here, unless the Pali directly contradicts it, as it makes the most sense. The sutta covers mindfulness of the body in a number of ways, some of them not "immersed" in the body as Thanissaro states, so I think "mindfulness of the body" makes more sense. http://www.greatwesternvehicle.org/kayagatasati.htm Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #119135 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:28 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > That's very sweet, Phil. I appreciate it. If I don't make it this time, I will try to arrange it in the future. I would enjoy meeting you too, not to mention the other illustrious folks I've been bothering for ten years. [Side note: Somehow I can't imagine Scott not drinking a beer or two, but I'm always open to a surprise.] > > > Ph: I can't imagine he does, nor do I. When I said that it wasn't a moral concern , I meant that I have graduated from that particular foolishness, once and for all, not that I now feel relaxed about indulging in it. Mana obliges me to clarify that. Thanks, I didn't mean it seriously. I was just being stupid. Sorry for joking about that - not that I would actually judge it one way or the other. I am not very advanced myself in many of these areas, and I am just being overly silly. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #119136 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:30 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "[Side note: Somehow I can't imagine Scott not drinking a beer or two, but I'm always open to a surprise.]" > > Scott: What, do you imagine me to be some sort of redneck or something? Silly boy. Me, it's straight to the opium dens. Man, I love those dreams... The truth is, as I think about it, I have no idea what you're like in general. It's kind of interesting. All I really remember about you is that I think it's been mentioned that you surf, so no reason for me to say such things, though meant as a joke. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #119137 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:33 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...that is so profound!..." > > Scott: Not really. It's why I don't 'have a meditation practice.' I'm honest about it. When I wrote 'I don't know' in answer to those questions, I really meant 'I don't know.' Some of the information can be looked up with a little effort, true. But that is just book study. > > No, when *I don't know* what a Buddha knows, when *I don't know* what aspect of Moggalana's actual situation at the time was, when *I don't know* that suttas are instruction manuals, when *I don't know* that what the Buddha says to one guy hundreds of years ago is meant to apply to me, I *do* know that it is simply folly to go imagining that the sutta amounts to a set of instructions for me (read: anyone; include yourself on the list). > > You think that you 'know' enough to make a set of instructions out of the suttas. Knock yourself out. Me, I don't mind not knowing. I don't think I know enough to make stuff up. When Buddha says "Do this and do that to get this and that to happen," I just read it stupidly and don't second-guess it. I'm not 'turning it into' an instruction manual. It says what it says. > And for sure, all books aside, I know that there is not adequate penetration of dhammas for me to 'know' kusala from akusala when it comes, say, to the intricate matter of jhaana. This is a matter of undeveloped pa~n~naa and, rather than fake-it and go along with all the malevolent buddhist peer-pressure to 'meditate' and act all buddhisty, I'll 'do' what amounts to waiting for things to unfold according to conditions, some of which can be known - once in awhile - now. Nothing wrong with that approach, if you think that is the correct path. We each take the teachings in a way that we think is right, and wait for further illumination. Hopefully we are open to it when it comes. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #119138 From: "philip" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:34 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) philofillet Hi Rob E > > Thanks, I didn't mean it seriously. I was just being stupid. Sorry for joking about that - not that I would actually judge it one way or the other. I am not very advanced myself in many of these areas, and I am just being overly silly. > Ph: Here you were being silly. No harm done. I do it too. Now on to the other post, where you are being stupid, with more harm done. Metta, Phil #119139 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:39 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > Rob: "...Obviously it referred to his conventional meditation activity; otherwise Buddha would not have given him all this advice about how to continue his meditation without falling asleep! Why would he give all this advice for a useless, imaginary activity? I mean, Duh!" > > Scott: You very much misunderstand me. The problem lies with your notion of 'conventional meditation activity.' To what does this term apply? > > Was Moggalana able to attain jhaana? Let's say this is the case. I have no doubt as to the so-called 'reality' of jhaana. If the Buddha is talking in this case to someone (and I'm using conventional *language* here - language couched in ordinary terms but always - always - referring to dhammas; the term 'conventional meditation activities' is meaningless) capable of attain jhaana, then this automatically is not you nor I. > > Again, your belief in something so loosely construed and ill-considered as 'conventional meditation activity' automatically rules you out from possibly gaining any so-called 'benefit' from such 'activity' - and by this I mean anything beyond relaxation and self-satisfaction. > > Such 'activity' will, in my opinion, remain at the ordinary, every-day level of, say, learning to play the piano, or learning a language. It will never, ever be in accordance with Dhamma - no matter what colour the cushion is, no matter what sort of incense is burned, no matter what sort of ritual is engaged in. The blind, top-down application of 'activities' which appear like someone's day-dream about what 'meditation' is, the thoughts about what one is doing or experiencing will be nothing special since the foundation is missing. Needless to say, I think you assume too much, infer too much, and for someone who doesn't know, you have a fair degree of certainty about the correct or incorrect approach for someone else to take, and what the results might be. Your evaluation is noted, but I believe is based on your own reading and bias towards what I say. There is no way that anyone could "sit down to meditate" in any form with any approach at all that would not be subject to your abnegation. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #119140 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:42 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Scott, and Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Jon, (Rob E.), > > J: "...I'm more interested in what the training being recommended is..." > > Scott: Sammohavinodanii, 1934: > > "Now in order to point out those kinds of training by means of the apportionment of which these five precepts of trainings were stated, this section begins with 'Katame dhammaa sikkhaa?' ('Which states are trainings?'). Herein, since all profitable states in the four planes are training because they should be trained in..." > > Scott: I like this: 'which states are training?' This demonstrates the way of considering 'training' and it is much the same as the way to consider 'development' (bhaavanaa); that is, training is when any of the profitable states in the four planes arise. And, to be consistent, these states, having the characteristic of anatta, are not subject to control. While this statement is in full accord with your "arising dhammas" way of looking at all activities, it has absolutely nothing in common with the way in which the sutta actually discusses practice, and so is at odds with it. Practice is not spoken of in the sutta as applying to the arising of kusala states, which is a stretched meaning of "practice" in any case. It is discussed as an activity to be fully pursued and perfected. Sorry that Buddha isn't cooperating with you again! Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #119141 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:44 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > Hi Rob E > > > > Thanks, I didn't mean it seriously. I was just being stupid. Sorry for joking about that - not that I would actually judge it one way or the other. I am not very advanced myself in many of these areas, and I am just being overly silly. > > > Ph: Here you were being silly. No harm done. I do it too. Now on to the other post, where you are being stupid, with more harm done. Sure, whatever. I realize it's tough on you to have disagreement. The world would be a better place if everyone accorded with your views, I'm sure. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = #119142 From: "philip" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:52 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) philofillet -- Hi again > > Thanks, I didn't mean it seriously. I was just being stupid. Sorry for joking about that - not that I would actually judge it one way or the other. I am not very advanced myself in many of these areas, and I am just being overly silly. > > > Ph: Here you were being silly. No harm done. I do it too. Now on to the other post, where you are being stupid, with more harm done. > No never mind, there is such a sea of text thrown up on shore by you that I can't find the bit I I was looking for, where you blithely skip over your ideas about "mindfulness in the body." Your attitude towards the suttas is like towards a plaything. I'm tired of it, I really need a break. Of course I know you're a good fellow and all that, but I have good fellows at work. Please do some serious and respectful studying. As A Sujin said "Dhamma is for studying, not reading." I have to pay more attention to that too. Metta Phil #119143 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 10:10 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger scottduncan2 Dieter, D: "...for me it means : .. 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..." Scott: What does this come down to in actual behaviour? Does the above refer to a way of thinking? Does the above refer to dhammas? If the latter, which dhammas? And how are these dhammas 'cultivated?' Scott. #119144 From: "philip" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 10:22 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) philofillet Hi again I wrote: Your attitude towards the suttas is like towards a plaything. I'm tired of it, I really need a break. And for Alex they are a tin pot to hammer on, and for Howard a lectern from which to share his theorizing. And who will be the next? It seems to me the agenda at DSG is dictated by people whose understanding of Dhamma is fundamentally divergent from the founding principles in the group description. Yes, yes, I'm just clinging to the serious atmosphere and focus of the recorded discussions, but I do think the onlune version of DSG (or an alternate version, sub forum or something) could possibly be closer to an extension of those discussions so the people who participate there could and would participate here. Selfish and ungrateful, I know...but so be it...I am always looking after myself and what self wants and clings to...that won't change any day soon! The following smiley indicates understanding of that. :) Metta, Phil Metta, Phil #119145 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 10:24 am Subject: "Thus should you train yourselves" truth_aerator Hi Jon, RobertE, all, >J: Many thanks for taking the trouble to post this translation (will >be interested to compare with the one posted by Alex). >================================================== Here is Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation: "`A strong post or pillar': this, bhikkhus, is a designation for mindfulness concerning the body. Therefore, bhikkhus, you should train yourselves thus: `We will develop and cultivate mindfulness concerning the body, make it our vehicle, make it our basis, stabilize it, exercise ourselves in it, and thoroughly undertake it.' Thus should you train yourselves."" Even Bhikkhu Bodhi says "you should train yourselves thus". I believe that whenever the Buddha has said that "you should train yourselves thus", He really meant that and not the exact opposite. I really find it unbelievable to claim that whenever the Buddha has said "X" what He really meant that, but was inept at expressing, was "NOT-X". Was He really such a bad teacher who couldn't express what He meant clearly? With best wishes, Alex #119146 From: "connie" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 10:38 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger nichiconn Thanks, Dieter, AN viii 26: "Jivaka, when one has gone to the Buddha for refuge, has gone to the Dhamma for refuge, and has gone to the Sangha for refuge, then to that extent is one a lay follower." > > > According to the Illustrator (cy to Minor Readings), Buddha originally started the refuges formula << When the sixty-one Arahants were engaged in teaching the True Idea in the world for the benefit of the many, after the venerable Yasa, together with his companions, had attained Arahantship (see Vin i 20). Why? For the purpose of giving the Going Forth into Homelessness and for the purpose of giving the Full Admission >> and, as you implied: << this is the pathway by which gods and men enter the Dispensation, whether they become lay-followers or those gone forth >>. Just thought you might like that. I didn't really have anything to say... Chuck's Ranger stuck with me since I've been on a paperback novel kick lately & the heroine of the last ones was a 5th generation Ranger. In a book is close enough to that kind of law enforcement for me. Hopefully, we all get a bit closer to the "real law" outside of them, connie #119147 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:30 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "I don't think I know enough to make stuff up..." Scott: Oh what a great straight man you are. You made me say: 'No, it's *because* you don't know enough that you make stuff up.' Too tempting. As you say, your fault. R: "...When Buddha says 'Do this and do that to get this and that to happen,' I just read it stupidly and don't second-guess it. I'm not 'turning it into' an instruction manual. It says what it says." Scott: Don't contradict yourself, Rob. You have clearly said that the suttas offer instructions for 'meditating.' Do you think that you can now solve the problem of 'sleepiness during meditating' because of what the Buddha said to Moggalana, for example? Are you even sure that 'sloth and torpor' equate to 