#124400 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 21, 2012 8:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: degree of kusala and akusala upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Loong) - In a message dated 5/20/2012 6:15:58 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: >Read your last quote, you spoke of nanas.I have been doing research >,on this word, and came up empty .Tried Wiki,Access to insight,Google. > > Would you be so kind as to explain the origin or the meaning of the >word. > Here is the first example that comes to mind: _http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mahasi/progress.html_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mahasi/progress.html) With best wishes, Alex ====================================== Alex, you had written 'nanas with an 'n' in the middle, where you meant to write 'namas' with an 'm'. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124401 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 8:42 am Subject: Re: Meditational view epsteinrob Hi pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > I think abhidhamma says that kusala citta can only have kusala cetasikas. No mixing possible. It's often said here though that in life akusala cittas succeed kusala cittas very quickly, so that certainly gives the impression that both kusala and akusala can be present at the same time. That's what I thought - thanks for clarifying that, as well as your additional notes. Some of the areas of precision in Abhidhamma, such as distinguishing nama and rupa, and others, do seem very helpful. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - #124402 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 8:46 am Subject: [dsg] Re: degree of kusala and akusala truth_aerator Hello Howard, all, I've meant insight knowledges (vipassana nana). My question to Pt was that it appears that during long and intense retreats people get a lot of insight knowledges (nana-s, nana + english plural "s" at the end). With best wishes, Alex #124403 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 10:08 am Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine" wrote: > > Hello all, > > I wonder if those with a little more knowledge than I have would please read and comment on this article: > > Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy by Ven. Paññobhāsa Bhikkhu > http://pathpress.wordpress.com/2012/04/20/some-evidence-suggesting-the-spurious-\ nature-of-abhidhamma-philosophy-2-2/ > ---------- Hi Christine, That is the type of article on the Dhamma that must be expected from a writer who has no understanding of anatta. Rather than exposing holes in the Theravada Dhamma, as he has set out to do, he has exposed only his own lack of understanding. For example, belief in the absolute reality of the the outer layers of the eye is atta belief and wrong understanding. That is what this writer obviously has, so how can he be taken seriously? For another example, suttas can, in some cases, be taught when the Abhidhamma has not been taught in the same lifetime. That is because the Abhidhamma has, in those cases, been taught in previous lifetimes. The writer of your article seems to think the opposite. He seems to think the teaching of conventional-language suttas prior to the teaching of Abhidhamma proves that the Abhidhamma was not part of the Dhamma. But think of the single-sentence sutta that enlightened Sariputta. According to this writer's logic, the existence of that sutta would prove there were no other genuine suttas. As absurd as the article is, it is no more absurd than any other article on the Dhamma that is written without right understanding of anatta. Ken H #124404 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 21, 2012 10:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: degree of kusala and akusala upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 5/20/2012 6:46:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, all, I've meant insight knowledges (vipassana nana). My question to Pt was that it appears that during long and intense retreats people get a lot of insight knowledges (nana-s, nana + english plural "s" at the end). ---------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Ahh, yes, ~nana. ----------------------------------------------------------- With best wishes, Alex ============================== With metta, H0ward Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124405 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 21, 2012 4:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' nilovg Dear Christine, I thought of an answer and I think I can send it also to the venerable one's website. Op 20-mei-2012, om 7:22 heeft Christine het volgende geschreven: > > Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma > Philosophy by Ven. Paññobhāsa Bhikkhu > http://pathpress.wordpress.com/2012/04/20/some-evidence-suggesting- > the-spurious-nature-of-abhidhamma-philosophy-2-2/ > > -------------- N: The main question is, how does one see the Abhidhamma: as a book of abstract classifications or as the study of our life at this moment? If one merely thinks of a book of classifications doubts may arise as to the fact whether it is the Buddha's teaching. One may try to find out its history and there will be no end to argumentations and discussions. I would like to have more understanding of my life and I find the Abhidhamma most helpful in my search for the truth. The Abhidhamma is not a theory one finds in a textbook; the teaching of the Abhidhamma is about all the realities that appear at this moment. The Abhidhamma teaches about seeing, about thinking of what was seen, about all the defilements arising on account of what is experienced through the senses and the mind-door. While we are studying the different mental phenomena (nÃ¥mas) and physical phenomena (rúpas) and while we are pondering over them, we can be reminded to be aware of the nÃ¥ma and rúpa which appear at that moment. In this way we will discover more and more that the Abhidhamma explains everything which is real, that is, the “worlds” appearing through the six doors of the senses and the mind. In the ultimate sense life exists only in one moment, the present moment. At the moment of seeing the world of visible object is experienced, at the moment of hearing the world of sound, and at the moment of touching the world of tangible object. Life is actually one moment of experiencing an object. When we are thinking about the world and all people in it, we only know the world by way of conventional truth. It seems that there is the world full of beings and things, but in reality there is citta experiencing different dhammas arising and falling away very rapidly. Only one object at a time can be cognized as it appears through one doorway. Without the doorways of the senses and the mind the world could not appear. So long as we take what appears as a ‘whole’, a being or person, we do not know the world. The teaching of the Abhidhamma is mainly by way of ultimate realities, paramattha dhammas. In order to have understanding of the Abhidhamma it is essential to know the difference between ultimate realities, paramattha dhammas, and concepts, paññatti, such as a person or a tree. Through the Abhidhamma we are reminded all the time that there is no person who clings, no person who suffers, that only citta and the accompanying cetasikas experience different objects, be these unpleasant or pleasant. There is no person who develops understanding; understanding, paññā, is a cetasika that can only arise when there are the appropriate conditions for it. The Abhidhamma teaches us that realities are anattaa, like the whole of the Tipi.taka. Its teaching is not different from the Suttanta. With satipa.t.thaana we study the reality appearing at the present moment. This will lead to detachment. The prefix “abhi” in abidhamma is used in the sense of “preponderance” or “distinction”. “Abhidhamma” means “higher Dhamma” or “Dhamma in detail”. We have accumulated so much ignorance, we need many details in order to understand the truth. The Seventh book of the Abhidhamma, the book on conditional relations is of great help to understand that our life is conditioned realities. Each conditioned reality can exist just for an extremely short moment. When we understand this it will be easier to see that there is no self who can exert control over realities. The sixth book, the Yamaka, has a section on the latent tendencies. These are accumulated defilements that do not arise but that can condition the arising of akusala citta. They are called subtle defilements because they do not arise with the akusala citta, but they are powerful. Since they have not been eradicated they can strongly condition and influence our behaviour. They lie dormant in the citta like microbes infesting the body. So long as they have not been eradicated we are like sick people, because they can condition the arising of akusala citta when there are the appropriate conditions.They can condition the arising of akusala citta even to the degree of transgression of síla at any time, and thus, more defilements are accumulated again and added to the latent tendencies. The teaching of the latent tendencies helps us to see why the defilements in our life are so tenacious, arising again and again, and why their arising is unforeseeable and uncontrollable. All the texts of the Tipiá¹­aka , including the Abhidhamma, are not meant merely for intellectual study or memorizing, they are directed to the practice, the development of vipassanā. All the classifications of cittas, cetasikas and rÅ«pas are terse reminders of the truth, they are an exhortation to develop understanding of what appears at this moment. This is the development of the eightfold Path leading to the eradication of all defilements. --------- Nina. #124406 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 21, 2012 5:59 pm Subject: 2007 audio - 8. Faith - kusala or akusala? sarahprocter... Dear Friends, ***** Ven Dh: I want to ask about the proximate cause of faith, saddhaa, which is said to be saddheyya-vatthu, faith with an object that is worth believing in; but to serve as a proximate cause, how does it have to be encountered? is it encountered as an object of thought and so gives rise to faith or does it refer to, say, something external, like a book, or abhidhamma that you read or maybe a monk that you meet or something? KS: I think that even the meaning of faith or saddhaa should be understood clearly, because we might think that it is saddhaa, but actually it's not. For example, at moments for Vakkali* when he watched the Buddha from morning on, saddhaa or lobha, attachment? The other can not tell, only that person with sati and pa~n~naa can tell , otherwise there is no way to eradicate all akusala because we take akusala for kusala. Ven Dh: And what factors are relevant to cause saddheyya-vatthu to be cause of faith in one person, but not in another? KS: You mean kusala? Ven Dh: I mean saddheyya-vatthu, which is usually one of the 3 jewels, will be the proximate cause for faith in one person, but not for somebody else, so what are the factors which differentiate these two? KS: It can be the accumulation of the individual. For example, for those who do not have faith or believe in Buddhism at all, in the Buddha's time, when they saw Buddha, they had akusala cittas instead of kusala cittas. So it doesn't mean that when it's the object for kusala, that everyone has to have kusala citta. ***** * www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.087x.wlsh.html "For a long time, Lord, I have wanted to come and set eyes on the Blessed One, but I had not the strength in this body to come and see the Blessed One." "Enough, Vakkali! What is there to see in this vile body? He who sees Dhamma, Vakkali, sees me; he who sees me sees Dhamma. Truly seeing Dhamma, one sees me; seeing me one sees Dhamma."[3] From Dict of Pali Proper Names: Vakkali Thera. He belonged to a brahmin family of Saavatthi and became proficient in the three Vedas. After he once saw the Buddha he could never tire of looking at him, and followed him about. In order to be closer to him he became a monk, and spent all his time, apart from meals and bathing, in contemplating the Buddha's person. One day the Buddha said to him, "The sight of my foul body is useless; he who sees the Dhamma, he it is that seeth me" (yo kho dhammam passati so mam passati; yo mam passati so dhammam passati) (Cp. Itv. sec. 92). But even then Vakkali would not leave the Buddha till, on the last day of the rains, the Buddha commanded him to depart. Greatly grieved, Vakkali sought the precipices of Gijjhakuuta. The Buddha, aware of this, appeared before him and uttered a stanza; then stretching out his hand, he said: "Come, monk." Filled with joy, Vakkali rose in the air pondering on the Buddha's words and realized arahantship. Metta Sarah ====== #124407 From: "Christine" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 6:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' christine_fo... Dear Ken H, and Nina, Thank you so much for your responses which are very much appreciated. with metta Chris #124408 From: "sarah" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 6:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 2007 audio - 1. experiencing impermanence sarahprocter... Dear Nina & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > >S: " until it's time to really understand reality - very little from > > moment to moment - because now avijjaa, wrong understanding and > > akusala follow the seeing, the hearing all the time. As it's like > > this, so as pa~n~naa develops, it has to be like this. It can not > > be different from this. Very natural." > ------ > N: I remember hearing on a recording that the understanding can be > only very little at a time. There may be some weak awareness, but it > is followed by thinking, naming, etc. This is a good point to pursue > when you are in Bgk. .... S: No need to wait for Bgk! Now there is hardness, visible object, other realities that are experienced. There can be awareness immediately and then there is no doubt. Even when there is thinking or naming, wrongly trying to grasp the reality even, there can be awareness immediately. Just dhammas, not self. "It has to be like this......". ... >There may be doubts: hardness is experienced > through the bodysense, vipaakacitta, but it is very short. Usually it > just passes, but sometimes there may be some consideration of > hardness. As Kh Sujin said, we have to become familiar with all kinds > of characteristics. We cannot expect clear understanding yet. > ------ .... S: It doesn't matter at all if there are doubts - more dhammas that can be known now when they appear. Hardness, thinking, doubt, confusion - all kinds of characteristics as you say. Gradually the understanding develops and becomes clearer, yes, without any expectation! Always dhammas now to be known - or not known - Very natural! Metta Sarah ===== #124409 From: "sarah" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 6:38 pm Subject: Re: Hello dear friends! sarahprocter... Hi James, I swear I had been thinking of you the morning you posted. I had read Phil's lovely letter about his cousin and I was thinking about how he and you write at your best when you're writing to people (like the Starkids, remember?) who have next to no knowledge of the Buddha's Teachings at all. It's a really great skill you both have - extremely difficult for most of us to put Deep Dhamma into simple language. Rob E has a lot of skill in that regard as well - the only person who gets my mother's attention when we're reading out loud and she's around. Anyway, welcome back! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Buddhatrue" wrote: >I have been banned from several Buddhist Yahoo groups and was just recently banned (last week) from a Yahoo group called Magical Knowledge! LOL! Nah, I just get into too much trouble...but it is nice to pop in every now and then. .... S: Sounds like the James we know:-) Anyway forget all the Magical Knowledge and come back to the here and now Dhamma! I'm glad to hear your job is going smoothly and that you and Sebastian are still well. Taiwan has worked well for you. There's always time for meditation because meditation is just about the development of understanding and there can be understanding of life, of dhammas that are arising, at any time at all, no matter how busy, how tired we are. Thanks for the updates:) Metta Sarah ===== #124410 From: "sarah" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 7:01 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > >S: " - these and various similar things, although they do not exist in the ultimate sense, become objects of the arisings of consciousness in the manner of a shadow of something real." > >R: They are the objects of arising cittas, which means that they are objects of consciousness...? I thought that concepts could only be objects of thought, and that the "thinking" or other mental process was object of citta, but not the concept? .... S: Yes, some confusion here. Concepts or thoughts are objects of thinking. Cittas (moments of consciousness) are mostly thinking cittas when they are not moments of seeing, hearing and other vipaka cittas. The thinking cittas and accompanying mental factors, especially factors such as vitakka, "think about" or conceive a concept, an idea, an image. ... >R: I'm sure I am confused, if you can help to clarify this. If "concept" is the object of arising cittas, I am interested in how that takes place. .... S: The cittas that arise in the mind-door processes and conceive ideas, images, stories. From: Expositor (Atthasaalinii), Analysis of Terms, p.84 "By 'consciousness' (citta) is meant that which thinks of its object, is aware variously. (Cittan ti aarmamma.na.m cintetii ti citta.m vijaanaatii ti attho.) Or, inasmuch as this word 'consciousness' is common to all states or classes of consciousness, that which is known as worldly, moral, immoral, or the great inoperative, is termed 'consciousness. ' because it arranges itself in a series (cinoti, or, its own series or continuity) by way of apperception in a process of thought. And the resultant is also termed 'consciousness' because it is accumulatd (cito) by kamma and the corruptions. " .... >R: ......But in any case the idea that concepts are arising in the manner of a semblance of a dhamma suggests a kind of connection between delusion and reality which is provocative, but still unclear to me in any detail. .... S: Concepts don't arise. Like now if you think about an orange, the thinking arises and passes away. If there were no realities, no dhammas such as visible object and tangible object, there'd be no concepts, no idea of an orange or anything else. Sanna (perception) has marked and remembered the names, the ideas and associations. Even now there is a marking of what is seen and thought about which accumulates at each moment. Metta Sarah ===== #124411 From: "sarah" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 7:16 pm Subject: Re: spd 16 (vatthu kaama) sarahprocter... Dear Phil, I'm glad you worked further on your letter to famiy and friends of Ned - excellent. A wonderful tribute to him and your confidence in the Dhamma. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > "As regards the term 'basis of sensuousness or clinging' (vatthu kaama) this has, according to the Atthasaalini, a wider meaning than visible object, sound, colour, flavour or tangible object. Any kind of dhamma that is a basis or foundation for attachment is actually vatthu kaama. > > .... > Ph: Actually I posted that because it sounded important but now I can see I don't really understand what it is referring to. Is it that, for example, kusala dhammas such as panna can also be objects of clinging. Is this teaching to remind us - again - how all-pervasive clinging is? ... S: Yes, exactly - as it says, any dhamma (other than the lokuttara dhammas) can be a basis for attachment, including panna, jhana, any dhamma at all - all upadana khandha when clinging arises. As you'll remember, there are 4 kinds of upaadaana: sensuous clinging (kaamupaadaana), clinging to views (ditthupaadaana), clinging to mere rules and ritual (siilabbatupaadaana), clinging to the personality-belief (atta-vaadupaadaana). The anagami has eradicated all sensuous clinging, but in this context, kaamupaadaana includes all other kinds of clinging not included in the other categories, including bhavupaadaana (clinging to existence/rebirth) which the anagami has not eradicated. I assume that "vatthu kaama" may also has this wider meaning, but don't have Atth. with me to check. Metta Sarah ===== #124412 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 21, 2012 7:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bodhgaya sarahprocter... Hi Chris, >________________________________ > From: Christine >The importance of Bodh Gaya is of course evident, but he did seem to spend most of his time around Vulture Peak and Shravasti.' .... S: Weren't you going on a trip to the Holy Places recently? If so, please share any of your lively anecdotes/reflections/summaries. I'd love to read them. I think a rather obvious reason for the Buddha spending "most of his time around Vulture Peak and Shravasti" is that Rajghir and Sarsvasti were major cities in which some of his main supporters lived. For example, Rajghir, (where Vulture's Peak is found) was the ancient capital of the Magadha kings and of course is where King Bimbisara lived. It was also a main Jain centre - so large numbers of people ripe for hearing the Buddha's discourses here. As you know, it was here that King Bimbisara offered the Buddha “Veluvana” , Bamboo Grove where the Patimokkha was recited and where there was a spontaneous gathering of 1,250 Arahants, all of whom had been personally ordained by the Buddha. So there were good reasons for spending many rainy seasons there. Also, Srasvasti was one of the largest cities in India at the time with a huge population. It was the capital of Kosala and Pasenadi was king and Anathapindika, the devoted lay disciple, invited him to Srasvasti when they met in Rajghir. Of course Jetavana was given to the Buddha and Sangha and other devoted lay people in addition to King Pasenadi and Anathapindika provided for them for the many, many rains they spent here. So I think that the populations of disciples ready to hear the Teachings and the offerings and provisions by lay disciples, especially the monasteries, in these places, were key factors. As NIna said, he'd always look to see where he could assist, where there was "little dust" and so on. Metta Sarah p.s best regards to Luke and Sarah, your grown children. ===== #124413 From: han tun Date: Mon May 21, 2012 7:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' hantun1 Dear Christine, Ken H, and Nina, I thank Ken H and Nina for their kind remarks on the subject. Ven. Pa~n~nobhaasa Bhikkhu wrote: Quote: [The standard Burmese explanation of the conspicuous absence of Abhidhamma in the oldest ecclesiastical histories is that it is included in the Khuddaka Nikaaya of the Suttanta Pi.taka, but this assertion receives no support from the ancient texts themselves. (The Burmese also consider Vinaya to be included in the Khuddaka Nikaaya, thereby rendering the fifth Nikaaya "The Small Collection" or "Collection of the Small" very much larger and more comprehensive than the entire remainder of the Canon and reducing the Buddhist scriptures to a single Pi.taka.)] End Quote. I think it may be very useful for Ven. Pa~n~nobhaasa Bhikkhu to kindly visit Myanmar and give a talk on the "Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy" at the International Institute of Abhidhamma, Yangon, which is running Abhidhamma courses at its Kabar Aye Pagoda campus in Yangon’s Mayangone township. Tel (95 1) 561 650, 570 837. with metta and respect, Han --- On Mon, 5/21/12, Christine wrote: Dear Ken H, and Nina, Thank you so much for your responses which are very much appreciated. with metta Chris #124414 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 7:58 pm Subject: Re: degree of kusala and akusala ptaus1 Hi Phil, > > A teacher pointing out mistakes???? It sounds like you're talking about piano lessons, which of course will please Alex... how on earth could "mistakes" be pointed out by a teacher in the development of satipatthana. Sounds like Goenka... > > > There could be mistakes in theoretical understanding but "intensive practice" is a mustake in itself. Do dhammas appear differently when people are seeking them intensively? Peeshaw!!! I don't know, I don't think there's a need to be scared of the word "practice". However development of kusala happens for someone, I'd imagine it's bound to be held up by different misgivings and misunderstanding, so mistakes. E.g. if it was me, I'd guess the teacher would be probably going over and over about the differences between trying to achieve smth vs understanding now. So, subtle lobha vs sati. Or between my supposed samatha practice vs true calm. So, subtle dosa vs pasadhi. And if I'm really lucky, he'd also have a few superpowers and be able to read minds and know exactly what sort of cittas are happening in mine, so the next time I go to him saying – "Hey, I just got into first jhana! Hell, maybe even the second one!" he'd be like – "Yeah, err, so did you read that chapter in Visuddhimagga that..." Regarding your comments about Goenka and I assume method-oriented practices - I don't know either. I haven't yet followed a particular method nor attend a retreat, so I don't have any resentment towards any of them atm and so can't really speak for or against. Though, I'd say, whether it's about following a method, rejecting a method, not caring about methods, etc, etc, regardless of what it is, it still all comes back to dhammas now, so I'm not sure I see much of a point speaking for/against schools and methods. Dhammas seem more interesting and to the point. Anyway, I don't see what's the use of my opinions on these issues, so let's better just go back to learning abhidhamma. Best wishes pt #124415 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 8:05 pm Subject: Re: degree of kusala and akusala ptaus1 Hi Alex, > Thank you for your post. It is interesting why intense meditators at intense retreats seem to get many nanas while here, with no practice perspective, some say about how long it takes... Is it coincidence or not? Hi Alex, I can't read minds, so I don't know. It seems there are only two possibilities – these things are really happening or people misinterpret their experiences based on misinterpretation of the texts. I don't know which one's more common, but I'd speculate it's the latter. Sort of like with claims of jhana attainments. Further, as I've always been too lazy to follow a certain method like the mentioned Mahasi or Goenka, I'm probably not the right person to ask about the efficacy of these practices. I would say this though, which is again just my pet theory - I think if there's a strong inclination to follow a method and do smth about speeding up Bodhi (regardless of whether it's mostly lobha or saddha that pushes for these), and yet one becomes intellectually convinced (or perhaps peer-pressured into believing) that methods are bad, then what results I think is just more suppression (so dosa), which then leads to irritability and then hostility towards opposing views, etc. Of course the same is true of the reverse situation for those who are not particularly into methods. The point being, it has to be understanding that governs the "practice", whatever it may be. But, understanding of course cannot be forced, etc, etc. Tricky. Anyway, I don't know what more to say on this issue, so maybe we can go back to studying abhidhamma now. Best wishes pt #124416 From: "sarah" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 8:17 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Hi Pt (& Rob E), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > pt: Maybe it's best we hold on here for a bit as I might be wrong - I think RobK suggested that a dhamma can be an object of akusala citta, so let's see what he or anyone else says on the issue. That would definitely make things more difficult in the sense that even when a dhamma is object of citta, there's still no guarantee that it's a kusala citta. .... S: I picked up on this point before as well, #123719, but you may have missed it. In that context, the discussion was about rupas and I pointed out that a rupa can be (usually is) the object of akusala as well as kusala cittas in the sense door process as well as in the following mind door process. For example, if there's attachment to the visible object in the eye-door javana cittas, then there will be attachment to it in the following mind door process as well. As just discussed with Phil, any dhamma, apart from lokuttara dhammas, can be the object of lobha and other akusala cittas. Metta Sarah ===== #124417 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 8:29 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhs ptaus1 Hi Nina, > > pt:2. For upaadi.n.na, it only refers to kamma-born ruupa? So, no > > naamas included there? > ------ > N: No, not vipaakacitta. It refers to ruupas of the body produced by > kamma. > ------ Thanks for your replies on triplet 4 of the Dhs Maatikka, it's more clear now. Yes, I'm hoping to get the Expositor sometimes soon, at the moment I'm using the library to read it. Also, thanks for posting the question about triplet 3 on the Pali list. Best wishes pt #124418 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 8:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhs ptaus1 Hi Rob K, KC, Nina, Rob E*, > N: In sense-door processes and mind-door processes there are > javanacittas and these can be kusala cittas or akusala cittas, but > they are mostly akusala cittas. Dhammas that are objects of mind-door > processes: any dhamma, except lokuttara dhamma, these can be objects > of clinging. Why not? Akusala javanacittas with clinging. Thanks for correcting my mistake. For some reason, I assumed that if a dhamma (other than ruupa) is the object of the mind-door process, the javana cittas of that mind-door process (and the associated cetasikas) must be kusala. *RobE, please note this issue in our discussion - I was wrong to point out that with dhamma as object, cittas of the mind-door process must necessarily be kusala, and thus, can be akusala as well. Best wishes pt #124419 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 8:49 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat ptaus1 Hi Sarah (RobE), > > pt: Maybe it's best we hold on here for a bit as I might be wrong - I think RobK suggested that a dhamma can be an object of akusala citta, so let's see what he or anyone else says on the issue. That would definitely make things more difficult in the sense that even when a dhamma is object of citta, there's still no guarantee that it's a kusala citta. > .... > S: I picked up on this point before as well, #123719, but you may have missed it. In that context, the discussion was about rupas and I pointed out that a rupa can be (usually is) the object of akusala as well as kusala cittas in the sense door process as well as in the following mind door process. For example, if there's attachment to the visible object in the eye-door javana cittas, then there will be attachment to it in the following mind door process as well. As just discussed with Phil, any dhamma, apart from lokuttara dhammas, can be the object of lobha and other akusala cittas. < Thanks for coming in here. Yes, I was familiar with this issue in relation to ruupa, but I didn't quite extrapolate that to naama dhammas. As just mentioned, for some reason, I assumed that if a naama dhamma (that has just fallen away) becomes the object of the succeeding mind-door process, then this happens by virtue of panna as the main condition, and thus implies kusala (javana) citta(s) by definition in that mind-door process. Otherwise, if the javana cittas of a mind door process are akusala, that would mean that it wasn't a dhamma that was the object of the mind-door process, but a concept (of a dhamma). It seems my reasoning there was faulty, so I'm sorry if I confused anyone in the process (notably RobE). Best wishes pt #124420 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 9:14 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Meditational view ptaus1 Hi Alex, Reply from Htoo to your post: > A: I believe that meditation is all about developing understanding and > observation of what arises now. Htoo: Hello Alex. Pleased to meet you. You are right. What arises now is the object or 'Aarammana'. It may be naama or ruupa or pan~n~atti. Observation is 'sati'. Developing understanding is 'pan~n~aa'. In Myanmar late-Mogok Sayadaw said 'former citta has to be viewed by meditating citta or later citta'. That is citta A is to be viewed by Citta B. I think Howard once used 'citta A and citta B'. Best wishes #124421 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 9:16 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Meditational view ptaus1 Hi Howard, Reply from Htoo to your post: > Howard: My perspective: I consider that meditation (in the fullest) is > occuring exactly whenever the hindrances are in abeyance. When they are not in > abeyance, at best, there is a pre-meditative state in effect. (Pre-meditative > states may well be quite auspicious, of course.) Htoo: Long time no see Howard. Your view is also right. Premeditative state has to be established first. Late-Mahaacii/Mahasi Sayadaw taught to establish premeditative state through Myanmar language as simple instructions even though at first it sounded 'noting pan~n~atti. But with time pan~n~atti will be overcome. Best wishes pt #124422 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 21, 2012 9:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 2007 audio - 1. experiencing impermanence nilovg Dear Sarah, I like your answer: No need to wait for Bgk! Nina. Op 21-mei-2012, om 10:27 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > There may be some weak awareness, but it > > is followed by thinking, naming, etc. This is a good point to pursue > > when you are in Bgk. > .... > S: No need to wait for Bgk! Now there is hardness, visible object, > other realities that are experienced. There can be awareness > immediately and then there is no doubt. #124423 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 21, 2012 9:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: spd 16 (vatthu kaama) nilovg Dear Phil and Sarah, Op 21-mei-2012, om 11:16 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > Any kind of dhamma that is a basis or foundation for attachment is > actually vatthu kaama. ------ N: In this context of the Atth. there are vatthu kaama and kilesa kaama. Vatthu kaama: the objects of sensuous clinging and kilesa kaama: the defilements of the sensuous plane. ---- Nina. #124424 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 21, 2012 9:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meditational view upasaka_howard Hi, pt (and Htoo) - Thank you for sending this, pt! :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 5/21/2012 7:16:50 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ptaus1@... writes: Hi Howard, Reply from Htoo to your post: > Howard: My perspective: I consider that meditation (in the fullest) is > occuring exactly whenever the hindrances are in abeyance. When they are not in > abeyance, at best, there is a pre-meditative state in effect. (Pre-meditative > states may well be quite auspicious, of course.) Htoo: Long time no see Howard. Your view is also right. Premeditative state has to be established first. Late-Mahaacii/Mahasi Sayadaw taught to establish premeditative state through Myanmar language as simple instructions even though at first it sounded 'noting pan~n~atti. But with time pan~n~atti will be overcome. Best wishes pt #124425 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 21, 2012 9:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhs nilovg Dear pt, Op 21-mei-2012, om 12:29 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > Also, thanks for posting the question about triplet 3 on the Pali > list. ------- N: Yes, Bryan gave an answer. N: I would like to know more about the grammar of no 2: the first part >of the compound vipaakadhamma is caused by the second part: dhammaa. >What kind of compound is this? vipaakadhammadhammaa B: It looks like the translator is taking dhamma to mean "quality" (gu.na, which is one of Buddhaghosa's definitions for dhamma, see PED) in the first part of the compound and in the second part is taking it to mean "states" (phenomena). So the compound is literally "resultant-quality-states," which makes it a kammadhaaraya or appositional compound where the three words are all in the nominative plural (vipaakaa-dhammaa-dhammaa, "states which are resultant qualities"). However, the translator is translating it as a bahuviihi or possessive compound, as he is using the word "have" as if vipaakadhammaa and dhammaa are sparate, i. e. vipaakadhammaa dhammaa. In this case the first compound vipaakadhammaa modifies the second word dhammaa, outside the compound which is what makes it a bahuviihi -- also called a possessive of attributive compound, analyzed as: ye.sam dhammaa vipaakaa santi, te vipaakadhammaa dhammaa ("states that have resultant qualities" or "states of which the qualities are resultant, these are resultant quality states"). This interpretation assumes that two "dhamma"s side by side have two different meanings, which I have never seen before .------ N: I think that it is a bahubiihi. possessive compound. ------ Nina. #124426 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 10:16 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat jonoabb Hi Rob E (124389) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > J: There is understanding that is correct (and that, accordingly, has 'correct' concepts as its object), > > RE: Well, I don't see how that is any different from what I am saying. It is an acknowledgment that for understanding to be correct, the content that is thought of must also be correct. So the concept is involved and must also be correct. So the idea that there is 'no such thing as a correct concept in the teachings' may be true, but it is at least implied not only by the teachings, but what you yourself has said above. > =============== J: You are of course welcome to read it that way, but it's not how I meant it :-)) > =============== > RE: Since it is impossible to have a correct understanding of dhammas without a correct thought about them [on the level of pariyatti, prior to direct discernment of the dhamma itself] it is somewhat self-contradictory to maintain the idea that there are no 'correct concepts' involved. > =============== J: See above. > =============== > > J: and understanding that is not correct. A person correctly understands something or he does not. > > RE: Right, and he can't understand something correctly without a correct thought or concept about it. > =============== J: If the understanding is correct, then of course the thought will be `correct' also. But there could be a `correct' thought (e.g., `all dhammas are anattaa') without there being any understanding, or in fact with wrong view. > =============== > RE: Just to make things more confusing, a person could also have a correct understanding about a false statement. He could understand that "dhammas are eternal" is incorrect, and that would be correct understanding of an incorrect statement. > =============== J: As I'm sufficiently confused already, I'll pass on this one :-)) > =============== > > J: 'Understanding' is, of course, a dhamma. > > RE: That is fine, but thinking must have an object, and if the object of thinking is conceptually incorrect or correct, that must be known as well, or there is not correct understanding. > =============== J: That is fine, but `understanding' is of course a dhamma :-)) Jon #124427 From: "philip" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 10:21 pm Subject: Re: degree of kusala and akusala philofillet Hi Pt > I don't know, I don't think there's a need to be scared of the word "practice". However development of kusala happens for someone, I'd imagine it's bound to be held up by different misgivings and misunderstanding, so mistakes. E.g. if it was me, I'd guess the teacher would be probably going over and over about the differences between trying to achieve smth vs understanding now. So, subtle lobha vs sati. Or between my supposed samatha practice vs true calm. So, subtle dosa vs pasadhi. And if I'm really lucky, he'd also have a few superpowers and be able to read minds and know exactly what sort of cittas are happening in mine, so the next time I go to him saying E"Hey, I just got into first jhana! Hell, maybe even the second one!" he'd be like E"Yeah, err, so did you read that chapter in Visuddhimagga that..." Ok, well, I don't know, it seems to me that for a householder seeking to make "progress" by going to a teacher who is expected to tell him or her what progress understanding has taken, just a lot of lobha for the student and mana for the teacher, a bit of a sham. I have to say that I have no interest in the BUddhist establishment, not much respect for monks, which I guess means not much respect for the sangha, there are so many pontificating monks kicking around on the internet. I seem to have tuned out of Buddhism. I'm interested in Dhamma and dhammas, the development of understanding of them. If I am deprived by not believing that there are gurus who can sort out my understanding, so be it. Maybe another lifetime. In the meantime, I will stick to understanding the texts, and do my wonderful morning meditation, my yoga. And not confuse it with bhavana, with Dhamma. Everyone should do it, I hope Lukas does. It is all about ki, or chi, that energy in the body, it's extremely pleasant and beneficial to tap into. Anyways, thanks, carry on. One of these days I will learn to keep my nose out of this topic, it is not my cup of tea. Phil #124428 From: "philip" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 10:26 pm Subject: Break philofillet Hi all Let me take a break in the Survey of Paramattha Dhamma series. Back at it in a couple of weeks. I'm going to record and absorb all the ones I've posted so far. Phil #124429 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon May 21, 2012 10:23 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat jonoabb Hi Rob E (124392) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > RE: I think you have just demonstrated that they are 2 sides of the same coin: > > You said: > "The understanding 'dhammas are eternal' would be incorrect understanding." > > Yes, that is because the concept "dhammas are eternal" is incorrect. That is what makes the understanding incorrect. It is dependent on the concept involved. If the concept involved were "dhammas are momentary" the understanding would be correct. In both cases it is not just the cetasika "understanding" that is involved, but the concept which is the object of that understanding. > =============== J: Regarding, <>. It's the understanding that is either correct or incorrect. The thought/concept itself is neither (but we refer to it as `correct' or `incorrect' for convenience). Regarding, <>. Not necessarily. The moment of consciousness could be accompanied by wrong view or by no view of any kind. > =============== > RE: It seems to me that panna can arise with a concept, as I think has been recently clarified, because the concept can be correct or incorrect. Right understanding takes a *correct* concept in its view; otherwise it woudl be wrong understanding. > > The two sides of the coin are: > a. The cetasika "understanding," [right or wrong,] and > b. The concept that is either correct or incorrect. > > Only a correct conceptual construction or thought can be present with right understanding, and only an incorrect conceptual construction or thought can be present for wrong understanding. I believe that understanding + concept are two sides of the coin for pariyatti. > =============== J: I do not see your (b) as being either correct or the other side of the coin to your (a) (but I'll spare you and everyone a further repetition of my reasons, unless requested :-)) Jon #124430 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue May 22, 2012 1:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bodhgaya moellerdieter Dear Sarah , Chris and Nina, Sarah wrote: S: Weren't you going on a trip to the Holy Places recently? If so, please share any of your lively anecdotes/reflections/summaries. I'd love to read them D: so would I , Sarah. If I recall correctly from former messages , all three of you have been to the holy places . Would be indeed nice to learn about your 'feelings of reverence ' you still remember at the moments you were there ( of course only if you like to share and don't think that should be kept privately). extract from DN 16 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html Four Places of Pilgrimage 16. "There are four places, Ananda, that a pious person should visit and look upon with feelings of reverence.[42] What are the four? 17. "'Here the Tathagata was born!'[43] This, Ananda, is a place that a pious person should visit and look upon with feelings of reverence. 18. "'Here the Tathagata became fully enlightened in unsurpassed, supreme Enlightenment!'[44] This, Ananda, is a place that a pious person should visit and look upon with feelings of reverence. 19. "'Here the Tathagata set rolling the unexcelled Wheel of the Dhamma!'[45] This, Ananda, is a place that a pious person should visit and look upon with feelings of reverence. 20. "'Here the Tathagata passed away into the state of Nibbana in which no element of clinging remains!' This, Ananda, is a place that a pious person should visit and look upon with feelings of reverence. 21. "These, Ananda, are the four places that a pious person should visit and look upon with feelings of reverence. And truly there will come to these places, Ananda, pious bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, laymen and laywomen, reflecting: 'Here the Tathagata was born! Here the Tathagata became fully enlightened in unsurpassed, supreme Enlightenment! Here the Tathagata set rolling the unexcelled Wheel of the Dhamma! Here the Tathagata passed away into the state of Nibbana in which no element of clinging remains!' notes :42 See The Four Sacred Shrines, by Piyadassi Thera (BPS Bodhi Leaves No. 8). 43.At Lumbini near Kapilavatthu, the ancestral seat of the Sakyans in the foothills of the Himalayas. An Asokan pillar marks the spot. 44.At Buddha-Gaya, in Bihar. 45.At Isipatana near Benares (modern Sarnath). D: defining pious A.E.Dict.: having or showing a deep respect for God and religion , Etymology :c.1600, from L. pius "dutiful, kind, devout," perhaps related to L. purus "pure, clean" (see pure). Related: Piously; piousness. That means in our case a deep respect for the Buddha and the Dhamma , respectively after parinibbana: the Buddha Dhamma. with Metta Dieter #124431 From: "Christine" Date: Tue May 22, 2012 6:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' christine_fo... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Christine, Ken H, and Nina, > > I thank Ken H and Nina for their kind remarks on the subject. > > Ven. Pa~n~nobhaasa Bhikkhu wrote: > Quote: [The standard Burmese explanation of the conspicuous absence of Abhidhamma in the oldest ecclesiastical histories is that it is included in the Khuddaka Nikaaya of the Suttanta Pi.taka, but this assertion receives no support from the ancient texts themselves. (The Burmese also consider Vinaya to be included in the Khuddaka Nikaaya, thereby rendering the fifth Nikaaya "The Small Collection" or "Collection of the Small" very much larger and more comprehensive than the entire remainder of the Canon and reducing the Buddhist scriptures to a single Pi.taka.)] End Quote. > > I think it may be very useful for Ven. Pa~n~nobhaasa Bhikkhu to kindly visit Myanmar and give a talk on the "Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy" at the International Institute of Abhidhamma, Yangon, which is running Abhidhamma courses at its Kabar Aye Pagoda campus in Yangon’s Mayangone township. > > Tel (95 1) 561 650, 570 837. > > Hello Han, Thank you for your response. Apparently the Venerable spent a long time in Burma: Paññobhāsa Bhikkhu – Born John David Reynolds in Seward, AK, he was ordained in the Burmese Taungpulu Forest tradition of Theravada Buddhism in 1991 and spent 18 years in Burma, most of that time in forest caves. He returned to the US in May 2011, and is experimenting with the possibility of living as an independent monk in the West. He has specialized in meditation, monastic discipline, and the subtleties of Buddhist philosophy, and is willing to teach those who are interested. He may be contacted by email at nippapanca@... This is his website: Nippapañca (A synonym for Nirvana in the Pali language meaning "non-differentiation.") http://nippapanca.org/ with metta Chris #124432 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue May 22, 2012 7:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' truth_aerator Hello Christine, I've read another article by the Venerable. He is smart and wise. As for his talk about Abhidhamma, what he has said is correct. Historical analysis and analysis of early schools does point to the fact that Abhidhamma Pitaka, as pitaka was later addition. Of course when AP doesn't contradict the suttas it is right in that sense. But when there is contradiction, contradiction needs to be rejected. Also there is difference between Abhidhamma Pitaka and commenterial Abhidhamma (such as described in Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma). With metta, Alex #124433 From: han tun Date: Tue May 22, 2012 9:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' hantun1 Dear Christine,  Thank you very much for the information. Taungpulu Tawya Kaba-Aye Sayadaw is a famous Sayadaw in Myanmar.  with metta and respect, Han --- On Tue, 5/22/12, Christine wrote: Hello Han, Thank you for your response. Apparently the Venerable spent a long time in Burma: Paññobhāsa Bhikkhu – Born John David Reynolds in Seward, AK, he was ordained in the Burmese Taungpulu Forest tradition of Theravada Buddhism in 1991 and spent 18 years in Burma, most of that time in forest caves. He returned to the US in May 2011, and is experimenting with the possibility of living as an independent monk in the West. He has specialized in meditation, monastic discipline, and the subtleties of Buddhist philosophy, and is willing to teach those who are interested. He may be contacted by email at nippapanca@... This is his website: Nippapañca (A synonym for Nirvana in the Pali language meaning "non-differentiation.") http://nippapanca.org/ with metta Chris #124434 From: "philip" Date: Tue May 22, 2012 10:48 am Subject: Delisting announcement #10 philofillet Dear moderators, and all One of the things that is good about Dhammawheel is that in the area devoted to discussion about Abhidhamma, questioning the place of Abhidhamma in tge tipitika is not permitted. I din't think this is because people have knee-jerk sensitivity about having it questioned, everybody here and there is well aware of the historical evidence that Abhidhamma was a later addition. But I think the prohibition against arguing based on that is in order to have focussed and productive discussions about Abhidhamma. Here at DSG the order of the day every day is people who accept Abhidhamma "discussing" with people who don't. I think the group's home page description should be changed to make it clearer that respect for Abhidhamma is not necessary at DSG. I know I should be able to avoid threads in which Guys On The Internet Who Understand Better Than Abhidhamma participate, but that is impossible, they are completely dominant here and the purpose of this group seems to be to cater to their needs and demands. No thanks. So until my next guilt pangs ("I am so ungrateful") I will guve a byebye kiss to the kalamites and sincere thanks to Sarah, Jon Nina and others who share my interest in Abhidhamma, not as a supplemental aid to understanding suttas, but an absolutely necessary one. Phil > Hello Christine, > > I've read another article by the Venerable. He is smart and wise. > > As for his talk about Abhidhamma, what he has said is correct. > > Historical analysis and analysis of early schools does point to the fact that Abhidhamma Pitaka, as pitaka was later addition. Of course when AP doesn't contradict the suttas it is right in that sense. But when there is contradiction, contradiction needs to be rejected. > > Also there is difference between Abhidhamma Pitaka and commenterial Abhidhamma (such as described in Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma). > > > With metta, > > Alex > #124435 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 22, 2012 2:40 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > >S: " - these and various similar things, although they do not exist in the ultimate sense, become objects of the arisings of consciousness in the manner of a shadow of something real." > > > >R: They are the objects of arising cittas, which means that they are objects of consciousness...? I thought that concepts could only be objects of thought, and that the "thinking" or other mental process was object of citta, but not the concept? > .... > S: Yes, some confusion here. Concepts or thoughts are objects of thinking. Cittas (moments of consciousness) are mostly thinking cittas when they are not moments of seeing, hearing and other vipaka cittas. The thinking cittas and accompanying mental factors, especially factors such as vitakka, "think about" or conceive a concept, an idea, an image. So just to try to simplify it, you could say that vitakka, for instance, arises, but its concept does not. Vitakka, in a sense, to could be said to invent the concept when *it* [vitakka] arises; thus the concept doesn't come from or go to anywhere, but is just entertained in the moment that the reality that entertains it is there. So it is time-freed in that sense, that it doesn't arise, nor does it need to arise, because a real mental faculty of some kind is doing the arising for it and it only exists while that mental faculty exists. It cannot support itself, but is supported by a reality that entertains it. I've been trying to get this straight for a while - if the above is in the right direction, that will help me understand what is meant by the concept being the object of thought, but not of citta directly, and being time-freed, etc. > ... > >R: I'm sure I am confused, if you can help to clarify this. If "concept" is the object of arising cittas, I am interested in how that takes place. > .... > S: The cittas that arise in the mind-door processes and conceive ideas, images, stories. > > From: Expositor (Atthasaalinii), Analysis of Terms, p.84 > > "By 'consciousness' (citta) is meant that which thinks of its object, is aware > variously. (Cittan ti aarmamma.na.m cintetii ti citta.m vijaanaatii ti attho.) Or, inasmuch as this word 'consciousness' is common to all states or > classes of consciousness, that which is known as worldly, moral, immoral, or the > great inoperative, is termed 'consciousness. ' because it arranges itself in a > series (cinoti, or, its own series or continuity) by way of apperception in a > process of thought. And the resultant is also termed 'consciousness' because it > is accumulated (cito) by kamma and the corruptions. " I like this - it raises some interesting questions about the typology of consciousness and what consciousness refers to, which I will leave for another time. > .... > >R: ......But in any case the idea that concepts are arising in the manner of a semblance of a dhamma suggests a kind of connection between delusion and reality which is provocative, but still unclear to me in any detail. > .... > S: Concepts don't arise. Like now if you think about an orange, the thinking arises and passes away. If there were no realities, no dhammas such as visible object and tangible object, there'd be no concepts, no idea of an orange or anything else. Sanna (perception) has marked and remembered the names, the ideas and associations. Even now there is a marking of what is seen and thought about which accumulates at each moment. Well that is still a bit difficult to grasp, ie, the thinking arises and passes away, but the concept that it is thinking of does not arise or pass away. The way I interpret this is that the concept is conceived in a kind of semblance of stasis - the citta that is thinking has arisen in order to think; and when it entertains the concept it is already arisen, so the concept just sort of beams into existence, rather than coming from anywhere or going anywhere, and then dissolves, as it is unreal, when the citta is no longer there to support it. So although the concept is dependent on the arising and falling away of cittas, the concept itself has no capability to arise or fall away and thus exists outside of the "time" that takes place for realities, which actually do have a kind of "real time" to their existence. Hope that is in the right direction. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #124436 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 22, 2012 2:44 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Pt (& Rob E), > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > > pt: Maybe it's best we hold on here for a bit as I might be wrong - I think RobK suggested that a dhamma can be an object of akusala citta, so let's see what he or anyone else says on the issue. That would definitely make things more difficult in the sense that even when a dhamma is object of citta, there's still no guarantee that it's a kusala citta. > .... > S: I picked up on this point before as well, #123719, but you may have missed it. In that context, the discussion was about rupas and I pointed out that a rupa can be (usually is) the object of akusala as well as kusala cittas in the sense door process as well as in the following mind door process. For example, if there's attachment to the visible object in the eye-door javana cittas, then there will be attachment to it in the following mind door process as well. As just discussed with Phil, any dhamma, apart from lokuttara dhammas, can be the object of lobha and other akusala cittas. What is confusing about this to me is that it suggests a stage of development at which dhammas are being directly discerned, and yet there is still akusala. If you can clarify for me what kind of stage has this degree of sati and understanding to see the rupas or namas for what they are yet still has the potential for such akusala attachment, that would help me orient to what sorts of akusala drop away at what points, as this seems pretty advanced to me. This would be after the second stage of insight at least...? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = #124437 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 22, 2012 2:46 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhs epsteinrob Hi pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > *RobE, please note this issue in our discussion - I was wrong to point out that with dhamma as object, cittas of the mind-door process must necessarily be kusala, and thus, can be akusala as well. Yes, this is interesting to me as well - I have asked Sarah about it, as I am confused as to this combination of seeing dhammas directly and yet still having akusala attachment. I guess that makes sense as some attachment only goes away very late on the path, but I am interested in how those stages take place. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #124438 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 22, 2012 2:48 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > Thanks for coming in here. Yes, I was familiar with this issue in relation to ruupa, but I didn't quite extrapolate that to naama dhammas. As just mentioned, for some reason, I assumed that if a naama dhamma (that has just fallen away) becomes the object of the succeeding mind-door process, then this happens by virtue of panna as the main condition, and thus implies kusala (javana) citta(s) by definition in that mind-door process. Otherwise, if the javana cittas of a mind door process are akusala, that would mean that it wasn't a dhamma that was the object of the mind-door process, but a concept (of a dhamma). > > It seems my reasoning there was faulty, so I'm sorry if I confused anyone in the process (notably RobE). Still a little confused, but clarity pending a bit more clarification. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #124439 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 22, 2012 2:56 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > J: There is understanding that is correct (and that, accordingly, has 'correct' concepts as its object), > > > > RE: Well, I don't see how that is any different from what I am saying. It is an acknowledgment that for understanding to be correct, the content that is thought of must also be correct. So the concept is involved and must also be correct. So the idea that there is 'no such thing as a correct concept in the teachings' may be true, but it is at least implied not only by the teachings, but what you yourself has said above. > > =============== > > J: You are of course welcome to read it that way, but it's not how I meant it :-)) The point is only that a correct understanding must have a correct concept as its object, which is just quoting what you said, not disagreeing with it. I'm happy to distinguish the concept from the nama that understands; I'm not saying they're the same thing. ... > > RE: Right, and he can't understand something correctly without a correct thought or concept about it. > > =============== > > J: If the understanding is correct, then of course the thought will be `correct' also. My only point. The correctness of the conceptual understanding follows or accords with the nama that understands. Understanding is a dhamma, the thought is not - I agree with you on that point. > But there could be a `correct' thought (e.g., `all dhammas are anattaa') without there being any understanding, or in fact with wrong view. That is a worthwhile addition, which means that the statement cannot be inverted. Every correct understanding nama has a correct concept as its corollary; but not every correct concept has understanding accompanying it. > > =============== > > RE: Just to make things more confusing, a person could also have a correct understanding about a false statement. He could understand that "dhammas are eternal" is incorrect, and that would be correct understanding of an incorrect statement. > > =============== > > J: As I'm sufficiently confused already, I'll pass on this one :-)) Understanding can correctly understand that a false concept is incorrect, that's all. If you said "The sun is green" and I said "That's wrong" my understanding that it's wrong would be correct understanding. To understand correctly, one has to be able to recognize not only what is a correct concept, but what is an incorrect one. So if I say to you "dhammas are eternal" you can say to me, "that is not correct" because your understanding is correct. > > =============== > > > J: 'Understanding' is, of course, a dhamma. > > > > RE: That is fine, but thinking must have an object, and if the object of thinking is conceptually incorrect or correct, that must be known as well, or there is not correct understanding. > > =============== > > J: That is fine, but `understanding' is of course a dhamma :-)) Yes, I agree with you -- understanding is a dhamma, and its concept is not a dhamma. I hope we're all lined up now. :-))) Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #124440 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 22, 2012 3:09 pm Subject: Re: Delisting announcement #10 epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > Here at DSG the order of the day every day is people who accept Abhidhamma "discussing" with people who don't. No it's not. The great preponderance of posts are about specific points in Abhidhamma and it's very productive for someone who is focused on what they want to learn here instead of who they can critique today, or just fault-finding in general. Even those who debate points of Abhidhamma do so to clarify their own understanding. I think your sense of what this group is about and how much better it would be if it was just pure lip-synching is misdirected, and is just the usual distraction from your own outstanding issues. We're all here out of devotion to the Dhamma. It's about time you picked that up. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #124441 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 22, 2012 3:12 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Only a correct conceptual construction or thought can be present with right understanding, and only an incorrect conceptual construction or thought can be present for wrong understanding. I believe that understanding + concept are two sides of the coin for pariyatti. > > =============== > > J: I do not see your (b) as being either correct or the other side of the coin to your (a) (but I'll spare you and everyone a further repetition of my reasons, unless requested :-)) I think this has been covered pretty clearly in our other exchange, which I've recently added to. Let's see how that goes! :-) Thanks for sticking with it so far... Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #124442 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue May 22, 2012 4:32 pm Subject: Re: Delisting announcement #10 kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > ><. . .> > Here at DSG the order of the day every day is people who accept Abhidhamma "discussing" with people who don't. <. . .> -------- Hi Phil, I occasionally get fed up with worldly conditions, so I can't criticise you for doing the same. I might remind you, however, that when we "accept" the Abhidhamma we accept there are only dhammas. No matter what the conventional story might be there are always only dhammas. To have lobha for one kind of discussion and dosa for another is non-acceptance of the Abhidhamma, isn't it? So who are we to criticise? :-) Ken H #124443 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 22, 2012 11:21 pm Subject: Our vacation, 1. nilovg Dear friends, During our break we had some Dhamma discussions. --------- Lodewijk: I have been wondering my whole life what sati is. I will never understand what it is. Nina: This shows that you cling, you take it for self. I quote from Khun Bong’s recording: Sujin: Most important is not to take sati for self. We would like to have it, to have more of it, but it cannot be controlled, it is anattaa. Bong: When I notice akusala I realize that I know just a concept of it. It has already fallen away when I am thinking of it and I do not understand its characteristic when it appears. S: Do not try to understand it. First we have to understand what naama is, as an element that experiences something, not self. It is different from ruupa. Seeing, hearing, dislike, they are all dhammas and you cannot choose what appears. You cannot choose seeing or dislike to appear. It seems that realities do not fall away, but they are present for a very short time, and they never come back. Dhamma is what is real, what appears. B: I cannot realize the difference between naama and ruupa. S: First you have to understand what appears now. You listened and hear the story about realities, and to what extent is there ignorance? Now it seems that realities do not fall away, and that seeing and hearing can occur at the same time. Something can appear through the eyes because there is an element that can see. Sound appears through the ears because there is an element that can hear. There is no need to think of the names citta and object. There is a reality that appears and a reality that experiences it. This we must hear for a long, long time. We cannot prevent ourselves from seeing, because seeing arises already, it sees already. We cannot force what appears through the eyes not to appear. This is the meaning of dhamma and anattaa. There is no need to look for dhamma, it is there already, it has arisen already. But we do not know the truth. What appears through the eyes does not know anything, it just appears. -------- Nina. #124444 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 22, 2012 11:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bodhgaya nilovg Dear Dieter, your post is an encouragement. Op 21-mei-2012, om 17:45 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > S: Weren't you going on a trip to the Holy Places recently? If so, > please share any of your lively anecdotes/reflections/summaries. > I'd love to read them > > D: so would I , Sarah. > If I recall correctly from former messages , all three of you have > been to the holy places . > Would be indeed nice to learn about your 'feelings of reverence ' > you still remember at the moments you were there ( of course only > if you like to share and don't think that should be kept privately). ----- N: I also would like to hear from Christine. I went on many pilgrimages with Kh Sujin and a whole group of friends. I wrote about several of them and they are in Zolag. But there is my third pilgrimage (the late Ven. Dhammadharo and Jonothan also joined) written about in a the pre-computer time. I decided to retype it now on computer. But it still needs a short intro. I due time I will post it in parts. ----- Nina. #124445 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue May 22, 2012 11:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bodhgaya moellerdieter Dear Nina, I am glad to hear that and looking forward to reading the parts .. with Metta Dieter ----- Original Message ----- From: Nina van Gorkom To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 3:26 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Bodhgaya Dear Dieter, your post is an encouragement. Op 21-mei-2012, om 17:45 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > S: Weren't you going on a trip to the Holy Places recently? If so, > please share any of your lively anecdotes/reflections/summaries. > I'd love to read them > > D: so would I , Sarah. > #124446 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed May 23, 2012 3:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy moellerdieter Dear Sarah , slowly getting some order in the posts I didn't reply yet .. you wrote: D: as far as I recall they do not deny the conventional reality. > It may be - from an absolute angle you are taking - nothing more than a bubble , but so far it is all what is available to us.> But how do you describe your daily life besides namas and rupas, as the 'rest utimately not existing'? .... S: There are only realities arising and falling away in daily life - the five khandhas, each reality anatta, as indicated in all the quotes you gave. No matter how we describe our daily life, no matter how much ignorance there is, no matter what we think or imagine, there are only names and rupas arising and falling away now. Anything else is a concept, an idea that is thought about. ... D: and still this is your thought, speech done by/ from this concept, isn't it? There is an acting (kamma) being (khandas) in this social environment, (conventional:Sarah who was writing to me ) . Concept is my imagination about you while I am writing , but the act is reality . There is a way of action which alone can not be explained only by namas and rupas falling away , despite nothing else can be found by analysis. This way or better wandering , this status quo in samsara , needs to be seen in perspective of Dependent Orgination, which is the background of our conventional reality. in other word two realities. reality of daily life ..and absolute reality , paramattha dhamma (the khandas embedded in D.O.) , S: Yes, the first kind everyone knows about. We don't need a Buddha to tell us about dukkha-dukkha. The third one is more subtle, but it is the second one, sankhara dukkha which is the Truth of Dukkha - the inherent unsatisfactoriness of all conditioned dhammas, which only a Buddha can teach. Changing or not changing postures will not lead to any insight of dhammas as dukkha in this sense. > > D: yes.. we still an agreement from time to time > I like to add "but it is the second one, sankhara dukkha which is the Truth of Dukkha - the inherent unsatisfactoriness of all conditioned dhammas", > due to formation (this 'creating' factor of sankhara) . > Possibly an interesting topic for discussion : sankhara and its role in Dependent Origination. .... S: See Nyantiloka's dictionary for the different meanings of sankhara. Sankhara dukkha, sabbe sankhara dukkha, refers to all conditioned dhammas. Sankhara as the second factor in D.O. refers to past kamma. ... D:yes, we speak about sankhara as the second factor of D.O. which is past in the meaning of accumulated , up to date - kamma , as it still condtions citta- cetasika /rupa . I maintain that it is not left to the previous life. > > D: its 'content , the dhammas are different , but the function being 'conscious' isn't, is it? ... > S: Each citta arises, is 'conscious' of its object and falls away. I don't know what you mean by "its content'. > > D: for the citta I have something like a shore or the ground a stream is flowing along in mind .. .... S: Sorry, this doesn't make sense to me. Citta just experiences its object. It doesn't have 'content', but perhaps you're referring to the accumulated tendencies, such as the latent tendencies accumulated with the citta/ D:I meant it is not part of the stream , the citta knows, is conscious , experiences the ' content ', a stream of arising and falling phenomena (the ' All' of the 6 senses media), no content of its own. ... > D> khanda is often translated by aggregate .I miss a more fitting term ... S: maybe best to stick to khandha. Otherwise, perhaps I'd use 'constituent' or 'factor'. Not easy. D. yes , khandha .. though the recently mentioned definition of aggregate seems to me quite ok ... > S: We can read a Self into any sutta, but the truth is that there is no Self, no Doer, no One who can command anything. Postures are concepts - we can say they are sammutti sacca, conventional truth, which is what you mean, I think. > > D: how do you distinguish conventional truth and mundane realtity ... ... S: "Apple", "Computer" are examples of conventional truth, sammutti sacca - correct usage for what is referred to as apple or computer. Lokiya dhammas (worldly/mundane realities) as opposed to lokuttara dhammas (supramundane realities). Seeing now, visible object, hearing, sound - all lokiya dhammas. The only lokuttara dhammas are nibbana, magga and phala cittas (path and fruition consciousness and mental factors). D: I recently discussed this issue with Nina and think lokiya (=samutti sacca (?)) involves the mundane (conventional ) and the super mundane ( khandhas in D.O.) , whereas lokuttara means nibbana, magga and phala cittas nibbana and stands for the supra mundane The distinction between super and supra avoids - I.M.O. - confusion by mixture ... > S: Yes, disentchantment, dispassion and detachment develop with right understanding. At the moment of understanding, there is detachment, there is dispassion. No need to do anything extra, no one to do anything! > > D: 50 % yes, as nothing to ......besides! the Path training of sila , samadhi and panna ..one supports the other .. developing understanding .. > without chanda , without volition no progress.. even before his parinibbana the Buddha emphasised again and again the training. ... S: When there is right understanding, this is the training. At such moments there is the development of adhi sill and adhi samadhi - 'higher' sila and 'higher' samadhi. There is chanda, cetana and all the other sobhana factors already. Otherwise it's trying to sneak the self back in, as just discussed with Rob E! D: when there is will ( chanda/ cetana ), there is action , and if done with right understanding (the instructions of the 3 fold Noble Path training) there will be (gradual ) development even if it is only drop for drop .. , agreed? with Metta Dieter #124447 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed May 23, 2012 3:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, >S: There are only realities arising and falling away... >===================================== Is "arising" ultimate or conventional truth? Is "falling away" ultimate or conventional truth? With metta, Alex #124448 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 23, 2012 5:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Sarah) - In a message dated 5/22/2012 1:26:22 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Dear Sarah, all, >S: There are only realities arising and falling away... >===================================== Is "arising" ultimate or conventional truth? Is "falling away" ultimate or conventional truth? ---------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Here's an answer that I suspect neither of you will like. ;-) Q: Is "arising" ultimate or conventional truth? A: Conventional, for no separate "thing" ever arises. Q: Is "falling away" ultimate or conventional truth? A: Conventional, for no separate "thing" ever falls away. ----------------------------------------------------- With metta, Alex =============================== With metta, Howard /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none — such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta) #124449 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed May 23, 2012 5:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy truth_aerator Hello Howard, Sarah, all, >Alex:Is "arising" ultimate or conventional truth? >Is "falling away" ultimate or conventional truth? > ---------------------------------------------------------------- >HCW: >Q:Is "arising" ultimate or conventional truth? A: Conventional, >for >no separate "thing" ever arises. > >Q: Is "falling away" ultimate or conventional truth? A: >Conventional, for no separate "thing" ever falls away. >========--------------------------------------------- You could be right. Here is possible thing: Identity and Difference is a function of the mind. So in this sense it is conventional. Also: Mind-moment cannot perceive its own non-existence, and there is only one mind-moment at a time, so how can a person ever directly perceive (rather than infer) trillions of mind-moments arising and ceasing every split second? The gap between two cittas in order to know that there are two cittas cannot be directly perceived as it occurs, it can only be conceptualized and inferred (especially if one is taught and believe in that) later on. With metta, Alex #124450 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 23, 2012 7:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Sarah) - In a message dated 5/22/2012 3:32:11 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, Sarah, all, >Alex:Is "arising" ultimate or conventional truth? >Is "falling away" ultimate or conventional truth? > ---------------------------------------------------------- >HCW: >Q:Is "arising" ultimate or conventional truth? A: Conventional, >for >no separate "thing" ever arises. > >Q: Is "falling away" ultimate or conventional truth? A: >Conventional, for no separate "thing" ever falls away. >========--------------------------------------------- You could be right. Here is possible thing: Identity and Difference is a function of the mind. So in this sense it is conventional. --------------------------------------------------------- HCW: IF identity is, indeed, a function of mind and not intrinsic, then, yes, it is a matter of convention - and vice versa. I believe that is so. I hasten to add, though, that this does not seem to be the Abhidhammic perspective. --------------------------------------------------------- Also: Mind-moment cannot perceive its own non-existence, and there is only one mind-moment at a time, so how can a person ever directly perceive (rather than infer) trillions of mind-moments arising and ceasing every split second? ---------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Assuming separate and distinct mind-moments (to be observed) arising and ceasing, the perceiving would have to be indirect, by recollection. A knife does not cut itself. (Of course, neither you nor I know what supermundane wisdom is capable of.) ---------------------------------------------------------- The gap between two cittas in order to know that there are two cittas cannot be directly perceived as it occurs, it can only be conceptualized and inferred (especially if one is taught and believe in that) later on. ----------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, recalled. But the recollection could be a "fresh memory". ----------------------------------------------------- With metta, Alex =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124451 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed May 23, 2012 7:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy truth_aerator Hello Howard, All, >=============================================== >HCW:IF identity is, indeed, a function of mind and not intrinsic, >then,yes, it is a matter of convention - and vice versa. >============================================ Yes, how we split up the mind into "moments" is conventional just like we split up meter into centimeters, millimeters and so on. This type of division is purely conceptual. Also, gap between "two mind moments" cannot be directly perceived because there is no mind to cognize the gap itself. The two mind moments feel like one inseparable mind. >================================================ >HCW:Assuming separate and distinct mind-moments (to be observed) >arising and ceasing, the perceiving would have to be indirect, by >recollection. >================================================ And how can one recall a moment where there was no awareness at all? One cannot remember what one never cognized. The gap between the cittas cannot be recollected because there is nothing to recollect. Only to infer and conceptualize it. With metta, Alex #124452 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed May 23, 2012 8:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > And how can one recall a moment where there was no awareness at all? One cannot remember what one never cognized. The gap between the cittas cannot be recollected because there is nothing to recollect. Only to infer and conceptualize it. I don't think there are any gaps between mind-moments. Experience is continuous while one is alive, even if, in deep sleep for instance, there are moments that have no content, or very subtle content, they still take place. Why would there be gaps? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #124453 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed May 23, 2012 8:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy truth_aerator Hello RobertE, Howard, Sarah, all, >RE:I don't think there are any gaps between mind-moments. >========================== How can we distinguish one citta from the other citta which is necessary to say that "now it arose, now it ceased" and "trillions of cittas rise and fall every split second". How can we put numbers for the amount of cittas that have supposedly ceased? What distinguishes cittas? Conceptualizing mind... With metta, Alex #124454 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed May 23, 2012 8:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, Howard, Sarah, all, > > >RE:I don't think there are any gaps between mind-moments. > >========================== > > How can we distinguish one citta from the other citta which is necessary to say that "now it arose, now it ceased" and "trillions of cittas rise and fall every split second". > > How can we put numbers for the amount of cittas that have supposedly ceased? I don't think anyone thinks the ordinary person can experience single cittas [mind-moments] or count the number of cittas going by, but we an imagine a person in a state of advanced insight or an arahat who would be much more "up to speed" in terms of experiencing actual momentary experiences as they happen. For us ordinary folk who may have a bit of attention to such things but no supernatural abilities, I think we can certainly acknowledge that some experiences register with much more clarity than others and are distinct singular experiences. I think we can all remember certain sharp moments that registered very clearly and give a kind of example of what it is like to live more "moment-to-moment" with one's attention and understanding. Sometimes the conceptual buzz seems to die down and we can experience the clarity of a certain color or taste and really experience it more fully. This hints at direct experience, as opposed to simply conceptualizing about it. Maybe it's not getting the super-fast momentary experience that is buzzing by all the time, but it is worthwhile to focus on what we *are* able to experience more directly rather than less. And then the more advanced state depends on what you believe in - do you believe there is a state of very advanced clarity and sharpness - real fully accomplished mindfulness and wisdom that comes from successive insight events, whether from understanding Dhamma or from meditation? I certainly do. > What distinguishes cittas? Conceptualizing mind... I think that is a cynical view, and I would not think that any of us know for sure what direct experience is like, other than our own experiences that are more direct than at other times. That degree of directness that is experienced is real, it's not conceptual. And the more we are able to focus on the reality of the moment, instead of getting lost in various concepts, the more we can see what that reality is like. So I would not say that citta is conceptual, I would say that our concepts get in the way of experiencing what direct consciousness of things is really like. When we see a concept or a direct object of sensory or mental experience directly, that's not conceptual. That's a real experience. And that's all that citta is - it is a moment of actual experience that is actually experienced! I don't personally care how long it is supposed to last, or how many mind-moments can dance on the head of a pin. I'm more concerned with the gradual development of direct experience, so the deluded nonsense I suffer from most of the time is replaced by a sense of understanding. That is just a long process and one has to be patient. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #124456 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed May 23, 2012 9:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >RE: I don't think anyone thinks the ordinary person can experience >single cittas [mind-moments] or count the number of cittas going by, >but we an imagine a person in a state of advanced insight or an >arahat who would be much more "up to speed" in terms of experiencing >actual momentary experiences as they happen. >================== As I have been saying before, this is impossible and at best is an inference. If experience is not experienced, then is it really an experience? Can it be counted as experience #1,2..etc? No. So talk about uncognized cittas is metaphysics, not experiential truth. With best wishes, Alex #124457 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 23, 2012 10:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 5/22/2012 5:42:05 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, All, >=============================================== >HCW:IF identity is, indeed, a function of mind and not intrinsic, >then,yes, it is a matter of convention - and vice versa. >============================================ Yes, how we split up the mind into "moments" is conventional just like we split up meter into centimeters, millimeters and so on. This type of division is purely conceptual. Also, gap between "two mind moments" cannot be directly perceived because there is no mind to cognize the gap itself. The two mind moments feel like one inseparable mind. ---------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Actually, Theravada does not consider there to be gaps between cittas. ------------------------------------------------------------ >================================================ >HCW:Assuming separate and distinct mind-moments (to be observed) >arising and ceasing, the perceiving would have to be indirect, by >recollection. >================================================ And how can one recall a moment where there was no awareness at all? ------------------------------------------------------------ HCW: By "awareness" her, I presume you mean consciousness. When is there no consciousness? No consciousness, no time passage. ---------------------------------------------------------- One cannot remember what one never cognized. The gap between the cittas cannot be recollected because there is nothing to recollect. Only to infer and conceptualize it. --------------------------------------------------------- HCW: I agree with Abhidhamma and the commentaries on this: there are no gaps. ---------------------------------------------------------- With metta, Alex ==================================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124458 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed May 23, 2012 11:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy truth_aerator Hello Howard, all, > ---------------------------------------------------------- >HCW:Actually, Theravada does not consider there to be gaps between >cittas. > ------------------------------------------------------------ What about Bhavanga that occurs between two cittas? What happens when one enters in a coma or complete cessation of perception and feeling, etc. Then there would be a gap between two normal states of consciousness. >================================================ >HCW:Assuming separate and distinct mind-moments (to be observed) >arising and ceasing, the perceiving would have to be indirect, by >recollection. > >================================================ > >And how can one recall a moment where there was no awareness at all? > ------------------------------------------------------------ >HCW:By "awareness" her, I presume you mean consciousness. When is >there no consciousness? No consciousness, no time passage. >==================------------------------------------------ > If there are no gaps, then that aspect of my argument doesn't work. However, what still stands is this: Can there be unexperienced experience? No. If citta = experience of something, and trillions of such cittas happen in split second, yet are un-experienced, then how can we say that trillions of unexperienced cittas have happened? Aren't we falling into metaphysics when we propose trillions of cittas per second even though we may not experience them? How can citta occur which isn't experienced? Doesn't that contradict the whole definition of citta as knowing something? With metta, Alex #124459 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed May 23, 2012 1:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > >RE: I don't think anyone thinks the ordinary person can experience >single cittas [mind-moments] or count the number of cittas going by, >but we an imagine a person in a state of advanced insight or an >arahat who would be much more "up to speed" in terms of experiencing >actual momentary experiences as they happen. > >================== > > As I have been saying before, this is impossible and at best is an inference. Based on your opinion? Or your definition of cittas? I am not sure, based on this, whether you agree with any notion of Buddhist insight, even that which is indicated in the suttas. If you don't believe that direct experience of the kandhas is possible, what constitutes insight in your view, and what constitutes wisdom? What is the enlightened state, or do you think that is a myth as well? Do you think the path is essentially conceptual? What is it that is experienced or realized in meditation? I am asking these questions sincerely, because of your statement that direct experience of the moment is impossible and therefore is a conceptual inference. I don't think this is in line with Buddhism, but I am happy to be corrected if I am not interpreting your statement correctly. > If experience is not experienced, then is it really an experience? You are actually saying that all experience is unexperienced? Do you think that all we are capable of experiencing are concepts? My own definition of "experience" is that which is experienced at any given time, no matter what that experience consists of. Even if the object of that experience has already gone by, I am still experiencing something, and that does not have to be conceptual. It can be the trace, memory, residue, result, or delayed experience of the moment, and those are all valid non-conceptual experiences. We can also think about, or define, the experience that has passed, and that is what I define as conceptual. > Can it be counted as experience #1,2..etc? No. So talk about uncognized cittas is metaphysics, not experiential truth. I am not talking about uncognized cittas as being the current experience. But I have described in some detail how I think the directness of experience gradually grows with awareness and understanding. What is your view of what constitutes direct experience, and how does that develop in your view, if at all? I am not really all that sure whether you are just critiquing the idea of "single cittas" being experienced, or experience in general. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #124460 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed May 23, 2012 1:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello Howard, all, > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > >HCW:Actually, Theravada does not consider there to be gaps between >cittas. > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > What about Bhavanga that occurs between two cittas? Bhavanga is a special case, but why not leave that aside since it is not the norm? I am not sure how Bhavanga cittas work, and Howard doesn't believe they exist, if I remember correctly. > What happens when one enters in a coma or complete cessation of perception and feeling, etc. Then there would be a gap between two normal states of consciousness. There may be a gap between "normal" states of consciousness, but it is my view that there is still consciousness in a coma and in the higher states of consciousness, such as cessation of perception and feeling - just not the usual objects of consciousness. Even in the state of perception of nothingness, there is the consciousness of the perception of nothingness, so consciousness continues to be present in those states. I think it may be present in Bhavanga cittas as well, just without a delineated object. > >================================================ > >HCW:Assuming separate and distinct mind-moments (to be observed) >arising and ceasing, the perceiving would have to be indirect, by >recollection. > > >================================================ > > > >And how can one recall a moment where there was no awareness at all? > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > >HCW:By "awareness" here, I presume you mean consciousness. When is >there no consciousness? No consciousness, no time passage. > >==================------------------------------------------ > > > > If there are no gaps, then that aspect of my argument doesn't work. > > However, what still stands is this: > Can there be unexperienced experience? No. Who is saying there is unexperienced experience? There can still be events that are perceived incorrectly or indirectly. One is still always experiencing something, even if not the exact thing that is there. A blurry picture taken by a camera still takes a picture of its object - it's just less clear. > If citta = experience of something, and trillions of such cittas happen in split second, yet are un-experienced, then how can we say that trillions of unexperienced cittas have happened? They may not be consciously or directly experienced, but citta is still experiencing its object. We may not be consciously aware of it, but it still is cognized on some level. We have many perceptual and thought-events take place very moment that we are not clearly aware of, but they still take place, and some form of consciousness is registering them, even if we are not clearly aware of them. > Aren't we falling into metaphysics when we propose trillions of cittas per second even though we may not experience them? How can citta occur which isn't experienced? Doesn't that contradict the whole definition of citta as knowing something? Citta may not register consciously. Even in ordinary life we have trillions of experiences that are not consciously registered, yet they do have an effect on the mind. Sometime events are not registered or remembered, but still exist in consciousness and the memory-trace can be activated by a later event, even though we were not aware of experiencing them initially. This, I believe, has been verified by ordinary science. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #124461 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 23, 2012 5:32 pm Subject: Audio 2012 KK - metta, no one can have it! sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Today's extract is from recent discussions. There had been some talk about "metta meditation" and the idea of a special time or place to "pursue" metta meditation. **** Jessica: I did (pursue it). I was curious about it, so I have some findings. In Sujin's past talks I remember she talked about metta.... KS: Would you like to understand it or would you like to follow it or do it? Jes: Of course I'd like to understand it. KS: Because people just want to follow, to do, without any understanding at all. Thai people or anyone I think would like to have something, to gain something, instead of understanding whatever appears now. And this is not the right thinking because you see that, that which hasn't happened here and now - can it be understood? Jes: No. KS: Only this moment, whatever appears, is the only thing that there can be the development of understanding of its true nature. For example, seeing, usually there is no understanding of seeing at all, right? Shouldn't it be understood as it is, because it's now here? Jes: Yes. KS: And so like metta, people talk about it a lot, "developing metta", "having metta more and more", but actually what is metta? Is it a reality, is it mine or who's metta? Or it's like other realities which are conditioned to arise? No one can have it. The more there is understanding of reality, I think that it can condition more metta, because actually seeing is seeing, it's not mine, it's not his, it's not hers at all. Like metta or any reality, it's conditioned to arise and then pass away instantly, but the characteristic of metta is like friendliness -good? So instead of having dosa , instead of thinking of the others with ill-will, the moment of being friendly, to be friendly and help at any time, good wishes to everyone at any time, that is the understanding of metta, instead of trying to have it more without understanding at all. Even right now or on the street or anywhere, when there is the understanding about the very brief or short moment of life - should there be hate, hatred or ill will? By having understanding, the citta can see the best thing in one's life is to be friendly and that is metta to every one, not just the person you like Because you see that if you can do anything for the one you like, it's not metta, it's attachment. So how can there be the understanding of the difference between metta and attachment? Because people might think that parents love their childen so much, they have metta towards their children, but actually how can one say that, because can that person do what they can do to the others like they can do to their children? J: Most people can't. KS: So right understanding will purify all kusala better than just clinging to my kusala or "I can do this only for that person, not the others". It's unlimited, so it can be pure metta. ***** Metta Sarah ====== #124462 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 23, 2012 6:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy nilovg Dear Alex, Op 23-mei-2012, om 3:14 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > > What about Bhavanga that occurs between two cittas? > What happens when one enters in a coma or complete cessation of > perception and feeling, etc. Then there would be a gap between two > normal states of consciousness. > -------- > N: In between processes of cittas that experience objects through the six doors, there are bhavangacittas arising and falling away. Quote from Survey of Paramattha dhammas: < Kamma not only produces the rebirth-consciousness as result. When the rebirth-consciousness has fallen away, kamma also conditions the arising of the succeeding citta which is the same type of vipåkacitta and performs the function of bhavanga, life-continuum. As we have seen, this type of citta maintains the continuation in the life span of someone as a particular person until death. So long as the dying-consciousness has not arisen yet the bhavanga-cittas that arise and fall away perform the function of preserving the continuity in one’s life. They perform their function at the moments there is no seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, the experiencing of tangible object or thinking. Thus, the rebirth- consciousness, the bhavanga-citta and the dying- consciousness are cittas that do not arise in processes; they are not víthi-cittas. When we are fast asleep, we do not see or experience other sense objects, we do not think. The bhavanga-cittas arise and fall away in succession all the time, until we dream or wake up, and there is again seeing, hearing, the experience of other sense objects or thinking of different subjects of this world. This world does not appear to the rebirth-consciousness, the bhavanga-citta and the dying- consciousness. At the moment the vipåkacitta arises and performs the function of rebirth or the function of bhavanga, the different objects of this world, in our case the human world, do not appear. If we would be fast asleep at this moment, we would not know anything, we would not see anyone who is here. We would not experience sound, odour, cold or heat. The bhavanga-citta is not involved with anything in this world. It does not even know who we are, where we are, who are our relatives and friends. It does not know anything about possessions, rank, an honourable position, happiness or misery. Whereas when we are not asleep we remember the things of this world, the different people and the different stories connected with this world. When we see, there is no bhavanga-citta, but víthi-citta instead, which arises and sees what appears through the eyes. > --------- N: We cannot experience the objecty of bhavangacitta, it is the same object as experienced by the rebirth-consciousness. Bhavangacitta itself can be experienced, but this depends on the developed insight. Why not study what you can experience right now, like seeing or visible object? Then you can understand more the nature of citta. We do not have to think of trillions of citta, that is just thinking. It is best just to attend to what appears right now. ------- Nina. #124463 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 23, 2012 6:20 pm Subject: Our Vacation, 2. nilovg Dear friends, I read more transcripts of recordings to Lodewijk: ------ My own reflection: I find it very significant that we should not use the terms naaama and ruupa first before understanding what dhamma is, a conditioned reality that is beyond control. Knowing this will prevent us from just using the names of realities without any understanding. There should be attention to their characteristics when they appear instead of attention to their names. ------ Nina. #124464 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 23, 2012 6:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Hi Pt (& Rob E), ________________________________ > From: ptaus1 >pt: ....My dilemma is though what is "contemplation" especially when it comes to samatha bhavana? It's probably not focusing on the object (breath in our example), as the object does not make the citta kusala. .... S: (reviewing and elaborating on what I wrote before after some discussions): First of all, we must stress that the cittas must be kusala and arise with understanding, if it is the development of samatha (calm). When breath is the object, it is a concept of breath only, a pannatti or nimitta, not the paramattha dhamma. There can be wise reflection, sati sampajanna, on how life at this moment depends on breath. This helps us to have less attachment to other things or possessions. As I've mentioned, I find it useful to reflect on how life and all we hold dear depends on this very in and out-breath as you suggest below. Without breath there'd be no life at all. The moments of calm have to be understood, otherwise it doesn't make sense. Below you ask about highly developed samatha and absorption. The object, breath, is still a concept or rather a nimitta of the concept. The clear comprehension of kusala and akusala and the suppression of sense objects (through understanding the danger of attachment to them when it arises) has been developed to such a degree that the citta with calm and understanding is very refined indeed. No need for a 'story'. It's a different kind of understanding from that which knows realities. It is not the breath which brings wise reflection, attachment or aversion, but the kind of reflection and understanding. If one has an idea that if breath is the object, it will bring kusala, it's not correct at all, as you've been pointing out. If there are no conditions for calm and kusala with such an object in our ordinary day, without any trying or wishing to have it, there's no point in dreaming about higher levels of samatha. Breath itself (or what is taken for breath) can appear in daily life, such as during our exercise, and be the object of attachment or detachment. When it appears (i.e. what is taken for breath) and there is understanding, that understanding knows how to develop samatha with this object at that moment, just as when there is wise reflection of death or metta which is apparent, samatha can develop too. None of this has anything to do with focussing, as you say. Before the Buddha's time even, anapanasati as object of samatha was developed up to the 5th (arupa) jhana without any understanding of dhammas as anatta. There was no knowledge of the reality of the very subtle rupa - the insight into this very particular dhamma is known only by certain ariyan disciples of the Buddha. However, there was the knowledghe of how to develop samatha with the concept, the nimitta of breath as it appears. However, if there is no understanding of conditioned dhammas as anatta, without any selection or preference, what is the use of anapanasati as object of samatha? It doesn't lead out of samsara but perpetuates the cycle like all other conditioned dhammas do other than those which arise at moments of satipatthana and vipassana. So in summary, it's pointless to aim to have samatha, but it can develop in daily life, such as when being kind or helpful or reflecting wisely on death or breath, for example. At such times, one isn't disturbed by lobha or dosa at all and there is calm. Self-view is bound to be there if one just wants to have more kusala, such as calm or selection of breath as an object for development and there isn't any panna at such times. If one sits or lies down, wishing to reflect on breath or attempting to understand it, the attachment at such times can never understand detachment and other wholesome states. Of course, right understanding can know such moments of attachment too. When it comes to breath as object of satipatthana, the object is quite different. In this case it is the very subtle rupa, the special vayu dhatu (wind element) as conditioned by citta only, which appears at the nose-tip. There are many different groups of rupas, but other groups are conditioned by other causes (such as kamma or temperature). If we try to pinpoint such rupas and call them breath, there will be no understanding. Likewise, when we read texts such as the Visuddhimagga, we're bound to just our own ideas about breath without understanding the subtle rupas of breath which only appear to a few mahapurisas (ariyan disciples) about to become arahats such as Buddha, Ananda and other key disciples. For them almost all attachment has been eradicated and the understanding is unimaginably great, without any wish for results. I think we should stress that any nama or rupa can be the object of satipatthana and the development is one of understanding and detachment from whatever appears, this is all that matters. Any reality commonly taken for being breath can be the object of awareness in daily life if it appears, such as during one's exercise, such as yoga, running and panting or any other time. Heat, cold, hardness, softness, pressure (taken for breath ordinarily) may appear, just like any other tangible object. They all fall away instantly. The understanding and detachment accumulate whenever they arise with such rupas or any other realities as objects and without any selection at all. Again, let's stress, these are not the very subtle rupas only known by the mahapurisa here, but any rupas taken for breath. So, there can be awareness of breath now, or rather, those rupas commonly taken for breath. There can be moments of samatha without understanding of realities or moments of satipatthana. It just depends on conditions what appears and on what kind and level of understanding is there as to whether there is any samatha or satipatthana development. At moments of satipatthana, there is samatha already and the Buddha always ends the suttas by stressing the path which leads to the eradication of defilements. If we try to meditate, try to be calm or focus on the breath first, it just delays the development of the path. .... >Sarah and Jon said for example that when it comes to breath as object, then "kusala" contemplation of the samatha kind would be understanding that breath is the only thing that connects us to life, if I remember right. I feel that is fine for those momentary instances of samatha that happen in daily life, but say if we are talking about samatha bhavana in the case where one supposedly naturally sits under a tree for a while and all that, I'm not sure I understand how could that thing about life connection be contemplated for hours on end without thinking. But then if there's thinking, how can there be absorption. Etc. This shows you I don't really know much about samatha bhavana, so we're just discussing here. .... S: The way I see it is that If there's no understanding now of when the citta is really calm, really kusala as opposed to just feeling pleasant and relaxed, there's no way that calm and understanding can grow. Like metta or any other wholesome state, the test is always now! Metta Sarah ===== #124465 From: "sarah" Date: Wed May 23, 2012 7:11 pm Subject: Re: degree of kusala and akusala sarahprocter... Hi Pt & Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > A: Can this also apply to correct meditation practice to increase understanding? At first there are many minor akusala and few kusala cittas. Eventually the ratio will change with more and more kusala cittas arising until only kusala cittas arise. > >PT: Hard to tell. I used to think so, but not anymore. E.g. just the fact that after two hours in meditation for example I feel great, the mind is clear, there are no verbal thoughts, the attention sticks clearly and continuously to the breath, the body feels so light that it is almost nonexistent, the mind feels expanded etc, etc - all this is not an indicator that any kusala actually happened during those two hours. There's a passage that Scott and RobK like to post (from atthasalini I think) which gives a long list of descriptions what is right and what is wrong concentration - and the only difference between the two is simply that one has wrong concentration, the other right, everything else being the same (all that business about feeling great etc). .... S: The passages were from the Dhammasangani. Dan started quoting the very similar "right and wrong" descriptions with the following. (Same applies in Dhsg for concentration and other factors that can be kusala or akusala): ***** #13176 >-> Erik (on FM): Evam me suttam (Nava Sutta): "Even though this wish may occur to a monk who dwells without devoting himself to development -- 'O that my mind might be released from effluents through lack of clinging!' -- still his mind is not released from the effluents through lack of clinging. Why is that? From lack of developing, it should be said. Lack of developing what? The four frames of reference, the four right exertions, the four bases of power, the five faculties, the five strengths, the seven factors for Awakening, the noble eightfold path." ** Dan: These are certainly to be developed, with the utmost urgency and total effort. However, they must be developed in the context of the eightfold path, central to which is right view (4NT); otherwise, the development doesn't go in the right direction, doesn't lead to liberation. As an example, consider effort/energy/endeavour which is one of the components of each: the right exertions, the bases of power, the five faculties, the five strengths, the seven factors for Awakening, the noble eightfold path. We read from the Dhammasangani (376): Katamam tasmim samaye viriyindriyam hoti? "What at that time is the faculty of effort/energy/endeavor?" "That which is mental endeavor (viriyarhambo), riddance of lethargy, exerting harder and harder, endeavoring higher and higher, striving, painstaking zeal, utmost exertion, steadfastness, resoluteness, unfaltering endeavor, having sustained desire (chanda) to strive, not relinquishing the task, discharging the task well, effort (viriya) as the faculty of effort, power of effort, wrong effort -- this at that time is the faculty of endeavor." Wrong effort?! Everything sounded pretty good up to that point! This is a description of the viriya cetasika arising with lobha-mula- cittani. It is interesting to read how it differs from the viriya cetasika arising with the sense-sphere kusala cittas: [Dhs. 13] "What at that time is the faculty of effort/energy/endeavor? That which is mental endeavor (viriyarhambo), riddance of lethargy, exerting harder and harder, endeavoring higher and higher, striving, painstaking zeal, utmost exertion, steadfastness, resoluteness, unfaltering endeavor, having sustained desire (chanda) to strive, not relinquishing the task, discharging the task well, effort (viriya) as the faculty of effort, power of effort, right effort -- this at that time is the faculty of endeavor." The only difference is the word "right" in the second paragraph contrasting with the "wrong" of the first. It's fine and dandy to toss around lists of the five this's and the four that's, but it is critical to be able to discern clearly when they are "right" or "wrong" as they arise. This hinges on development of discernment and understanding. Is this done via ritual? I don't think so.