'sleepiness?' R: "...We each take the teachings in a way that we think is right, and wait for further illumination. Hopefully we are open to it when it comes." Scott: I'm not sure what you mean, here. Do all roads lead to Rome? I'm not sure I know what being 'open for further illumination' means, except that it sort of sounds cool at first. It's like hippy-speak, I guess. That's what it reminds me of. Not that I hate hippies or anything. Scott. #119148 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:36 am Subject: Enthusiastic is Energy! bhikkhu5 Friends: Energy is the 5th Mental Perfection: Energy means enthusiasm, effort, exertion and interest! Energy means eagerness, endeavor, initiative and intensity! Energy means action, force, power, drive and hyper keenness! Energy means devotion, dedication, determination & commitment! Energy means enjoyment :-) Energy pave the way for success in all and any project ... Energy is thereby instrumental for all the perfections! Without Energy no achievement can ever be accomplished.. The proximate cause for Energy is a sense of urgency! The characteristic of Energy is Striving, its function is Effort, and the manifestation of Energy is Endurance. The Blessed Buddha said about the perfection of Energy: Get up! Sit up! Of what use are your dreams ? How can you sleep, when mentally sick, stabbed by the arrow of urge and craving. Sutta Nipâta 331 Get up! Sit up! Push on your training, until reaching pure peace! Don't let the king of death -Mara- see you sloppy and thus delude and dominate you like a stringed toy doll... Sutta Nipâta 332 Possessed of Energy and Endurance be always Earnest in your training. The clever one is not satisfied before the final goal of ending all misery is completely achieved. Theragatha 585 It is too cold, it's too hot, it's too early, it is too late! Such bad excuses, makes one give up the training and miss one more precious opportunity to end suffering... DN 31 This straight and Noble Way has now been clearly shown: Don’t hesitate, walk forward and do not turn around. Urge yourself to advance further by your own Energy! Only thus will you obviously approach and attain Nibbâna! Theragatha 637 The efforts to prevent and to eliminate all evil. The efforts to develop and to maintain all good. These are the 4 right efforts, taught by the Buddha. AN II 17 And what, friends, is feeding the Energy Link to Enlightenment, not yet arisen, & food too for boosting of any present Energy ? 1: The element of initial initiative, 2: The element of launching into action, 3: The element of persistent endurance. Systematic attention to these 3 aspects, is initiating your Energy and is boosting any Energy that is already present . Samyutta Nikâya XLVI 51 Bojjhanga-samyutta At such times, when the mind is Slow, Sluggish, and Heavy: Then it is the right occasion: for cultivating: The Investigation-by-curiosity enlightenment-factor, The Energy-of-Enthusiasm enlightenment-factor, The Rapture-of-Joy enlightenment-factor... Why is it so ? When the mind is slow, sluggish, and heavy, it is easily raised up by exactly these 3 mental qualities. Suppose, friends, that a man wants a fire to blaze up, and he put on dry grass, dry wood sticks and blow it with dry hot air and do not cover it with any dust, would that man then see his fire blaze up ? Certainly So, Lord... SN V, 46. Bojjhanga-samyutta When Moggallana where sitting nodding in the jungle night: Well then, Moggallana, whatever experience you had in mind when drowsiness demoralized you down, don't attend to that experience, don't follow it. Remember instead the Dhamma, as you have heard & memorized it, reflect on & examine it! Then raise up & repeat aloud the details of Dhamma, as you have learnt it! Then pull both your earlobes and rub your limbs with both your hands.! Then get up from your seat, and after washing your eyes with cold water, look around and upward in all directions and identify the major stars & planets! Then attend to the experience of inner light, resolve on the clear perception of daytime, by night as by day, and by day as by night! By means of an Awareness thus open, unhindered & vivid, develop the bright mind. Its possible, that by doing this, you will shake off your lethargy... But if by doing this you don't shake off your laziness, then continually noting what is both in front and behind set of a distance to meditate walking back and forth, your senses inwardly settled, while your mind is not getting lost outwards. It is possible that by doing this you will shake off all your mental sluggishness... Anguttara Nikâya VII 58 Born as the Brahmin Mahajanaka, the Bodhisatta was once aboard a sinking ship far from shore. All the crew were in great panic...!!! The Bodhisatta though ate his belly full of sugar and ghee, oiled his clothes and swam continuously for 7 days towards the shore, until he was rescued by a guarding female devata. Later he remembered: "Even far out at sea, where many men were lost, yet still unruffled by worry was my mind. I just kept swimming for seven days! This was my perfection of Energy." Mahajanaka-Jataka no. 539 SPREADING FAME One who exerts effort, One who is alert and always aware, One who does good deeds voluntarily and deliberately, One who is kind and considerate in all dealings, One who is restrained and controlled, One who lives according to the real truth of the Dhamma, carefully and seriously, the fame of such one always grows! Dhammapada Illustration 24 Background Story 24 SAFETY By arousing & inspiring oneself to put forth energetic effort; By meticulous carefulness; By well restrained self-control; The wise and clever ones make themselves a safe island, no flood or fever of desire can ever overwhelm! Dhammapada Illustration 25 Background Story 25 <...> Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <...> #119149 From: SARAH CONNELL Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:15 am Subject: Re: [SariputtaDhamma] RE: Vinaya was intended for the monks. dhammasanna Hi Min and Chuck, I was not going to say anything until Min's response. IMHO I disagree with it. The Buddha did not teach with a closed fist. I have been a Theravada Buddhist for a number of years and have been studying the Tipitaka for much of that time. I have read and studied the Vinaya Nikaya (all 6 volumes of the English translation) as well as Suttas and some of the Abhidhamma and some commentaries. If anything I have been given the impetus to strive in my practice even more with the increased knowledge. Although I am not required to live the rules of the Vinaya, knowing them has helped me in the development of my journey on the Noble Eightfold Path.  It has also helped me in my being around the monks and teaching them the English language. I have a deep respect for the monks but without putting them on a pedestal. In fact in the beginning there was no Vinaya when the Buddha founded the Sangha of Bhikkhus and Bhikkunis. The rules were only put in place by the Buddha when he found that the monks were not able to live the life in the sangha without petty arguments unless he set up the rules to prevent those disputes. Thus I am able to see them in the reality of their trying to grow in the Dhamma and not giving undue praise just because they are in robes. It is because people do not study the dhamma for themselves that I believe that the existence of living arahats are in present day life very rare and perhaps it is why many people have fallen into the practice of only rites and rituals and into superstitious practices of fortune telling, etc which were prohibited by the Buddha. May you be well and happy and always smiling,  Sarah ________________________________ From: min kyaw To: "SariputtaDhamma@yahoogroups.com" Sent: Sat, October 22, 2011 6:23:00 PM Subject: Re: [SariputtaDhamma] RE: Vinaya was intended for the monks.  Hi Chuck I think so - better not show it to laity because they would fear of becoming monks. Actual teaching only should start, as in Buddha time, after ordination and learn gradually. In a Burmese tradition - in Shew Kyin tradition for example, there is a need for laity to live in monastery a few days before becoming a monk so that they can learn how to live like a monk with the ten precepts, how to chant about the four things: food, monastery, etc. not to eat of have with greed. But the 227 Viniya is not taught to them as can be too much. There is a need to persuade to keep a monk not to leave the order and to be being a good monk. This is how I see it. Actually all 227 Viniya rules are not for laity and will not be useful for their daily life but it can make them have low self-esteem if they think they should follow and cannot. The laity should be informed properly that Viniya is only for monks and not for laity - e.g. not to eat meat if it is killed for you. The Buddha made it clear what is for monks and what is not for monks. If laity try to live like monks, monks would be not respected for any better reason. Also the society will be difficult to support itself and the Sasana. Even all monks do not follow the Viniya; then if some people follow and some people do not, the society will be in bad shape - not secular anymore but power struggle between religious and non-religious people imposing their desire on each other will happen. Obviously the Buddha didn't want that. The Buddha wanted secular societies supporting itself for Sasana. This will keep the order clean as well. Regards, Min  Min KhinKyaw <....> #119150 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:32 am Subject: RE: [SariputtaDhamma] RE: Vinaya was intended for the monks. dhammasaro Good friend Sarah (dhammasanna), An old expression - but, very true here - A Breath of Fresh Air... It is as I was taught by a very old and senior monk at Bangkok's Wat Bowon... All of the Tipitaka is for all observing... both monks and laypersons... Yes! Yes, there is much, much more than the 227 rules in the Vinaya-pitaka... Yes, you are most correct on the development of the rules... If I remember correctly, all the rules were promulgated because one or more laypersons complained about a monk's action(s). I think only one rule was made because of the action of an arahant!!! I know in my case, study of the Vinaya-pitaka has helped me both as a temporary monk and as a layperson... Sincere warm thanks for your comments. yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck <...> #119151 From: "connie" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 12:55 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) nichiconn hey, Phil - > > Please do some serious and respectful studying. As A Sujin said "Dhamma is for studying, not reading." I have to pay more attention to that too. > Does this mean you're finally getting around to working on that DSG Entrance Exam you were supposed to write before you took off on that convenient little excursion? I've really been impatient waiting for it, connie #119152 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 1:17 pm Subject: For all: was Vinaya was intended for the monks. dhammasaro Good friends all When at Wat Thai Washington DC, a young Thai-American, recently disrobed, asked me to talk to his girlfriend about him. I had only ordained a few days; but, had studied what was available on the Vinaya-pitaka on Access-to-Insight. I learned a monk does not act as a go-between... I replied that he should have asked me before I ordained... both, he and my junior ajahn (teacher) were surprised that I knew I could not do as he requested... a test, no doubt... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: scduncan@... <....> c: "two, namely, the one-sessioner's practice and the bowl-food-eater's practice, are proper for male and female lay followers to employ." Scott: Cool. <...> #119153 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 1:37 pm Subject: Do We All Agree the Vinaya-pitaka Does Apply to Laypersons? dhammasaro Good friends all, [I trust this message will pass my censoreeties] In recent days, both on-line and off-line I have been castigated about the Vinaya-pitaka and it's application to us laypersons... In addition, the vinaya-pitaka was recently written on this Yahoo that the vinaya-pitaka does not apply to us laypersons!!! What ignorance from a so-called Dhamma-vinaya expert!!! An extract: The monastic tradition and the rules upon which it is built are sometimes naïvely criticized — particularly here in the West — as irrelevant to the "modern" practice of Buddhism. Some see the Vinaya as a throwback to an archaic patriarchy, based on a hodge-podge of ancient rules and customs — quaint cultural relics that only obscure the essence of "true" Buddhist practice. This misguided view overlooks one crucial fact: it is thanks to the unbroken lineage of monastics who have consistently upheld and protected the rules of the Vinaya for almost 2,600 years that we find ourselves today with the luxury of receiving the priceless teachings of Dhamma. Were it not for the Vinaya, and for those who continue to keep it alive to this day, there would be no Buddhism. It helps to keep in mind that the name the Buddha gave to the spiritual path he taught was "Dhamma-vinaya" — the Doctrine (Dhamma) and Discipline (Vinaya) — suggesting an integrated body of wisdom and ethical training. The Vinaya is thus an indispensable facet and foundation of all the Buddha's teachings, inseparable from the Dhamma, and worthy of study by all followers — lay and ordained, alike. Lay practitioners wlll find in the Vinaya Pitaka many valuable lessons concerning human nature, guidance on how to establish and maintain a harmonious community or organization, and many profound teachings of the Dhamma itself. But its greatest value, perhaps, lies in its power to inspire the layperson to consider the extraordinary possibilities presented by a life of true renunciation, a life lived fully in tune with the Dhamma. End extract, Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/vin/ comments? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119154 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 1:51 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > -- Hi again > > > > > Thanks, I didn't mean it seriously. I was just being stupid. Sorry for joking about that - not that I would actually judge it one way or the other. I am not very advanced myself in many of these areas, and I am just being overly silly. > > > > > Ph: Here you were being silly. No harm done. I do it too. Now on to the other post, where you are being stupid, with more harm done. > > > No never mind, there is such a sea of text thrown up on shore by you that I can't find the bit I I was looking for, where you blithely skip over your ideas about "mindfulness in the body." Your attitude towards the suttas is like towards a plaything. I'm tired of it, I really need a break. Of course I know you're a good fellow and all that, but I have good fellows at work. > > Please do some serious and respectful studying. As A Sujin said "Dhamma is for studying, not reading." I have to pay more attention to that too. Give it a rest Phil. I don't throw suttas around, I don't have a glib attitude or any of the other nonsense you keep making up, and your way of supporting your own views by making up judgmental crap about me is getting beyond tiresome. If you need a break, take it already and shut up. I am sick of getting your unwanted opinions about how serious I am or how I am approaching Dhamma. Mind your own integrity and lay off. If you want to talk about an actual topic instead of ridiculous talk about who's doing what, feel free. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #119155 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 2:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - In a message dated 10/22/2011 7:22:27 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: I wrote: Your attitude towards the suttas is like towards a plaything. I'm tired of it, I really need a break. And for Alex they are a tin pot to hammer on, and for Howard a lectern from which to share his theorizing. And who will be the next? ================================= Well, aren't you the master of pigeonholing! Do you also have a fixed category for yourself too, Phil? Say, "Mr. Truth Knower"? With metta, The Theorizer (I'll be baaack!!) Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #119156 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 2:17 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > Hi again > > I wrote: Your attitude towards the suttas is like towards a plaything. Wrong, but thanks for repeating it *again.* Your disparaging language is noted. > I'm tired of it, I really need a break. Good for you, go cry somewhere else. Break granted! Take off! > And for Alex they are a tin pot to hammer on, Wrong. > and for Howard a lectern from which to share his theorizing. Wrong. > And who will be the next? How about you? How about examining your own overly personalized totally biased view, and your continuous whining and complaining about everyone other than yourself [and those you agree with?] Why don't you exercise a little discipline and hold your tongue? Oh, I forgot, it's totally out of your control. If the nasty old akusala dhammas want to arise it's not little Phil's fault, so there's no responsibility for anything. Do you realize you know have an unremitting, incessant agenda to drum people off the list who don't talk about what you want them to talk about? You are now the "head of school" here, although no one appointed you as such. In that role, your whining lecturing towards other list members, whose membership is equally valid to your own, is continuous. Do you really want to be the one to decide who belongs here and who doesn't, who is "serious" and who is not? I don't think we should trust your judgment on that, Phil - someone who's own views change like the wind depending on what mood you're in this month. > It seems to me the agenda at DSG is dictated by people whose understanding of Dhamma is fundamentally divergent from the founding principles in the group description. Sure, you should have kicked yourself out months ago when you were fighting against the paramatha view with every post, rightly insisting that conventional behavior mattered and was part of the path. Now that you've given that up, you're a very staunch advocate for purity. And it is highly hypocritical. You should be embarrassed, but of course you're not. > Yes, yes, I'm just clinging to the serious atmosphere and focus of the recorded discussions, but I do think the online version of DSG (or an alternate version, sub forum or something) could possibly be closer to an extension of those discussions so the people who participate there could and would participate here. There is a reason why we're all here, and why the group leaders actually do not have rules about talking only in Abhidhamma terms, and do not censure people for saying what they think. If you don't like it, do start your own group. Why not? You can then set the rules to your new level of purity and [ha ha] seriousness. You can even refrain from smiling if it makes you feel more pompously superior. > Selfish and ungrateful, And inaccurate, hypocritical and inappropriate - just helping with your list. > I know...but so be it...I am always looking after myself and what self wants and clings to...that won't change any day soon! The following smiley indicates understanding of that. :) Yeah, well, next time just send the smiley and skip the rest of the post. No one needs a running commentary on who is right and who is wrong from you. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #119157 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 2:36 pm Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "I don't think I know enough to make stuff up..." > > Scott: Oh what a great straight man you are. You made me say: > > 'No, it's *because* you don't know enough that you make stuff up.' > > Too tempting. As you say, your fault. No problem. It's meaningless. > R: "...When Buddha says 'Do this and do that to get this and that to happen,' I just read it stupidly and don't second-guess it. I'm not 'turning it into' an instruction manual. It says what it says." > > Scott: Don't contradict yourself, Rob. You have clearly said that the suttas offer instructions for 'meditating.' I read what he says. I can recognize what a person is saying by what they say. It's not an interpretation. If you said "Take some eggs and make an omelette," you wouldn't have any doubt that it was an instruction. It's the same form of language. When Buddha says "Do X" that is an instruction pure and simple. Your denial is absurd in such a case. You don't present any sensible interpretation or explication of your own that references the sutta and makes any sense; you just deny that the Buddha says "Do X by doing Y" when that is exactly the form of the sutta. And so you are in nonsense-land, hypnotized by your own views to be incapable of reading plain speech and admitting that it says what it says. How can anyone talk to such a person? If you give a reasonable explanation as to why you think X means Y, other than "I know that it couldn't mean X because I believe in Y," of course I would listen and discuss it with you. But you do no such thing. You just content yourself with saying the equivalent of "You insist on saying that an egg is an egg. How do you know that an egg is an egg? Why do you think that you are so wise that when Buddha says "make an omelette" you interpret that to mean that Buddha is saying "make an omelette?" How can you be so presumptuous?" It is complete and utter nonsense. If you don't think the Buddha means what he says, prove it. Otherwise I will go by the plain meaning of the text, and my evidence *is* the text. If I am not saying correctly what the text says, then you tell me what it says. Without such evidence, there is no possibility of an objective discussion. Seriously it's like talking to the mad hatter. "Oh but down here an omelette is really a tomato." "But no, mad hatter, it really is an omelette." "How do you know it is an omelette and not a tomato?" "Uh...it's made out of eggs." "How do you know those are eggs? My philosophy tells me they are really tomatoes, despite appearances." And so the nonsense continues with no offering from you to demonstrate why an egg is really a tomato. Oh but you know it's true, because you read it in your favorite book. > Do you think that you can now solve the problem of 'sleepiness during meditating' because of what the Buddha said to Moggalana, for example? Are you even sure that 'sloth and torpor' equate to 'sleepiness?' Don't be ridiculous. It is clear what sleepiness is in this sutta. It's normal, garden-variety sleepiness - a tendency to fall asleep or get sleepy while meditating. It's familiar to all meditators at one time or another, and Buddha's advice is simple but inventive advice aimed at this very problem, nothing suggesting it is something else. This is more "mad hatter" talk. "How do you know that sleepiness is not some other weird unnamed advanced cetasika from the twilight zone? Can you prove it's not something else, unnamed and unsuggested by the Buddha?" These are ridiculous, invalid forms of argument in *any* discussion. If you don't think sleepiness means sleepiness *you* have a show a valid reason for doubting it, not just because you can say it and cast doubt on it in your imagination. Those are phony arguments Scott! They're worthless. They're not based on evidence and they don't offer any knowledge of the sutta, just making stuff up because you don't like the plain meaning, which offers proof that your understanding is wrong. Why not just accept what the Buddha said and figure out how it works, instead of denying the Teacher's words? This commitment to your view in the face of contrary evidence will keep you spinning away from the Buddha for a really long time if you don't deal with what is really there. > R: "...We each take the teachings in a way that we think is right, and wait for further illumination. Hopefully we are open to it when it comes." > > Scott: I'm not sure what you mean, here. Do all roads lead to Rome? I'm not sure I know what being 'open for further illumination' means, except that it sort of sounds cool at first. It's like panna or vipassana arising. When it comes things are more clear. When you are holding onto your treasured concepts to the point where you can't read and accept what is on the page without making up a far-fetched "possible" explanation for why it may not mean what it says, that keeps you from being open to the teaching as it is said and as it is taught. The Buddha actually said things. You are not open to hearing them. You are only open to the philosophy you learned from others, and if that contradicts the Buddha you will dismiss his words and his direct teachings. That is a shame. And in any case, you should not insist on it to others. When you encounter the Buddha's clear teachings that show what he taught, you should contemplate it and take it to heart and adjust your own thinking, not adjust the sutta to match your own views. > It's like hippy-speak, I guess. That's what it reminds me of. Not that I hate hippies or anything. I'm just saying, one of us is wrong about this. I feel secure in reading the Buddha's words and listening to them directly. I can add whatever I learn from Abhidhamma and the good people here without giving up the Buddha's own teachings. If you insist on translating them into your own version of Dhamma, then I hope that will work out in the end. It's not what the Buddha actually taught, what actually came from his lips when he instructed his disciples as to how to follow the path. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #119158 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 2:42 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Phil - > > In a message dated 10/22/2011 7:22:27 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > philco777@... writes: > > I wrote: Your attitude towards the suttas is like towards a plaything. > I'm tired of it, I really need a break. > > And for Alex they are a tin pot to hammer on, and for Howard a lectern > from which to share his theorizing. And who will be the next? > ================================= > Well, aren't you the master of pigeonholing! Do you also have a fixed > category for yourself too, Phil? Say, "Mr. Truth Knower"? > > With metta, > The Theorizer (I'll be baaack!!) Glad to see you posting again! Hope the computer is up and running....or is it only a concept? I wish I could dream up computers as easily as call them a concept so I wouldn't have to buy one! Oh well, no such luck. I think it's more than funny seeing you called a "Theorizer" at a lectern. That's actually a pretty good definition of those who think that preaching the detailed analysis of the Abhidhamma is a substitute for practice. Oh well, white is grey, and red is blue, and all is well in the land of the Mind. May citta reign supreme and raise up the sabhava of each little dhamma proudly to the sky! Oh I forgot there is no sky - just a concept which is the limit of Phil's unfettered criticisms of others. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #119159 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 2:51 pm Subject: Re: Do We All Agree the Vinaya-pitaka Does Apply to Laypersons? epsteinrob Hi Chuck. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Maipenrai Dhammasaro wrote: > > > Good friends all, > > [I trust this message will pass my censoreeties] I have never had a post censored on this list, no matter how annoying my posts have become, and no matter how much I have sometimes disagreed with the members of this group. If the moderators ever had a problem with me - such as not adequately addressing or snipping a post - they contacted me off-list and let me know directly. They don't just pick and choose the posts they like and sneakily delete them. I think you should stop accusing the moderators of censoring your posts. As far as I can tell, there are about 20 or 30 recent posts of yours that have come through without any problem. So I think your sense of persecution is greatly exaggerated. > In recent days, both on-line and off-line I have been castigated about the Vinaya-pitaka and it's application to us laypersons... > > In addition, the vinaya-pitaka was recently written on this Yahoo that the vinaya-pitaka does not apply to us laypersons!!! > > What ignorance from a so-called Dhamma-vinaya expert!!! Are lay-followers obligated to follow the same rules as monks, or not? Let's be specific. > An extract: > > The monastic tradition and the rules upon which it is built are > sometimes naïvely criticized — > > particularly here in the West — > > as > irrelevant to the "modern" practice of Buddhism. Who has criticized Vinaya around here? Anyone? > Some see the Vinaya as a > throwback to an archaic patriarchy, based on a hodge-podge of ancient > rules and customs — quaint cultural relics that only obscure the essence > of "true" Buddhist practice. I don't think anyone here thinks that; just that the Vinaya applies to monks, not to lay people. That does not mean that lay followers have nothing to learn from Vinaya, just that it is not the set of rules that they are obligated to follow. > This misguided view overlooks one crucial > fact: > > it is thanks to the unbroken lineage of monastics who have > consistently upheld and protected the rules of the Vinaya for almost > 2,600 years that we find ourselves today with the luxury of receiving > the priceless teachings of Dhamma. Were it not for the Vinaya, and for > those who continue to keep it alive to this day, there would be no > Buddhism. I don't think there's anyone here who is unappreciative of the role that monks play in carrying the Dhamma and in keeping the Buddhist traditions alive. What makes you think so? > It helps to keep in mind that the name the Buddha gave to the spiritual path he taught was "Dhamma-vinaya" — the Doctrine (Dhamma) and Discipline (Vinaya) > — suggesting an integrated body of wisdom and ethical training. > > The > Vinaya is thus an indispensable facet and foundation of all the Buddha's > teachings, inseparable from the Dhamma, and worthy of study by all > followers — lay and ordained, alike. > > Lay practitioners > > wlll find in the > Vinaya Pitaka many valuable lessons concerning human nature, > > guidance on > how to establish and maintain a harmonious community or organization, > > and many profound teachings of the Dhamma itself. I don't think anyone would disagree with this. > But its greatest > value, perhaps, > > lies in its power to inspire the layperson to consider > the extraordinary possibilities presented by a life of true > renunciation, a life lived fully in tune with the Dhamma. > > End extract, > > Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/vin/ I think that the Buddha said that if one could follow the life of a monk, that was best, but that it was also possible to lead the life of a householder and follow the path, just more difficult. So both of these pathways are open to Buddhists and we should be equally respectful of both, while acknowledging the great commitment to Buddhism made by monks. No one would deny that the life of a monk shows a great commitment to Buddhism. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #119160 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 3:08 pm Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., I think that your inability to comprehend that conventional truth is simply another mode of expressing ultimate truth is a real impairment. Scott. #119161 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 3:30 pm Subject: Re: Reply to Rob E was Do We All Agree... epsteinrob Thanks for your reply, Chuck. I wish you the best! Regards, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Good friend Rob E, et al Warm thanks for you very polite message... However, it is true... even as a monk; some of my messages were deleted, modified, delayed... ... Sincere warm thanks for your very polite message... peace... yours in the dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119162 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cetasika as external sarahprocter... Hi Phil, > >P: 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. > ------ S: Just to add, internal/external are used in different context. This is from a post I wrote before #53119: *** >S:When the texts refer to the ayatanas, the internal and external ayatanas, the meaning is different from when the texts talk about the internal and external rupas in Steve's examples. For example, visible object is an 'external ayatana'when these 'meeting points' or 'sources' are referred to, regardless of what visible object it is. The same applies to sound, smell, taste, tangible objects. Whether it is the hardness experienced when touching one's own leg or the leg of a table, it is the external ayatana of hardness which is experienced only when there is the 'coming together' of 'touching', 'body-sense', 'tangible object' and also cetasikas souch as phassa (contact) and vedana (feeling) included in dhammayatana (another external ayatana). Mental pnenomena is a misleading translation of dhammayatana, because it includes not only cetasikas, but also subtle rupas and nibbana. Another use of 'internal' and 'external' dhammas in the texts which should not be confused either, is the use of these terms in suttas such as the Satipatthana Sutta, whereby the development of satipatthana is stressed regardless of whether the present citta (cosnciousness)and cetasikas are conditioned by what we conventionally refer to as our own or another's mental and physical phenomena. Please let me know if you have any further comments or if I've misunderstood any of yours. (Also, more in U.P. under 'Ayatanas' and 'Internal & External').< **** S: Adding, dhammaraamana (mind object) is different from ayatanna. Dhammaraamana refers to any object experienced through the mind-door - any nama, rupa or concept. There is a lot of confusion over these terms, especially with regard to the ayatanas. Pls let me know if you'd like further clarification. I know you don't mind delayed replies at all. Metta, Sarah ======== #119163 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Black Curtain, 2. sarahprocter... Dear Phil, > > 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. .... S: See the commentary to Abhidhammattha Sangaha. Here's a summary as given in the Guide to CMA, Ch V, #Guide to 41: " 'Immediately following....the rebirth-linking': The rebirth-linking consciousness is followed by sixteen moments of the bhavanga citta. Thereafter a mind-door adverting consciousness arises, followed by a porcess of seven javanas in which an attachment develops to the new existence (bhavanikanti-javana). This cognitive process, the first in the new life, takes as object the rebirth-linking consciousness; the javanas consist in sense-sphere cittas rooted in greed, dissociated from wrong views, unprompted. When this process ends, the bhavanga again arises and perishes, and continues thus whenever there is no intervention of a cognitive process. In this way the stream of consciousness flows on from conception until death, and from death to new birth 'revolving like the wheel of a cart.' " Metta Sarah ===== #119164 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:05 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > S: Panna is the same cetasika as samma ditthi, right understanding. There are two kinds of panna, a) panna in the development of samatha bhavana (the development of calm) and b) panna in the development of vipassana bhavana (the development of insight). In the development of vipassana bhavana, strictly speaking, panna is only referred to as vipassana (insight) at moments of vipassana ~nana, so when people refer to "vipassana practice" or "vipassana meditation", it is an incorrect use of vipassana. > >R: If I understand you correctly, when vipassana-nana arises it is not the same cetasika as panna, but panna causes the development of those vipassana moments. .... S: It is still panna cetasika. There are degrees and different kinds of panna. nana (~naa.na) means panna (pa~n~naa) .... >In other words, just to clarify a little more, panna keeps growing gradually -- right understanding -- and at certain moments it yields vipassana-nana moments, moments in which some new insight is added to the panna. Would that be more or less correct? .... S: panna (of satipatthana) keeps growing gradually -- right understanding -- and at certain moments, when sufficiently developed it is of the level of vipassana-nana (insight knowledge). ... > I think that Scott and I are confused in sorting this out because of the extremely close association between panna and vipassana, and the role that panna plays in developing vipassana, and perhaps vice versa as well. When vipassana-nana arises does it not bring the forthcoming moments of panna up to a new level of understanding? .... S: Well yes, but I'd prefer to put it that "When a vipassana-nana arises for the first time, panna has been developed to 'a new level of understanding'". ... > Sometimes though, vipassana is referred to as vipassana-panna, which is used as a synonym for vipassana/insight, but I think it may have a more technical meaning as the "highest insight" that combines with panna close to enlightenment. Is that at all correct? .... S: There are many different kinds/levels of vipassana-nana. In an earlier message, I quoted from "Survey" here: >Appendix 9 The Stages of Insight Three stages of "tender insight" (taruna vipassanaa): Defining of Naama and Ruupa (naama-ruupa-pariccheda ~naa.na) Discerning the Conditions of Naama and Ruupa (paccayapariggaha ~naa.na) Investigation Knowledge or Comprehension by Groups (sammasana ~naa.na) ..... Eight Stages of Principal Insight (Mahaa-Vipassanaa ~naa.na): Knowledge of the Arising and Falling Away of Naama and Ruupa (udayabbhayaa ~naa.na) Knowledge of Dissolution (bhanga ~naa.na) Knowledge of Terror (bhaya ~naa.na Knowledge of Danger (aadiinava ~naa.na) Knowledge of Dispassion (nibbida ~naa.na) Knowledge of Desire for Deliverance (muccitukamyataa ~naa.na) Knowledge of Reflection (pattisankhaa ~naa.na) Knowledge of Equanimity about Sa.nkhaara Dhammas (sa.nkhaarupekkhaa ~naa.na) Adaptation Knowledge (anuloma ~naa.na)< ***** Metta Sarah > > p.s At least your wife didn't tell you to throw out your books! Perhaps, one day, she'll take an interest too, but no expectations! > > She already has an appreciation for some of the things I read to her or that we discuss. She also comes from a basic sense that the world as we see it is not the true reality, so we have a nice exchange. However, when things -- even good books -- start to pile up, it makes our little condo get somewhat oppressive, so I am sympathetic. Clearing out 'worldly stuff' and making more space for Dhamma books is good! Reading them is even better! :-) .... S: In Hong Kong, we now live in one very small bed-sit/studio flat. At first we said, no books. Now it's two each at a time, so I definitely understand! In Manly, Sydney, we're like kids in a candy store with books and papers (and surf gear) everywhere:-) Metta Sarah ===== #119165 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:24 pm Subject: Re: Panna and the not yet known sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > The passage says panna "will also study and investigate." This brings me back to my favorite cetasikas at the moment, vittakha and vicara. It seems that they would be the foot-soldiers or tools of the panna that further inquires into the nature of the namas. Would that be correct? They seem like the "probing and investigating" functions. .... S: Yes, it sounds good. Except in higher jhanas, panna can't arise without vitakka (and vicara) to support and 'mount' the object. In the Vism, it refers to the characteristic of vitakka as "directing the mind onto an object". In the Atthasaalinii, it refers to how it "conveys the sense of thorough-designing. And 'fixation' is the applying the selective mind to the object." We also read about the simile of someone wishing to ascend to the kind's palace and how this depends on the help of a relative or friend. Without vitakka assisting in mounting the object, panna cannot arise and perform its task of understanding the object. In the division of the eightfold path into pa~n~naa, siila and samaadhi, samma di.t.thi (right understanding) and sammaa sankappa (right thinking, i.e vitakka cetasika) make up the pa~n~naa component. Good questions, thanks. Metta Sarah ==== #119166 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:33 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, Another good question on kamma and accumulations. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > So if someone tells a joke and I enjoy it and laugh, that experience is based on vipaka from the past and not on my reaction to the present joke? Just hoping to clarify this. .... S: It's interesting, isn't it? The hearing of the particular sounds is a result of past kamma, i.e. the hearing is vipaka. The enjoyment and attachment are accumulated tendencies conditioned by tendencies for such (by natural decisive support condition - the widest condition). So, not everyone might hear the kind of sounds we conventionally call a joke. When we hear the sounds, there is lots of thinking about the meaning going on (according to accumulations), but not everyone will have enjoyment and laugh. Some might find the joke offensive and have dosa. Some might not 'get it' at all. For some it might be in a foreign language. As for the actual laughter, there will be lots of rupas conditioned by the cittas (primarily) at that time. ... > And of course, no rush on the answer! :-) .... S: Just as well :-) (See, for some there will be conditions, i.e the tendency, to smile. For others not. Metta Sarah ===== #119167 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 7:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vinaya-pitaka; was: Giving Grapes to a Bhikkhu and/or Bhikkhuni nilovg Dear Chuck, Op 22-okt-2011, om 19:10 heeft charlest het volgende geschreven: > Do you all agree the first of the Tipitaka, The Vinaya-pitaka, does > not > apply to us laypersons at all? ------ N:Yes, it does. So many rules that laypeople can apply in their own situation. When monks are decorating their dwelling, what kind of citta motivates this? Don't we, laypeople, decorate our house? Usually thoughtlessly. Good to know that lobha is likely to motivate this. Nina. #119168 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 10:03 pm Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny sarahprocter... Hi Connie, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: >I'd suggest, to an extent, that the more miserable we are, the better... at least then, most of us aren't so inclined to be self-congratulatory. I'd say if most of the day is akusala, that's what's to be known. > yours in ignorance, .... S: :) Are you suggesting a promoting of the accumulation of dosa for that end? Yes, most of the day its akusala already - no need to add to it by thinking "the more miserabe, the better" lol! I remember KS talking about how dosa is worse than lobha because of the effect on others, if I recall. Perhaps Nina or others will recall or remember any text on this. Metta Sarah ===== #119169 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Oct 23, 2011 10:40 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) sarahprocter... Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Sarah: "- KS's comments about how we should study the reality now, the kind of citta etc - all about direct understanding now, not about just accumulating book knowledge as you know and agree." > > Scott: Agreed and beside the (my) point. 'Book knowledge' is a part of the beginnings of pariyatti, as you know and agree. .... Sarah: I would say 'it depends'. We can't define pariyatti in terms of 'book knowledge' or scholarship of any kind. ... >Scott: Others might not agree, and certainly continually misunderstand this, but I think that we can agree that, a) there is right understanding, ... Sarah: You mean now or when? .... >Scott: b) the conceptual basis for this is found in the texts, .... Sarah: In the right understanding from considering what is in the texts, maybe in a few words of the texts .... >Scott: c) these need to be studied at some point, .... Sarah: There has to be the 'hearing' or association with true Dhamma in some way. There has to be the 'studying' of dhammas now. I wouldn't say the books have to be studied by all. .... >Scott: and, d) this is not the 'study' referred to when talking about 'studying' dhammas since that refers to realities. I'm referring to the mundane discussing and using texts and scholarship aspect of the concern. .... Sarah: Yes, my comment at the outset was not out of place. You are talking about the necessity of 'mundane discussing and using texts and scholarship' in the development of pariyatti leading to patipatti. I am saying that the only conditions for pariyatti leading to patipatti are the hearing and wise considering about present dhammas."Mundane discussing and using texts and scholarship" may be undertaken with kusala or akusala cittas with panna or lack of panna. Again, it may be driven by lobha conditioned by an idea of some 'rule' in this regard. .... > > Sarah: "- I referred to comments she's made to some of us about trying to find out the detailed answers, the theory - thinking our way through. All conditioned by self, even if no wrong-view arising at the time. Attachment conditioned by wrong view tendency..." > > Scott: Yes, and there is a place for reading books, as I mentioned. I don't misunderstand what Kh. Sujin says about this. Others totally do (whether literally or tactically). .... Sarah: do we have the idea that when we open a dhamma book or listen to a good dhamma recording that there will be pariyatti? I think the lobha creeps in often and that misunderstandings arise more often that we might acknowledge. I find that the more considering there is, the more understanding begins to develop, the more ignorance and lobha are apparent. > > Sarah: "- personal details, practice ...... all gone . If someone thinks they experience jhana, for example, KS will just smile and ask about this moment. By understanding more about present dhammas, we'll all understand more about such so-called experiences and cling less to ideas of practice as anything other than the understanding of dhammas now." > > Scott: Again, agreed. I'd like to hear more from you about the way in which you understand the sort of 'should' implied in the above ('we should understand more about present dhammas') - as in the sorts of 'shoulds' that are found throughout Survey. I think others will and do totally misunderstand this. ... S: 'we should understand more about present dhammas' - the only way out of samsara is through the development of right understanding of the dhamma which appears now. Death may occur anytime, now we have read and heard a lot and there is the opportunity to be aware of what appears at this very moment. We hear a sound and there's a long story about people and cars and so on, but actually it's just sound heard and the rest is all thinking. Sikkhati - you asked Alex about. As he said, it's just the simple present tense, 3rd person, meaning 'he studies'. What can be studied at this moment? Only the sound, the thinking, the like, the dislike, the reality which appears. How is it studied? Just through the development of panna now. No being involved. Sikkhitabba.m - should be studied, to be studied or trained. How? Just through the development of sati and panna now again. Never by a 'should' as in 'you should look up the Pali or study the book' in an absolute sense, though I appreciate that you're just encouraging others to consider the terms, consider the commentary meanings and so on and not suggesting that this is the Path. Metta Sarah p.s Your comments and Rob E's reply in #119059 were very witty. Glad to see you both there in good humour:) [And to Connie - I say that because the good humour, even though we know it's lobha, doesn't hurt others, but the dosa, the unpleasant personal comments we sometimes make, often does hurt others.] ========== #119170 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 12:43 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Good discussion. Me: "...'Book knowledge' is a part of the beginnings of pariyatti, as you know and agree." Sarah: "I would say 'it depends'. We can't define pariyatti in terms of 'book knowledge' or scholarship of any kind." Scott: Okay. 'It depends' on what? This comes up below. Me: "... a) there is right understanding," Sarah: "You mean now or when?" Scott: I mean 'now' ( but I wasn't meaning to restate that message) and, more particularly, I mean that right understanding is a reality - it is a term based on the function of pa~n~naa. Me: "...b) the conceptual basis for this is found in the texts," Sarah: "In the right understanding from considering what is in the texts, maybe in a few words of the texts" Scott: Yes and, again, more particularly, I mean that there is only one way that things are. For example, the concept of 'right understanding' is clarified by the words of the texts. While interpretations differ, I make the assumption that, imbedded in the texts, a conceptual description exists of the reality of dhammas (and of the way in which the Path arises). This 'conceptual description' I consider to have only one correct meaning - and I'm referring to conceptual meaning. The correctness of a conceptual description is arbitrated by the correspondence of the description to actual reality - to dhammas - and this is why we talk about 'now.' I'm suggesting that a some elements of acorrect apprehension of textual concepts and the here-and-now apprehension of dhammas are part of the same 'package' of conditioned and conditioning dhammas which lead to 'right understanding' in the wild, as it were. And yeah, 'maybe in a few words of the texts' but there has to be reading and studying in order for this to happen. And these 'few words', I'm speculating, would be like the 'hearing' that one reads about in the suttas - a hearing that seems to lead quickly to the arising of the Path to various degrees. The conventional descriptions of a person hearing the words of the Buddha and attaining to some level of the Path are just a conventional way of describing a very complex 'cascade' of dhammas. I don't even have a clue how the actual words are condition, except to imagine that they somehow serve to condition the apprehension of that particular reality which then is then object of supramundane consciousness (and that would be Nibbaana in the case of the Path). Me: "...c) these need to be studied at some point," Sarah: "There has to be the 'hearing' or association with true Dhamma in some way. There has to be the 'studying' of dhammas now. I wouldn't say the books have to be studied by all." Scott: Yes. This links to the point above. Saying that 'books [don't] have to be studied by all' is one thing, but this point seems a bit directed at the repeated false impression expressed by some that 'book study' is the 'practice' being advocated on this list. And we both agree that this is absolutely not the case and reflects a bit of a spurious argument (to say the least). It is likely a complex thing to suggest that 'reading the Dhamma' can be like 'hearing the Dhamma.' I agree with your point that 'there has to be hearing in some way.' I'm suggesting that 'reading' can be 'hearing.' Me: "...and, d) this is not the 'study' referred to when talking about 'studying' dhammas since that refers to realities. I'm referring to the mundane discussing and using texts and scholarship aspect of the concern." Sarah: "...You are talking about the necessity of 'mundane discussing and using texts and scholarship' in the development of pariyatti leading to patipatti...'Mundane discussing and using texts and scholarship' may be undertaken with kusala or akusala cittas with panna or lack of panna. Again, it may be driven by lobha conditioned by an idea of some 'rule' in this regard..." Scott: Yes, hence 'mundane' I suppose. I'm not sure I'm referring to 'necessity.' I might be. I am saying that the texts are all we have, in a way - all we have as a substitute for 'hearing' the Dhamma. We also have the 'hearing' that can come up in mundane discussion, but one would have to hear Dhamma expressed 'correctly.' Whether appropriate or inappropriate, from a 'political correctness' standpoint, it seems to me that those of us who are like-minded on the list are by one means or another convinced that we are 'correct' and that there are views that are to varying degrees 'incorrect,' and when discussing the Dhamma with those we consider to have an 'incorrect' version of the Dhamma, we are, with varying styles, pointing out that this or that person is 'wrong' about a given aspect of the conceptual Dhamma. Sarah: "...I am saying that the only conditions for pariyatti leading to patipatti are the hearing and wise considering about present dhammas." Scott: Does 'hearing about present dhammas' mean mundane discussion or mundande study of texts? Does 'wise considering' mean 'thinking about?' I know the mental factor is yoniso manisikaara and I understand this to be arising in relation to dhammas but is not equivalent to 'thinking wisely.' Sarah: "do we have the idea that when we open a dhamma book or listen to a good dhamma recording that there will be pariyatti? I think the lobha creeps in often and that misunderstandings arise more often that we might acknowledge..." Scott: I don't have that idea. Maybe some do. That is the common straw-man that is hoisted onto the field of discussion on the list all the time. I am considering the extent to which certain aspect of the sort of reading or listening that is simply that is or is not pariyatti. S: "'we should understand more about present dhammas'..." Scott: Agreed. The above is a re-statement of the view that others who don't share that view oppose in various ways. I'm setting it aside by agreement (with you) and discussing related aspects. I see how this may be offered just there near the end for other readers and reflects the 'message' which the list consistently (and correctly in my view) puts out there. I don't think that I'm missing that particular point. Scott. #119171 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 12:53 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Sarah: "...Sikkhati - you asked Alex about. As he said, it's just the simple present tense, 3rd person, meaning 'he studies'. What can be studied at this moment? Only the sound, the thinking, the like, the dislike, the reality which appears. How is it studied? Just through the development of panna now. No being involved." Scott: I think Alex adds a lot of as yet unclarified grammatical stuff about 'imperative' and suggests that this means it is an instruction to do. Alex does not agree with what you have written above. I agree that it means 'he studies' and that this means 'the study that in that moment is.' No one studies. Sarah: "...Sikkhitabba.m - should be studied, to be studied or trained. How? Just through the development of sati and panna now again. Never by a 'should' as in 'you should look up the Pali or study the book' in an absolute sense, though I appreciate that you're just encouraging others to consider the terms, consider the commentary meanings and so on and not suggesting that this is the Path..." Scott: Correct. As I say, you and I seem to agree on the correct way in which to understand a word like 'should' in this context. Others, however, clearly and consistently comprehend 'should' through the lens of sakkaaya di.t.thi. As controversial as it seems to say such a thing directly. Scott. #119172 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:02 am Subject: Re: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 10/22/2011 11:36:31 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "I don't think I know enough to make stuff up..." > > Scott: Oh what a great straight man you are. You made me say: > > 'No, it's *because* you don't know enough that you make stuff up.' > > Too tempting. As you say, your fault. No problem. It's meaningless. > R: "...When Buddha says 'Do this and do that to get this and that to happen,' I just read it stupidly and don't second-guess it. I'm not 'turning it into' an instruction manual. It says what it says." > > Scott: Don't contradict yourself, Rob. You have clearly said that the suttas offer instructions for 'meditating.' I read what he says. I can recognize what a person is saying by what they say. It's not an interpretation. If you said "Take some eggs and make an omelette," you wouldn't have any doubt that it was an instruction. It's the same form of language. When Buddha says "Do X" that is an instruction pure and simple. Your denial is absurd in such a case. You don't present any sensible interpretation or explication of your own that references the sutta and makes any sense; you just deny that the Buddha says "Do X by doing Y" when that is exactly the form of the sutta. And so you are in nonsense-land, hypnotized by your own views to be incapable of reading plain speech and admitting that it says what it says. How can anyone talk to such a person? If you give a reasonable explanation as to why you think X means Y, other than "I know that it couldn't mean X because I believe in Y," of course I would listen and discuss it with you. But you do no such thing. You just content yourse lf with saying the equivalent of "You insist on saying that an egg is an egg. How do you know that an egg is an egg? Why do you think that you are so wise that when Buddha says "make an omelette" you interpret that to mean that Buddha is saying "make an omelette?" How can you be so presumptuous?" It is complete and utter nonsense. If you don't think the Buddha means what he says, prove it. Otherwise I will go by the plain meaning of the text, and my evidence *is* the text. If I am not saying correctly what the text says, then you tell me what it says. Without such evidence, there is no possibility of an objective discussion. Seriously it's like talking to the mad hatter. "Oh but down here an omelette is really a tomato." "But no, mad hatter, it really is an omelette." "How do you know it is an omelette and not a tomato?" "Uh...it's made out of eggs." "How do you know those are eggs? My philosophy tells me they are really tomatoes, despite appearances." And so the nonsense continues with no offering from you to demonstrate why an egg is really a tomato. Oh but you know it's true, because you read it in your favorite book. > Do you think that you can now solve the problem of 'sleepiness during meditating' because of what the Buddha said to Moggalana, for example? Are you even sure that 'sloth and torpor' equate to 'sleepiness?' Don't be ridiculous. It is clear what sleepiness is in this sutta. It's normal, garden-variety sleepiness - a tendency to fall asleep or get sleepy while meditating. It's familiar to all meditators at one time or another, and Buddha's advice is simple but inventive advice aimed at this very problem, nothing suggesting it is something else. This is more "mad hatter" talk. "How do you know that sleepiness is not some other weird unnamed advanced cetasika from the twilight zone? Can you prove it's not something else, unnamed and unsuggested by the Buddha?" These are ridiculous, invalid forms of argument in *any* discussion. If you don't think sleepiness means sleepiness *you* have a show a valid reason for doubting it, not