< ***** Metta Sarah ====== #124466 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 23, 2012 9:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 5/22/2012 6:11:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello RobertE, Howard, Sarah, all, >RE:I don't think there are any gaps between mind-moments. >========================== How can we distinguish one citta from the other citta which is necessary to say that "now it arose, now it ceased" and "trillions of cittas rise and fall every split second". How can we put numbers for the amount of cittas that have supposedly ceased? ---------------------------------------------------------- HCW: WE do not have such observational, perceptual, and awareness skills at the level of fineness you refer to. But that doesn't mean that mind states do not differ. They differ in object-content and in concomitant qualities and operations. --------------------------------------------------------- What distinguishes cittas? Conceptualizing mind... --------------------------------------------------------- HCW: What distinguishes mind states is what I wrote above. What enables us to distinguish them, to the extent that we do, is clear observation, recollection, and comparison, i.e., keen attention, clear recollection and recognition (sa~n~na), and proper thinking. My personal perspective of non-separateness and lack of sharp delineation and own being does not imply homogeneity. Just as all of a river is "just river", still there are whirlpools in some places, straight flows in others, calm areas here, and rapids there - none separate and sharply delineated, yet differing in quality and distinguishable. --------------------------------------------------------- With metta, Alex ================================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124467 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 23, 2012 10:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 5/22/2012 9:14:22 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, all, > ---------------------------------------------------------- >HCW:Actually, Theravada does not consider there to be gaps between >cittas. > ---------------------------------------------------------- What about Bhavanga that occurs between two cittas? ------------------------------------------------------ HCW: That is also citta! (I don't see any need for such a form of consciousness, but assuming that it IS a fact, it still is consciousness and not a gap in consciouness.) ------------------------------------------------------ What happens when one enters in a coma or complete cessation of perception and feeling, etc. Then there would be a gap between two normal states of consciousness. ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: No. Within the mind stream there is no gap. The difference in mental content afterwards is what suggests a gap. ---------------------------------------------------- >================================================ >HCW:Assuming separate and distinct mind-moments (to be observed) >arising and ceasing, the perceiving would have to be indirect, by >recollection. > >================================================ > >And how can one recall a moment where there was no awareness at all? > ---------------------------------------------------------- >HCW:By "awareness" her, I presume you mean consciousness. When is >there no consciousness? No consciousness, no time passage. >==================------------------------------------------ > If there are no gaps, then that aspect of my argument doesn't work. However, what still stands is this: Can there be unexperienced experience? No. --------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: A process of fading consciousness can be detected, and the difference in content afterwards can be observed, but during the period that there is no consciousness (from an outsider's perspective) within the "stalled" mind stream there is neither consciousness nor experience nor passage of time. ------------------------------------------------------------- If citta = experience of something, and trillions of such cittas happen in split second, yet are un-experienced, then how can we say that trillions of unexperienced cittas have happened? ------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: What do you mean "unexperienced"? As objects? Of course "they" are unexperienced as objects because "they" are the experiencings!! (And whatever they experience, they experience.) But these moments of consciousness can be recalled. ------------------------------------------------------------- Aren't we falling into metaphysics when we propose trillions of cittas per second even though we may not experience them? -------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: I don't propose such particulate cittas. I propose continuous, gapless consciousness, that is ever-changing in terms of object-content and comcomitant quality and operations. And who cares about this counting business?!! -------------------------------------------------------------- How can citta occur which isn't experienced? -------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: What??? Why not? Consciousness has but a single object at a time. If I experience warmth, I do not simultaneously experience the experiencing of that warmth, for that would mean TWO objects. But immediately afterwards there could be an awareness of what just occurred. (And, Alex, your assumption that there can be no knowing which isn't itself known at the same time implies that there is no knowing at all! That is clearly false, is it not?) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Doesn't that contradict the whole definition of citta as knowing something? ---------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Simply put: No, it doesn't. ----------------------------------------------------------------- With metta, Alex =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124468 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed May 23, 2012 10:47 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat jonoabb Hi Rob E (124439) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > The point is only that a correct understanding must have a correct concept as its object, which is just quoting what you said, not disagreeing with it. I'm happy to distinguish the concept from the nama that understands; I'm not saying they're the same thing. > =============== J: Just to re-state what I've been saying, the so-called `correctness' of the thought (as conceptual object of citta) is a reflection of, or function of, the correct understanding. There are no correct or incorrect thoughts per se; a concept cannot have that (or any other) quality. > =============== > RE: My only point. The correctness of the conceptual understanding follows or accords with the nama that understands. Understanding is a dhamma, the thought is not - I agree with you on that point. > =============== J: I'm a little puzzled regarding "The correctness of the conceptual understanding follows or accords with the nama that understands". I would see `conceptual understanding' and `the nama that understands [at a conceptual level]' as being synonyms, whereas you are saying that one follows/accords with the other. > =============== > > J: But there could be a `correct' thought (e.g., `all dhammas are anattaa') without there being any understanding, or in fact with wrong view. > > RE: That is a worthwhile addition, which means that the statement cannot be inverted. Every correct understanding nama has a correct concept as its corollary; but not every correct concept has understanding accompanying it. > =============== J: First, regarding "not every correct concept has understanding accompanying it", cetasikas (including panna) accompany the citta with which they co-arise; they do not accompany the object of the citta. Secondly, given that a `correct' concept could be the object of a citta with wrong view, the whole notion of a `correct concept' seems to be misplaced. > =============== > > J: That is fine, but `understanding' is of course a dhamma :-)) > > RE: Yes, I agree with you -- understanding is a dhamma, and its concept is not a dhamma. I hope we're all lined up now. :-))) > =============== J: All lined up on this particular point :-)) Jon #124469 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu May 24, 2012 4:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >RE: Based on your opinion? Or your definition of cittas? I'll try to rephrase it. I believe that experience is the most pragmatically important. Dukkha is experiential and its solution is in experiential. Can there be citta as un-experienced experience or uncognized cognition? No. This is self refuting. If you cannot see trillions of cittas occurring per second, then that means that your experience is such that only few cittas arose per second. Your experience is such. What I critique is the idea of trillions of cittas occurring even though one is not aware of that. There can be trillions of mind-independent rupas occurring, sure. But not trillions of uncognized cognitions occurring. I hope this answers your questions. With metta, Alex #124470 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu May 24, 2012 4:32 am Subject: Re: unexperienced experience truth_aerator Hello RobertE, Howard, all, >Alex: What about Bhavanga that occurs between two cittas? > >RE: Bhavanga is a special case, but why not leave that aside since >it is not the norm? >============== According to Comy Abh it occurs after ever citta or so. So in that sense it is much more normal than falling into a coma. >RE: there is still consciousness in a coma and in the higher states If so, what is one "conscious of ..."? >RE: Citta may not register consciously. Then what is the point of calling it citta. As I understand it: unconscious consciousness, un-experienced experience, unpercieved perception, etc, all of this is oxymoron. If you don't feel trillions of different experiences happening per second, then you don't have trillions of experiences per second. You may have 2,3,4 or few more - but not trillions. With best wishes, Alex #124471 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu May 24, 2012 4:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy truth_aerator Dear Nina, Thank you for your reply. with metta, Alex #124472 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu May 24, 2012 4:46 am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy truth_aerator Hello Howard, all, >---------------------------------------------------------- >HCW: WE do not have such observational, perceptual, and awareness >skills at the level of fineness you refer to. But that doesn't mean >that mind states do not differ. They differ in object-content and in >concomitant qualities and operations. >==================================================== If we cannot distinguish two or more conscious states, then experientially it is experienced as one state. Of course after the fact we can conceive and analytically distinguish this... But this seems to be conceptualizing and analyzing rather than direct, not-analyzed-afterwards experience. With metta, Alex #124473 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 24, 2012 5:06 pm Subject: Our Vacation, 3. nilovg Dear friends, Lodewijk finds it difficult to understand impermanence. He said that we can see a church over there, at the other side of the river and next week, next year it is still there. The woman I am married to almost 60 years, is still there. N: It is important to understand the difference between realities and concepts. You look at the church over there, but in fact seeing only sees visible object and this falls away immediately. Because of associations of different experiences sa~n~naa remembers concepts like church or person. You cling to a whole of experiences instead of knowing realities one at a time. If you want to know the truth realities should be known one at a time as they appear through one of the six doorways, the senses and the mind-door. L: I believe that visible object can move. N: This is impossible. Visible object appears just for a moment and then it falls away. It could not move from one place to another. Quote from “Survey of Paramattha Dhammas”: ---------- Nina. #124474 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 24, 2012 6:44 pm Subject: 2007 audio - 9. Sila as foundation? sarahprocter... Dear Friends, The following is the interesting passage that I had in mind as being relevant to a discussion I was having with Rob E on the rules for the monks and so on. I think Rob had asked why "conventional" ways of behaviour were taught in the Vinaya. **** Han: What I was saying was that the sila as a foundation and the samadhi and panna are mutually supportive ....but the roots of the tree are especially beneficial..... KS: Yes, but what kind of sila will support samadhi and panna? Can just the 5 sila support the samadhi and panna without any understanding? Han: For the beginning, yes. 5 sila. To reach the higher level of sila, adhi sila, you need the import from samadhi and panna. <.....> KS: I think that before we can talk more about anything, what about the question 'what is it?' from the very beginning. Even the word sila - in reality, what is it? The rupas don't have any sila, right? So it has to be the nama, citta and cetasika only and in Tipitaka there are 3 kinds of sila, another way to explain: the akusala sila, the kusala sila and the abyakata sila*, all 3. Because actually, sila concerns the conduct of the kusala citta and akusala citta. For example if it's only very slight attachment or aversion, no manners of speech or deeds yet, who knows about that? So when it's very coarse sila, in the sense of the conduct of kusala citta and akusala citta, that's why there are kusala sila and akusala sila and abyakata sila. The Buddha taught in detail about everything - even the movement of the body, the hand or the foot, by akusala citta is akusala sila and when it's by kusala citta, it's kusala sila. Even the reaching of the hand or whatever happens - very very detailed about that. So when we talk about the [ordinary] akusala citta in daily life as akusala sila, it doesn harm or hurt anyone else at all. But in the old days, when the monk did something which was just not the way it should for the monkhood, the Buddha said this should this be done by monks in the right way, so there is Vinaya from that time on, to know what is the strong akusala that should not be done by monks. But for lay people it depends - 5 [precepts] is not easy at all to observe for lay people. But it doesnt mean lay people couldn't have more kusala sila. While one is reading about Vinaya and sees the advantages of right manners from kusala citta, that person can follow and these are the etiquette, or [kinds of] politeness that are known. So when one knows about the meaning of kusala sila, akusala sila and abyakata sila one can see why there are 227 rules for monks, because of the different akusala levels. So when we understand this, we know what sila is and when we know more about the development of understanding it has to be kusala citta. That's why the kusala citta is the foundation or the sila is the foundation, but it has to be with panna, otherwise it cannot condition higher, or adhi, sila, adhi citta and adhi panna. ***** *S: abyakata sila - that which is not kusala or akusala, i.e. that of the arahats only Metta Sarah ======= #124475 From: "sarah" Date: Thu May 24, 2012 7:00 pm Subject: Re: degree of kusala and akusala sarahprocter... Dear Alex (Pt & Loong*), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > Thank you for your post. It is interesting why intense meditators at intense retreats seem to get many nanas while here, with no practice perspective, some say about how long it takes... Is it coincidence or not? ... S: "Intense meditators at intense retreats" seem to "get" many amazing experiences including "many nanas". How do you know this is so? Because they believe so? From my earlier post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/46520 SN3:11 Seven Jatilas, on wisdom (pa~n~naa or ~Naa.na) "It is by discussion with someone, great king, that his wisdom is to be known, and that after a long time, not after a short time; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is wise, not by a dullard." ***** Another sutta, AN 4s, 192, [PTS `Conditions',(Thaanaani Sutta)], adds more detail after giving exactly the same summary as above with the same emphasis on `after a long time'. "In this case, monks, a person by conversing with another knows thus of him: Judging by this worthy's approach to a question, judging by his intention, judging by his conversation, he is weak in wisdom, he is not wise. What is the cause of that? In the case in question this worthy utters no profound profitable sentence (attha-padda"n) that calms, is sublime, is beyond the sphere of mere reasoning (atakkaavacara"n), that is subtle and intelligible to the wise. As to Dhamma that this worthy talks, he is not competent, either in brief or in detail, to explain its meaning, to show it forth, expound it, lay it down, open it up, analyse and make it plain. This worthy is weak in wisdom, he is not wise..... "Herein again, monks, a person by conversing with another knows thus of him: Judging by this worthy's approach to a question, judging by his intention, judging by his conversation, he is a wise man, he is not weak in wisdom (pa~n~navaa). What is the cause of that? "In the case in question this worthy can utter a profound, profitable sentence, that calms, that is sublime, is beyond the sphere of mere reasoning, that is subtle and intelligible to the wise. As to Dhamma that this worthy talks, he is competent, both in brief and in detail, to explain its meaning, to show it forth, expound it, lay it down, open it up, analyse and make it plain. This worthy is a wise man, he is not weak in wisdom. "Just as if, monks, a man with good eyesight, standing on the bank of a pool of water, were to see a big fish rising, he would think: Judging by the uprise of this fish, judging by the size of the ripple it makes, judging by its speed, this is a big fish; this is not a small fish: - just in the same way, monks, a person, by conversing with another, knows thus of him: judging by this worthy's approach to a question, judging by his intention, judging by his conversation, he is a wise man, he is not weak in wisdom." ***** Metta Sarah * Loong, you may find it helpful to print out the simple Pali glossary to be found in the file section of DSG to have handy. Ask for any clarifications anytime. ===== #124476 From: "sarah" Date: Thu May 24, 2012 7:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' sarahprocter... Dear Chris, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > Ven. Pa~n~nobhaasa Bhikkhu wrote: > Quote: [The standard Burmese explanation of the conspicuous absence of Abhidhamma in the oldest ecclesiastical histories is that it is included in the Khuddaka Nikaaya of the Suttanta Pi.taka, but this assertion receives no support from the ancient texts themselves. .... S: I think all the support is very clearly stated in the ancient commentaries, accepted and recited by the "ancient" Theras at many Councils. The following is from a post I wrote to another bhikkhu. Lots more details in Useful Posts in the files under "Abhidhamma - origins". As Nina said, without a deep understanding of Abhidhamma as the dhammas appearing now in daily life, there will always be these kinds of doubts. >S: The following is from the Baahiranidaana (Buddhaghosa's intro to Comy to Vinaya). It is from the section on The First Council, (Jayawickrama's transl). I’ve added a little of the Pali for this section at the end of the post. >S: Extracts from section 16 (p.14) onwards: "The word of the Buddha which should be known as uniform in sentiment, two fold as the Dhamma and the Vinaya, threefold according to the first, intermediate, and last words, and similarly as Pitakas (Baskets), fivefold according to the Nikayas (Collections), ninefold according to the Angas (Factors), and forming 84,000 divisions according to the Units of the Dhamma." ...... "How is it twofold as the dhamma and the vinaya? All this, in its entirety, is reckoned as the Dhamma and the Vinaya. Herein the Basket of the Discipline is the Vinaya, the rest of the word of the Buddha is the Dhamma. Hence was it stated: 'Let us, friends, rehearse the Dhamma and the Vinaya,' and 'I shall question Upali on the Vinaya and Ananda on the dhamma.' Thus it is twofold as the Dhamma and the Vinaya." ..... >A little later we read