just because you can say it and cast doubt on it in your imagination. Those are phony arguments Scott! They're worthless. They're not based on evidence and they don't offer any knowledge of the sutta, just making stuff up because you don't like the plain meaning, which offers proof that your understanding is wrong. Why not just accept what the Buddha said and figure out how it works, instead of denying the Teacher's words? This commitment to your view in the face of contrary evidence will keep you spinning away from the Buddha for a really long time if you don't deal with what is really there. > R: "...We each take the teachings in a way that we think is right, and wait for further illumination. Hopefully we are open to it when it comes." > > Scott: I'm not sure what you mean, here. Do all roads lead to Rome? I'm not sure I know what being 'open for further illumination' means, except that it sort of sounds cool at first. It's like panna or vipassana arising. When it comes things are more clear. When you are holding onto your treasured concepts to the point where you can't read and accept what is on the page without making up a far-fetched "possible" explanation for why it may not mean what it says, that keeps you from being open to the teaching as it is said and as it is taught. The Buddha actually said things. You are not open to hearing them. You are only open to the philosophy you learned from others, and if that contradicts the Buddha you will dismiss his words and his direct teachings. That is a shame. And in any case, you should not insist on it to others. When you encounter the Buddha's clear teachings that show what he taught, you should contemplate it and take it to heart and adjust your own thinking, not adjust the sutta to match your own views. > It's like hippy-speak, I guess. That's what it reminds me of. Not that I hate hippies or anything. I'm just saying, one of us is wrong about this. I feel secure in reading the Buddha's words and listening to them directly. I can add whatever I learn from Abhidhamma and the good people here without giving up the Buddha's own teachings. If you insist on translating them into your own version of Dhamma, then I hope that will work out in the end. It's not what the Buddha actually taught, what actually came from his lips when he instructed his disciples as to how to follow the path. Best, Rob E =================================== Just a point to add (given that I agree with you that what the Buddha said plainly is exactly what he meant): Why cannot, and in fact I know you agree with this, the Buddha mean exactly what he is saying and at the same time, and as realized by us followers of the Dhamma based on teachings of his elsewhere than the particular sutta being examined, also know the basic phenomena that actually occur and underlie the plainly stated activities he urges? For example, when the Buddha urges that "those listening to him" find an isolated spot to sit and meditate, he understands that the doing of what he is instructing comes down to 1) Understanding what is being urged by thinking and perhaps some wisdom, 2) believing in the advisability and urgency involved of what is being urged, 3) thinking, energy, and volition occurring that lead to all sorts of further mental and physical phenomena we refer to as walking, asking directions, searching, finding, sitting down, setting attention to the fore, etc, etc - with most of these things being mere bundles of far simpler phenomena. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #119173 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Phil) - Thanks for this post, Robert. I was slightly disappointed, though: I wasn't careful at first to see who this post was from, and thinking that it was a reply from Phil, I found myself smiling at the easy friendliness expressed. Ah, well! With metta, Howard In a message dated 10/22/2011 11:42:59 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Phil - > > In a message dated 10/22/2011 7:22:27 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > philco777@... writes: > > I wrote: Your attitude towards the suttas is like towards a plaything. > I'm tired of it, I really need a break. > > And for Alex they are a tin pot to hammer on, and for Howard a lectern > from which to share his theorizing. And who will be the next? > ================================= > Well, aren't you the master of pigeonholing! Do you also have a fixed > category for yourself too, Phil? Say, "Mr. Truth Knower"? > > With metta, > The Theorizer (I'll be baaack!!) Glad to see you posting again! Hope the computer is up and running....or is it only a concept? I wish I could dream up computers as easily as call them a concept so I wouldn't have to buy one! Oh well, no such luck. I think it's more than funny seeing you called a "Theorizer" at a lectern. That's actually a pretty good definition of those who think that preaching the detailed analysis of the Abhidhamma is a substitute for practice. Oh well, white is grey, and red is blue, and all is well in the land of the Mind. May citta reign supreme and raise up the sabhava of each little dhamma proudly to the sky! Oh I forgot there is no sky - just a concept which is the limit of Phil's unfettered criticisms of others. Best, Rob E. #119174 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:16 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, (and connie), Sarah: "...p.s Your comments and Rob E's reply in #119059 were very witty. Glad to see you both there in good humour:) [And to Connie - I say that because the good humour, even though we know it's lobha, doesn't hurt others, but the dosa, the unpleasant personal comments we sometimes make, often does hurt others.]" Scott: Okay, I'm on a roll I guess. I can recollect the various dhammas that were coming and going at the time of my impressive wittiness. I don't need to pretend that there wasn't still a lot of dosa. I don't think it was 'good humour.' I agree that it was funny. I am totally funny (and looks aren't everything.) I just remember the various realities of that moment. That being said, the post was a compromise expression - a compromise necessitated by the oscillation of dhammas arising while being driven crazy by Rob's ongoing inability to get it. That isn't about Rob, it's about me. I just want to point out that I don't particularly care for the implication that just because it looks witty and friendly that it actually is. It's just my thing - I can't fake it very well. I'd rather see the 'real' Rob as well, as opposed to some caricature of totally faked 'I'm-polite-so-I'm-buddhist' thing. I can stay this side of the line, but I don't like trying to pretend that I'm all kind and solicitous when I don't feel that way at all. I try to keep it civil (barely as you might say, sighing) but I'd rather appear in words closer to the reality of the moment, risking the chance that others might also realize that I experience akusala more often than kusala, than blatantly 'fake' an appearance or a persona that is not accurate. To me, some of that is what is simply appalling to me in the world of 'buddhism' and 'acting buddhist' and all that. End of rant. Scott. #119175 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:49 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkown moellerdieter Hi Scott, all, you wrote: ('Regarding:"...when one has gone to the Buddha for refuge, has gone to the Dhamma for refuge, and has gone to the Sangha for refuge, then to that extent is one a lay follower.") Scott: What exactly does it mean, in this day and age, to 'go to the Buddha?' And, having shown that, how does that make one 'a buddhist D: please find details in following links: http://online-dhamma.net/nanda/AccessToInsight/html/lib/authors/nyanaponika/whee\ l076.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/wheel282.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/refuge.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/khantipalo/wheel206.html Regarding your second question: It is the understanding of suffering which conditions faith .. it is faith in (the Buddha's) enlightenment , which stands for the cessation of suffering. Difficult to develop when the interest of the Dhamma is mainly based on intellectual curiosity. with Metta Dieter #119176 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 2:03 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkown scottduncan2 Dieter, D: "...please find details in following links..." Scott: No. I meant in your own words, with your own ideas. Don't post a bunch of links and call that discussion. Or are you just advertising for ati or something? D: "Regarding your second question: It is the understanding of suffering which conditions faith .. it is faith in (the Buddha's) enlightenment , which stands for the cessation of suffering. Difficult to develop when the interest of the Dhamma is mainly based on intellectual curiosity." Scott: What are you talking about? What is this 'intellectual curiosity' you are referring to? Do you mean to trot out your tiresome misrepresentation of the so-called dsg message? Do you actually really think that people are talking about 'intellectual curiosity?' This is just your way of appearing to know better. I'd suggest you try to move beyond this particularly facile 'argument.' I read you to string a series of pat phrases together in the above but, as the accusation du jour goes, a parrot can do that. No, what are your own actual ideas about this, Dieter? Please discuss more and preach less. I'm just saying, right... Scott. #119177 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 2:11 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Howard, H: "...Why cannot...the Buddha mean exactly what he is saying and at the same time...also know the basic phenomena that actually occur and underlie the plainly stated activities he urges?..." Scott: Conventional truth *does* refer only to ultimate truth. Are those elements you mention in the portion I elided - 'the basic phenomena that actually occur' - dhammas with characteristics? Scott. #119178 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 2:33 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkown moellerdieter Hi Connie, you wrote: According to the Illustrator (cy to Minor Readings), Buddha originally started the refuges formula << When the sixty-one Arahants were engaged in teaching the True Idea in the world for the benefit of the many, after the venerable Yasa, together with his companions, had attained Arahantship (see Vin i 20). Why? For the purpose of giving the Going Forth into Homelessness and for the purpose of giving the Full Admission >> and, as you implied: << this is the pathway by which gods and men enter the Dispensation, whether they become lay-followers or those gone forth >>. Just thought you might like that. D: thanks, I do.. I can imagine that the big number of disciples made it soon necessary to establish an order for the Order and set rules for e admission. Quite impressing to recall that the procedure of ordination is the same like 2500 years before , isn't it? C:I didn't really have anything to say... Chuck's Ranger stuck with me since I've been on a paperback novel kick lately & the heroine of the last ones was a 5th generation Ranger. In a book is close enough to that kind of law enforcement for me. Hopefully, we all get a bit closer to the "real law" outside of them, D: the heros of our youth .. I think that western psychology and Dhamma find sometimes common ground despite different aims, languages /semantic. Recalling an essay I stumbled upon recently , the aspect of youth and our situation at senior age was pointed out by : Jung understood and acknowledged (D: Freud's) the enormous importance of sexuality in the development of the personality, but he perceived the unconscious as encompassing much more. In addition he saw in unconscious material, especially dreams and fantasies, an unfolding of a process. This process was uniquely expressed in each person, but it had nevertheless a common structure. Jung called it the "individuation process" in which the potential of a person's psyche is seeking fulfillment. The concept of Individuation is considered by many to be his major contribution. It is a process which generally takes place in the last half of life - a time in the life cycle neglected by many other psychologists. While the first half of life is devoted to making one's way and establishing oneself in the world, the last half can be a time of psychological development, of moving toward awareness, integration, wholeness. http://www.trans4mind.com/mind-development/jung.html with Metta Dieter #119179 From: "Dieter" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 3:58 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkown moellerdieter Hi Scott, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Dieter, > > D: "...please find details in following links..." > > Scott: No. I meant in your own words, with your own ideas. Don't post a bunch of links and call that discussion. Or are you just advertising for ati or something? > > D: "Regarding your second question: It is the understanding of suffering which conditions faith .. it is faith in (the Buddha's) enlightenment , which stands for the cessation of suffering. Difficult to develop when the interest of the Dhamma is mainly based on intellectual curiosity." > > Scott: What are you talking about? What is this 'intellectual curiosity' you are referring to? Do you mean to trot out your tiresome misrepresentation of the so-called dsg message? Do you actually really think that people are talking about 'intellectual curiosity?' This is just your way of appearing to know better. I'd suggest you try to move beyond this particularly facile 'argument.' > > I read you to string a series of pat phrases together in the above but, as the accusation du jour goes, a parrot can do that. No, what are your own actual ideas about this, Dieter? Please discuss more and preach less. > > I'm just saying, right... > > Scott. > Scott, I get the impression , we could talk till doomsday but that will never change our minds . Nice to talk to you ..but for me it is the end of it for now. with Metta Dieter #119180 From: "connie" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:48 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny nichiconn > >I'd suggest, to an extent, that the more miserable we are, the better... at least then, most of us aren't so inclined to be self-congratulatory. I'd say if most of the day is akusala, that's what's to be known. > > yours in ignorance, > .... > S: :) Are you suggesting a promoting of the accumulation of dosa for that end? Yes, most of the day its akusala already - no need to add to it by thinking "the more miserabe, the better" lol! > c: haha, no - just thinking that we forget we're burning leaves and laughter rises like smoke. ...uh, Dhp. It was also a bit of protest against the dukkha = stress / personal discomfort idea, i suspect... hard to remember what all provokes me. > I remember KS talking about how dosa is worse than lobha because of the effect on others, if I recall. Perhaps Nina or others will recall or remember any text on this. > c: yes, don't worry, take joy! I'll keep deleting more than i send (& not really think that's 'moderation'), connie #119181 From: "connie" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 6:37 am Subject: under the gun nichiconn Dear Rob, (scott, scoot!) Sorry I let your initial snarkiness towards Scott's style kick the living kindness out of me so I resorted to calling you a liar. I can and do dish up the abusive sarcasm and nasty wit along with the -uh- "best", I just don't think it's right. Most of my harsher / nastier sounding talk is directed more towards myself than it seems; sorry for the collateral damage. Where i grew up, "love" often found pretty cruel expressions & while I really do try to keep a muzzle on, my bark's usually worse than my bite. I agree with your remark about us not having had a history of the kind of exchanges that would allow for my attack being acceptable ("should" we?); still, let what history there is stand in my defense! Somewhere back in the archives along comes this Scott guy and up jumps Connie: omg - I'm in love! Then, whaa, whaaa, whaaaaa! It's 'another good man done gone' after an onslaught of remarks along the lines you took when he finally-ever-after, hope against hope, did come back. I didn't / don't want him disappearing again & sure would be holding it against you now if he had! Wouldn't matter that I know better. I'd likely sink to friendly fire with nothing nice behind it. A Breed Apart (a Wild Bill Hickok novel) p.39: < There's nothing as vicious on God's earth as a woman who is trying to protect what is hers ... or trying to take something that ain't. > penitant connie ========== p.s Your comments and Rob E's reply in #119059 were very witty. Glad to see you both there in good humour:) [And to Connie - I say that because the good humour, even though we know it's lobha, doesn't hurt others, but the dosa, the unpleasant personal comments we sometimes make, often does hurt others.] Ok, Sarah, I know Rob wasn't really out to break my heart... and that even if he had been, the Saw Simile holds true. I'll try to "be nice" and impersonal after this... but can we relax that peevish so-and-so salutation required rule? I promise I’ll still delete most of what I write! #119182 From: "connie" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 7:22 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkown nichiconn Hi Dieter, > Quite impressing to recall that the procedure of ordination is the same like 2500 years before , isn't it? > Actually, Buddha made changes to the ordination rules / procedures over time. And now it seems, well, skip it... nothing to do with "what's real now?" But yes, it's really something that the truth of what Buddha taught never changes. > > I think that western psychology and Dhamma find sometimes common ground despite different aims, languages /semantic. I used to think so, too. Now I'd be more inclined to say other "sciences" are more invested in Self Promotion / Glorification - they don't really touch any truth about escaping samsara... quite the opposite, really. regards, connie #119183 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 6:56 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkown scottduncan2 Dieter, D: "Scott, I get the impression , we could talk till doomsday but that will never change our minds . Nice to talk to you ..but for me it is the end of it for now." Scott: Fair enough, Dieter, but, for the record, we haven't 'talked' yet. I got a series of links and a platitudinous phrase but no 'talk' (says me, of course). Maybe next time. Scott. #119184 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 7:50 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > I think that your inability to comprehend that conventional truth is simply another mode of expressing ultimate truth is a real impairment. > > Scott. I'm sure you do. That is because you are experiencing the Dhamma in an intellectual place. You are imagining that people and things don't exist, and that references to such common objects must really refer to something completely other. It doesn't occur to you that conventional people, objects and activities break down into khandas and dhammas, and thus are vehicles of development, even if the original terms of understanding are not absolute on the part of practitioners. Obviously, I think your inability to have a sense of realism and work with what actually appears in our lifetimes is a real impairment, a difficulty that keeps your Dhamma thoroughly in your head as a conceptual construction and does not allow you to make any real progress in relation to your actual lived moments in the world. And never the twain shall meet. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #119185 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 8:35 am Subject: Re: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 10/23/2011 3:12:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Howard, H: "...Why cannot...the Buddha mean exactly what he is saying and at the same time...also know the basic phenomena that actually occur and underlie the plainly stated activities he urges?..." Scott: Conventional truth *does* refer only to ultimate truth. Are those elements you mention in the portion I elided - 'the basic phenomena that actually occur' - dhammas with characteristics? ----------------------------------------------------- Yes. To qualify that, however, and as you certainly expect from me ;-), I consider that part of our avijja is reifying these dhammas; that is, thinking of them not only as distinguishable variations of mental and physical quality and activity, but as isolated, atom-like, separate entities. But inasmuch as we view it quite differently, I think it best that we not pursue this latter issue. :-) In any case, I prefer not to. ------------------------------------------------------- Scott. ================================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #119186 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 8:22 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: When Can A Monk Ask Me for Something? dhammasaro Good friend Connie, et al I finally located it in the Vinaya-pitaka. Briefly, Normally a bhikkhu will not ask for things. Instead, he will wait for something to be offered. This is exemplified in the alms round where the bhikkhu makes no request, does not even look at people, although he may quietly wait to see if an offering is to be made before moving on. One way that lay people enable a bhikkhu to ask them for help is by making an invitation or pavaara.naa. [58] The Buddha allowed a bhikkhu to accept pavaara.naa or 'invitation.' ... Note 60: In modern Thailand, a person can offer support by giving a printed slip which may read: "I invite you with the Four Requisites equal in amount to the value of 'x-amount' that has been handed over already to the steward. As you have need of it, please request it from the steward." oOo Once when I was at the American Embassy in Bangkok, a Thai man came to the layperson I was with. He presented him a piece of paper as depicted in note 60 above. ... More information in the attachment. peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck <...> From: nichicon@... <...> do you mean you will provide the answer or you will provide what the monk asks for? if it's the answer, when can he? <...> #119187 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 8:28 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Vinaya-pitaka; was: Giving Grapes to a Bhikkhu and/or Bhikkhuni dhammasaro Good friend Nina, I agree with you. Some laypersons look at learning the Vinaya-pitaka so they spot an errant bhikkhu... I prefer look in a positive manner... If I know the proper time and procedures in making offerings and the appropriate discussions; I can help the bhikkhu... Sincere warm thanks for your response... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119188 From: "connie" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 8:57 am Subject: Practical Meditation? nichiconn Hi, Chuck, I listened to the "Secrets of Happiness" talk you (Chuck) suggested. Let's see ... 0. Labels are barriers to understanding. 1. Stress is like holding a cup of tea; to relax, just put the cup down. (c: I'm guessing that's supposed to be a piece of cake.) 2. Meditation is not hard work: just make peace with, be kind to and gentle with this moment. Meditation is just an attitude - the relationship you have with life. 3. The brain can only notice things that change. When you sit with your eyes closed, there is no change in your eyelids so seeing stops; sound is constant so after awhile you can't hear anything; smell & taste are easy to stop; your body disappears and you feel no sensations. Everything is still then and you are face to face with your mind. 4. It is very beautiful inside your mindless self. This mind is the energy, emperor, conscious will. You can't control the mind but when you let it be, it becomes very still and peaceful. 5. While the eye is big enough to take in everything we see, the mind is bigger yet: the world exists in the mind. 6. World problems can and have to be solved. 7. Happiness is having fun in this moment & just appreciating what we have. Is that a fair enough summary? connie #119189 From: "connie" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:20 am Subject: Re: When Can A Monk Ask Me for Something? nichiconn Glad you found the answer, Chuck. I hope it proves helpful to you. I'd also like to point out that this group does not receive attachments. connie > > Normally a bhikkhu will not ask for things. Instead, he will wait for something to be offered. > <...cut...> > > More information in the attachment. #119190 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:06 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Rob E, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > >In other words, just to clarify a little more, panna keeps growing gradually -- right understanding -- and at certain moments it yields vipassana-nana moments, moments in which some new insight is added to the panna. Would that be more or less correct? > .... > S: panna (of satipatthana) keeps growing gradually -- right understanding -- and at certain moments, when sufficiently developed it is of the level of vipassana-nana (insight knowledge). > .... > S: There are many different kinds/levels of vipassana-nana. > > In an earlier message, I quoted from "Survey" here: > > >Appendix 9 > > The Stages of Insight ... I appreciate all the clarifications on panna and vipassana-nana, and also the rundown on the stages of insight, which I'm sure would be interesting in more detail as well. As I have the "Survey," I will try to look at the relevant section when I can. > > > p.s At least your wife didn't tell you to throw out your books! Perhaps, one day, she'll take an interest too, but no expectations! > > > > She already has an appreciation for some of the things I read to her or that we discuss. She also comes from a basic sense that the world as we see it is not the true reality, so we have a nice exchange. However, when things -- even good books -- start to pile up, it makes our little condo get somewhat oppressive, so I am sympathetic. Clearing out 'worldly stuff' and making more space for Dhamma books is good! Reading them is even better! :-) > .... > S: In Hong Kong, we now live in one very small bed-sit/studio flat. At first we said, no books. Now it's two each at a time, so I definitely understand! In Manly, Sydney, we're like kids in a candy store with books and papers (and surf gear) everywhere:-) Nice to spread out in a bigger place. At the moment we have a small condo, but with a loft, so it's like a tiny house in a sense; and my parents have an even smaller apartment nearby; while they have a slightly larger apartment in New York. We take some vacations in NY and stay there, but we are also looking for a house before my wife gets too stir-crazy [probably because of all my books... I hope she doesn't realize that I have 6 or 7 different editions of either the anapanasati or satipatthana suttas lurking around.] Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #119191 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:25 am Subject: Re: Panna and the not yet known epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Rob E, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > The passage says panna "will also study and investigate." This brings me back to my favorite cetasikas at the moment, vittakha and vicara. It seems that they would be the foot-soldiers or tools of the panna that further inquires into the nature of the namas. Would that be correct? They seem like the "probing and investigating" functions. > .... > S: Yes, it sounds good. Except in higher jhanas, panna can't arise without vitakka (and vicara) to support and 'mount' the object. In the Vism, it refers to the characteristic of vitakka as "directing the mind onto an object". In the Atthasaalinii, it refers to how it "conveys the sense of thorough-designing. And 'fixation' is the applying the selective mind to the object." We also read about the simile of someone wishing to ascend to the kind's palace and how this depends on the help of a relative or friend. Without vitakka assisting in mounting the object, panna cannot arise and perform its task of understanding the object. > > In the division of the eightfold path into pa~n~naa, siila and samaadhi, samma di.t.thi (right understanding) and sammaa sankappa (right thinking, i.e vitakka cetasika) make up the pa~n~naa component. Thank you for this excellent information. I enjoyed the quotes and metaphors, as I am always interested in the informative colorful ways in which vittakha and other cetasikas can be described -- but it seems like vittakha gets the best analogies and images, such as "beating," "turning over" the object, etc. I'm glad to see these new ones for my collection. I am glad to see the relationship between panna and vitakkha as you described it and to know that it is such a close component as to stand side by side with panna within the panna division of the 8Fold Path. Thanks for mentioning that. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #119192 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:30 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Rob E, > > Another good question on kamma and accumulations. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > So if someone tells a joke and I enjoy it and laugh, that experience is based on vipaka from the past and not on my reaction to the present joke? Just hoping to clarify this. > .... > S: It's interesting, isn't it? The hearing of the particular sounds is a result of past kamma, i.e. the hearing is vipaka. The enjoyment and attachment are accumulated tendencies conditioned by tendencies for such (by natural decisive support condition - the widest condition). So, not everyone might hear the kind of sounds we conventionally call a joke. When we hear the sounds, there is lots of thinking about the meaning going on (according to accumulations), but not everyone will have enjoyment and laugh. Some might find the joke offensive and have dosa. Some might not 'get it' at all. For some it might be in a foreign language. As for the actual laughter, there will be lots of rupas conditioned by the cittas (primarily) at that time. Okay, thank you, that makes sense. I forgot when I asked this that the experience of the sounds is vipaka, but the reaction comes from accumulated tendencies plus the cittas arising from current conditions. [I may not have put that exactly right, but I get the general idea.] > > And of course, no rush on the answer! :-) > .... > S: Just as well :-) (See, for some there will be conditions, i.e the tendency, to smile. For others not. Good point! Best, Rob E. = = = = = = #119193 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:36 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Howard, You did not disappoint. Must be the accumulations that came over onto the new computer. H: "...part of our avijja is reifying these dhammas; that is, thinking of them not only as distinguishable variations of mental and physical quality and activity, but as isolated, atom-like, separate entities..." Scott: Last word to me, I guess. 'Part of our avijja' makes little sense, since don't you consider everything to be indistinguishable? Given that, how can you parse out avijja and then further parse avijja into parts? Aren't you next suggesting a function of this part of avijja - that of 'reifying' and 'thinking?' And then, to make matters even less clear, you suggest that avijja creates ideas about 'atom-like, separate entities.' So this goes around and around in a great circle, with an entity parsed out and creating other entities which, like itself, apparently don't exist. Maybe the new computer is broken... Scott. #119194 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:48 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Moriarty, R: "...conventional people, objects and activities break down into khandas and dhammas, and thus are vehicles of development, even if the original terms of understanding are not absolute on the part of practitioners..." Scott: Rob, please clarify. Are you saying that 'conventional people' and 'objects' and 'activities' have their own inherent reality? Are you saying that 'conventional people,' 'conventional objects,' and 'conventional activities' contain some sort of motive power which makes of them 'vehicles of development?' 'Development' of what? 'Development' in what way? This phrase: "...even if the original terms of understanding are not absolute on the part of practitioners..." is very, very unclear. What do you mean to say? Scott. #119195 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:48 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 10/22/2011 11:36:31 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > epsteinrob@... writes: > I'm just saying, one of us is wrong about this. I feel secure in reading > the Buddha's words and listening to them directly. I can add whatever I > learn from Abhidhamma and the good people here without giving up the Buddha's > own teachings. If you insist on translating them into your own version of > Dhamma, then I hope that will work out in the end. It's not what the > Buddha actually taught, what actually came from his lips when he instructed his > disciples as to how to follow the path. > > Best, > Rob E > =================================== > Just a point to add (given that I agree with you that what the Buddha > said plainly is exactly what he meant): > Why cannot, and in fact I know you agree with this, the Buddha mean > exactly what he is saying and at the same time, and as realized by us > followers of the Dhamma based on teachings of his elsewhere than the particular > sutta being examined, also know the basic phenomena that actually occur and > underlie the plainly stated activities he urges? For example, when the > Buddha urges that "those listening to him" find an isolated spot to sit and > meditate, he understands that the doing of what he is instructing comes down > to 1) Understanding what is being urged by thinking and perhaps some wisdom, > 2) believing in the advisability and urgency involved of what is being > urged, 3) thinking, energy, and volition occurring that lead to all sorts of > further mental and physical phenomena we refer to as walking, asking > directions, searching, finding, sitting down, setting attention to the fore, etc, > etc - with most of these things being mere bundles of far simpler > phenomena. Absolutely, Howard. For those of us who believe or understand that conventional phenomena breaks down to paramatha dhammas, we can enjoy the multiple levels on which the Dhamma can be understood and actualized. We can recognize the mental factors at play in following the Buddha's words and doing *activities* based on them -- there, I said it -- and at the same time understand that such activities again break down to a series of dependently arisen namas and rupas. We can do things that the Buddha said with "the body" such as contemplating its action and contents, as Buddha advised, and know that such an activity can in fact take place, but at the same time understand that the "body as a whole" is just a conglomeration of various rupas experienced by different types of namas. And in that way the conventional teaching and the "higher teaching" of the Abhidhamma not only come together theoretically, but also can be immediately and continuously applied through "right volition" that takes the teachings to heart to the actions and experiences of our everyday lives. We don't have to wait for random insights to arise at random moments, although that is fine, we can also practice, knowing that practice comes down to moments of cetana motivating moments of attention leading to moments of awareness of nama and rupa, all uncontrolled by anything claiming to be a self. So the teachings and life are *one,* even if we are really lousy at it [self-assessment there.] The problem is with those who think that paramatha dhammas have no relation to conventional bodies, objects and activities, and believe that the true reality that Buddha spoke of is "utterly separate and apart" from anything we experience in everyday life. In that case there is nothing useful to do with a body, an object or anything else in life, because they cannot be true objects of satipatthana. Because of such a philosophy, there is no practice and nothing to do that is of any use in following the path. This restraint from practice is mistaken for a correct understanding of "anatta," while all it is is a wrong avoidance of the many actions that Buddha advised to activate the path. If the body, objects and action are seen as pure hallucination in a world that is truthfully only made up of free-floating namas and rupas that don't correspond to anything or anyone, then it is impossible to reconcile the Buddha's practical instructions on what to do while going through this delusory existence, in order to wake up. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #119196 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:01 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Robert (and Phil) - > > Thanks for this post, Robert. I was slightly disappointed, though: I > wasn't careful at first to see who this post was from, and thinking that it > was a reply from Phil, I found myself smiling at the easy friendliness > expressed. Ah, well! Oh well, it will all work out in the end... :-) Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - #119197 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:21 am Subject: Re: under the gun epsteinrob Hi Connie. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > Dear Rob, (scott, scoot!) > > Sorry I let your initial snarkiness towards Scott's style kick the living kindness out of me so I resorted to calling you a liar. I can and do dish up the abusive sarcasm and nasty wit along with the -uh- "best", I just don't think it's right. Most of my harsher / nastier sounding talk is directed more towards myself than it seems; sorry for the collateral damage. Where i grew up, "love" often found pretty cruel expressions & while I really do try to keep a muzzle on, my bark's usually worse than my bite. Well I was happy and surprised to find your remarks on sort of the other side of the argument recently. I can't remember the specifics, but you seemed to be defending me about something. Was it all a dream? > I agree with your remark about us not having had a history of the kind of exchanges that would allow for my attack being acceptable ("should" we?); still, let what history there is stand in my defense! Somewhere back in the archives along comes this Scott guy and up jumps Connie: omg - I'm in love! Then, whaa, whaaa, whaaaaa! It's 'another good man done gone' after an onslaught of remarks along the lines you took when he finally-ever-after, hope against hope, did come back. I didn't / don't want him disappearing again & sure would be holding it against you now if he had! Wouldn't matter that I know better. I'd likely sink to friendly fire with nothing nice behind it. I appreciate your feelings and of course, you are entitled to fall in love [especially online these days] and to hate those who are love-destroyers. [God, I have to be careful not to get involved in these love triangles!] I guess I'll try to be nice too, although if Scott keeps pickin' on me I can't absolutely promise... But if he tries to run away I'll trip him and tie him up for you, and you can come and collect him. > A Breed Apart (a Wild Bill Hickok novel) p.39: < There's nothing as vicious on God's earth as a woman who is trying to protect what is hers ... or trying to take something that ain't. > Hm...that reminds me of a pretty totally unrelated remark about New Jersey in the U.S. made by Bob Dylan in the Traveling Wilburys album: "In Jersey everything's legal, as long as you don't get caught." So, fire away as needed! Now that I know your motive -- the right kind of wrong volition -- I will respectfully step out of the way when I overshoot the mark - or something like that. > penitant connie No need, my child, you are forgiven! <:-} > ========== > p.s Your comments and Rob E's reply in #119059 were very witty. Glad to see you > both there in good humour:) [And to Connie - I say that because the good humour, > even though we know it's lobha, doesn't hurt others, but the dosa, the > unpleasant personal comments we sometimes make, often does hurt others.] Yeah! And while you're at it, tell that mean Phil to stop telling me to leave the group! :-( > Ok, Sarah, I know Rob wasn't really out to break my heart... and that even if he had been, the Saw Simile holds true. I'll try to "be nice" and impersonal after this... but can we relax that peevish so-and-so salutation required rule? Just my view - but the salutation in the first line is important. I skim through the posts on the yahoogroups site and look for my name in the line under the titles. I can spot posts I have to answer before opening the actual message. So it's like the address on an envelope. [Hope that didn't make you re-irritated with me again.] Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - #119198 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:32 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Moriarty, ? Do you mean as in Sherlock Holmes ? > R: "...conventional people, objects and activities break down into khandas and dhammas, and thus are vehicles of development, even if the original terms of understanding are not absolute on the part of practitioners..." > > Scott: Rob, please clarify. Are you saying that 'conventional people' and 'objects' and 'activities' have their own inherent reality? Are you saying that 'conventional people,' 'conventional objects,' and 'conventional activities' contain some sort of motive power which makes of them 'vehicles of development?' 'Development' of what? 'Development' in what way? I'm saying that even though we may think we are doing things in conventional terms, those conventional activities break down or contain or are constituted by paramatha dhammas and those dhammas will be put into play even while we may be thinking of what we are doing in terms of concepts. They have no inherent anything of their own. > This phrase: > > "...even if the original terms of understanding are not absolute on the part of practitioners..." > > is very, very unclear. What do you mean to say? Spooky, isn't it? More weird hippy talk. Ommmmmmmm, Ommmmmmmm. Om mane padme hum. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm. Ha ha ha, oh that felt good. Hang on a second, I want to contemplate the Living Emptiness of the Absolute Anatta................ Okay, I'm ready: What I meant to say was that [as I understand it in my clunky way, not necessarily using the terms """correctly"""] right cetana can follow the Buddha's words to do activities [arising of right action] that represent and contain the conditions [mindful attention to arising namas/rupas, etc.] that will direct attention and develop mindfulness, and that while we may think at first that we are "following breath [concept] with awareness [concept,] even while doing so the activity [really namas and rupas] will develop the conditions for sati to arise and develop. That's my understanding, and I'm sticking to it! Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #119199 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:11 am Subject: Friendliness Shines Everywhere! bhikkhu5 Friends: Brahmavihãra Meditation gives Infinite Joy! Training Universal Friendliness induces unalloyed Joy! Cultivating Boundless Pity enables tranquil Tolerance! Developing Mutual Joy produces deep Contentment! Refining Equanimity establishes calming Serenity! The Blessed Buddha repeatedly explained: May all creatures, all breathing things, all beings one and all, without exception, experience joy and good fortune only. May they not fall into any harm! Anguttara NikÄya II, 72 With good will for the entire cosmos, Cultivate a limitless & infinite heart: Above, as below, across & all around, Unobstructed, without any hostility. Sutta NipÄta I, 8 Overcome the angry by friendliness; Overcome the wicked by goodness; Overcome the miser by generosity; Overcome the liar by truth. Dhammapada 223 Train yourself in doing only pure good... That lasts and brings great happiness! Cultivate generosity, a peaceful living, and a mentality of infinite friendliness! Itivuttaka 16 <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita _/\_ * <...>