With regard to the term, Abhidhamma, it says: "Since here are found conditions which possess growth and their own characteristics, are revered and differentiated and said to be excellent- on account of these it is called Abhidhamma." ..... >A little later, there is a description of the 3 Pitakas, Vinaya, suttanta and Abhidhamma: "Here follows the explanation and elucidation. These three Pitakas, indeed, according to formal analyses are said to be the authoritative injunctions, the popular teachings, and the ultimate truth respectively; or they are the discourses necessitated by transgressions, those adapted to circumstances, and those set out in accordance with reality respectively; or again, discourses on the various categories of restraint, on the refutation of heresies, and on the distinction between Name and Form [S:i.e. nama and rupa], respectively. Herein, the Vinayapitaka is called the exposition of injunctions as it has been preached with a preponderance of authority by the Exalted One in whom all authority is vested; the suttapitaka, the exposition of popular teachings as it has been preached with great emphasis on popular ethics by the Exalted One who was proficient in popular ethics; and the Abhidhammapitaka, the exposition of ultimate truth as it has been preached with great leanings on absolute truth by the Exalted One who is adept in the absolute truths. "Likewise, the first is called the teaching necessitated by transgressions wherein those beings who are given to many misdeeds are admonished in accordance with the nature of their offences; the second, that adapted to circumstances wherein beings who are given to divers dispositions, latent tendencies, and traits of character are admonished in accordance with their adaptability; and the third, that set out in accordance with reality wherein beings who conceive of an ego and what pertains to it, only in the presence of a pile of conditions, are instructed in terms of the absolute truth......." ******************** >Pali ***** 20 <18> Katham pi.takavasena tividha.m. Sabbam pi eta.m Vinayapi.taka.m Suttantapi.taka.m Abhidhammapi.takan ti tippabhedam eva hoti. Tattha pa.thamsangiitiya.m sangiita~n ca asangiita~n ca sabbam pi samodhaanetvaa, ubhayaani Paatimokkhaani, dve Vibhangaani, dvaaviisati Khandhakaani, so.lassa Parivaarati ida.m Vinayapi.taka.m naama. Brahmajaaladicatutti.msasuttasaâ€ngaho Diighanikaayo,............... Pa.tisambhidaa.............Khuddakanikaayo ti, ida.m suttantapi.taka.m naama. < ***** Metta Sarah ======= #124477 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 24, 2012 11:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' nilovg Dear Sarah, I think it is useful if you send it to the web: They placed my post and it will be good if they also place yours. Nina. Op 24-mei-2012, om 11:30 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > > > > Ven. Pa~n~nobhaasa Bhikkhu wrote: > > Quote: [The standard Burmese explanation of the conspicuous > absence of Abhidhamma in the oldest ecclesiastical histories is > that it is included in the Khuddaka Nikaaya of the Suttanta > Pi.taka, but this assertion receives no support from the ancient > texts themselves. > ----------- #124478 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 2:53 am Subject: Pali glossary to be found in the file section of DSG moellerdieter Dear Sarah, I did not recognize DSG Pali glossary and just copied it for easier agreement on the definition of terms . Perhaps there is as well the opportunity to discuss differences of interpretations if any .. e.g.. the entree ' lobha' - attachment or greed may I suggest : ' greed ' only , or to add ' as a condition for attachment'? with Metta Dieter #124479 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 4:49 am Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: The way I see it is that If there's no understanding now of when the citta is really calm, really kusala as opposed to just feeling pleasant and relaxed, there's no way that calm and understanding can grow. Does one have to directly experience the citta that is calm to have any understanding that will lead to samatha bhavana? Or can one have insight in relation to the citta that is calm and the breath on the concept or nimitta level and still have development? As a corollary question, can you remind me in what instances panna can arise with concept, and how that is different than panna that discerns individual dhammas? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #124480 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 4:59 am Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Jon. Isn't this fun? :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: Rob E.: > > The point is only that a correct understanding must have a correct concept as its object, which is just quoting what you said... > > =============== > > J: Just to re-state what I've been saying, the so-called `correctness' of the thought (as conceptual object of citta) is a reflection of, or function of, the correct understanding. ... That is fine with me. Another way of saying that [I hope you will agree] is that correct understanding expresses itself in part through a concept which accords with its understanding. > > =============== > > RE: My only point. The correctness of the conceptual understanding follows or accords with the nama that understands. Understanding is a dhamma, the thought is not - I agree with you on that point. > > =============== > > J: I'm a little puzzled regarding "The correctness of the conceptual understanding follows or accords with the nama that understands". I would see `conceptual understanding' and `the nama that understands [at a conceptual level]' as being synonyms, whereas you are saying that one follows/accords with the other. Just semantics, I think. I'm just saying this: correct understanding ---> concept that expresses that understanding > > =============== > > > J: But there could be a `correct' thought (e.g., `all dhammas are anattaa') without there being any understanding, or in fact with wrong view. > > > > RE: That is a worthwhile addition, which means that the statement cannot be inverted. Every correct understanding nama has a correct concept as its corollary; but not every correct concept has understanding accompanying it. > > =============== > > J: First, regarding "not every correct concept has understanding accompanying it", cetasikas (including panna) accompany the citta with which they co-arise; they do not accompany the object of the citta. > > Secondly, given that a `correct' concept could be the object of a citta with wrong view, the whole notion of a `correct concept' seems to be misplaced. Well now that I look at it, how could there be a correct statement accompanied by wrong view? If that were the case, the concept would not be understood, so it would not reflect the person's understanding. I think we can stipulate that if someone mouths some words of which they have no or wrong understanding, they are not actually saying what that concept means, just making sounds, or reading words, but with no relation to conceptual understanding. So I would say in that case that there is no "right concept" there, since the concept that is correct is not understood or expressed. I could recite from a Spanish novel, or a Pali scripture for that matter, without the slightest idea of what I am saying, since I don't speak the language. That's not a concept, just an empty reading. > > =============== > > > J: That is fine, but `understanding' is of course a dhamma :-)) > > > > RE: Yes, I agree with you -- understanding is a dhamma, and its concept is not a dhamma. I hope we're all lined up now. :-))) > > =============== > > J: All lined up on this particular point :-)) The journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step! :-) Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #124481 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 5:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > What I critique is the idea of trillions of cittas occurring even though one is not aware of that. There can be trillions of mind-independent rupas occurring, sure. But not trillions of uncognized cognitions occurring. > > > I hope this answers your questions. Well it answers this one question at least, and I agree that experience is what we have to work with, not theory. But theory can also inform a direction for investigation, that is its purpose I think. We don't necessarily know everything right now, so Dhamma hopefully tells us where to look to learn more and to see more clearly. The question regarding cittas is open for me -- is it possible to have many many mental events take place of which we are not conscious? Absolutely yes. Even science acknowledges that there are constant acts of mental activity that we cannot "consciously" register. Those acts of mental activity do have awareness involved on other levels - cells are aware of something trying to go through their membrane and they will take account of this sensory input and react to it. We won't be at all aware on the level of conscious mind that this is taking place. But it is still an action that involves consciousness. If you are only including that which we are consciously aware of, then I think you are talking about a specialized aspect of consciousness, not consciousness as a whole. Just a moment ago I was vaguely aware that the sun was shining in the window, but a moment later I became fully conscious of it so that I could focus on it. Both the former peripheral awareness and the latter direct awareness were acts of consciousness. We have many many little acts of cognition that we immediately forget or don't pay attention to so as to register in any way. Those are all still acts of consciousness. I think the unacknowledged cittas are like that. We experience them, but not altogether consciously. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #124482 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 5:19 am Subject: Re: unexperienced experience epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, Howard, all, > > >Alex: What about Bhavanga that occurs between two cittas? > > > >RE: Bhavanga is a special case, but why not leave that aside since >it is not the norm? > >============== > > According to Comy Abh it occurs after ever citta or so. So in that sense it is much more normal than falling into a coma. That was not my understanding. Do you have a quote that I can read by any chance? I'd like to see what they say about Bhavanga Cittas. > >RE: there is still consciousness in a coma and in the higher states > > If so, what is one "conscious of ..."? > > >RE: Citta may not register consciously. > > Then what is the point of calling it citta. I think I went into some more detail on this, which you have snipped - in which case it is difficult to discuss. I'd rather not give all my examples again, and then have you snip them again! :-) > As I understand it: > unconscious consciousness, un-experienced experience, unpercieved perception, etc, all of this is oxymoron. Not what I was talking about. We have different kinds of experiences with different objects. Consciousness can have very subtle objects, even an experience of stillness and nothingness and still be conscious of that very subtle experience. I am not talking about a dead consciousness perceiving absolute nullity. You're right, that would be contradictory. But there is experience in a coma, if the person is not dead. Sometimes more experience, sometimes less. Mental events register on the eeg unless the person is brain-dead. > If you don't feel trillions of different experiences happening per second, then you don't have trillions of experiences per second. You may have 2,3,4 or few more - but not trillions. There are trillions of experiences happening even according to science, if you count all the experiences taking place in the nervous system. If you touch a hot stove, the thalamus will become conscious of this and retract the hand before your conscious mind [neo-cortex] becomes aware of it. So there are many different levels, types and speeds of awareness that qualify as consciousness, not just the part we think of us "me" and "my consciousness." I think we need to take stock of the many acts of consciousness that some aspect of the mind or nervous system is aware of - truly conscious - but "we" are not conscious of or don't register consciously. Cells have awareness, organs have awareness, functional parts of the mind and nervous system have billions of acts of awareness that we do not register consciously with the neocortex. So that is suggestive of what it means to have many acts of consciousness [mind-moments] that "we" don't acknowledge or are not directly aware of. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #124483 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 5:22 am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy epsteinrob Hi Alex, and Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello Howard, all, > > >---------------------------------------------------------- > >HCW: WE do not have such observational, perceptual, and awareness >skills at the level of fineness you refer to. But that doesn't mean >that mind states do not differ. They differ in object-content and in >concomitant qualities and operations. > >==================================================== > > If we cannot distinguish two or more conscious states, then experientially it is experienced as one state. > > Of course after the fact we can conceive and analytically distinguish this... But this seems to be conceptualizing and analyzing rather than direct, not-analyzed-afterwards experience. It may very well be the opposite, which is suggested by brain science - we experience a large number of rapid-fire perceptions, thoughts, memories and other mental events, and we consciously conglomerate them into simplified forms to make sense of them. The original events are equally if not more valid than the dumbed-down version that we settle on in order to think clearly, and that we "think" is happening, when it is not. That is the nature of delusion. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #124484 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 6:33 am Subject: Re: 2007 audio - 9. Sila as foundation? epsteinrob Hi Sarah, and all. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > The following is the interesting passage that I had in mind as being relevant to a discussion I was having with Rob E on the rules for the monks and so on. I think Rob had asked why "conventional" ways of behaviour were taught in the Vinaya. ... > KS: I think that before we can talk more about anything, what about the question 'what is it?' from the very beginning. Even the word sila - in reality, what is it? The rupas don't have any sila, right? So it has to be the nama, citta and cetasika only and in Tipitaka there are 3 kinds of sila, another way to explain: the akusala sila, the kusala sila and the abyakata sila*, all 3. Thanks for this worthwhile discussion of the roots of sila in kusala citta, and very good way to look at the Vinaya. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #124485 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 8:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy truth_aerator Hello RobertE, >RE: The question regarding cittas is open for me -- is it possible >to have many many mental events take place of which we are not >conscious? >============== What I understand "mental event" to mean is conscious of something. To me, it makes no sense to speak of consciousness which we are not conscious of. It is just plain contradictory. >RE: Even science acknowledges that there are constant acts of mental >activity that we cannot "consciously" register. >================================== Consciousness (as subjective "how it feels like") is very "hard" problem for science which is designed to keep as much subjectivity out of observation as possible. There are some scientists who claim that consciousness doesn't exist. Yes, I am aware of the idea that trillions of neuron firings per second occurs. But "neuron firing" is not consciousness. It is physical event, and perhaps highly abstract one at that. Maybe for one state of consciousness there needs to be trillions of neurons firing. Again, what is YOUR experience? How many distinct mental states do you experience in a second? I believe that that is the answer which can be different for all of us and varies with different circumstances. With best wishes, Alex #124486 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 8:34 am Subject: bhavanga citta seems to occur very often truth_aerator Hello RobertE, >RE: That was not my understanding. Do you have a quote that I can >read by any chance? I'd like to see what they say about Bhavanga >Cittas. >===================================== Here is what Nina has said: "Also when we are awake there are countless bhavanga-cittas arising; they arise in between the different processes of citta. " http://www.vipassana.info/nina-abhi-12.htm Alex: Seems to be a very common experience. Not just when one falls into a total coma, or enters cessation of perception & feelings. =============================================== "As soon as rebirth-consciousness (in the embryo at the time of conception) has ceased, there arises a similar subconsciousness with exactly the same object, following immediately upon rebirth-consciousness and being the result of this or that karma (volitional action done in a former birth and remembered there at the moment before death). And again a further similar state of subconsciousness arises. Now, as long as no other consciousness arises to interrupt the continuity of the life-stream, so long the life-stream, like the flow of a river, rises in the same way again and again, even during dreamless sleep and at other times. In this way one has to understand the continuous arising of those states of consciousness in the life-stream" http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/b_f/bhavanga_sota.htm With best wishes, Alex #124487 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 8:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' truth_aerator Dear Sarah, >S:I think all the support is very clearly stated in the ancient >commentaries, accepted and recited by the "ancient" Theras at many >Councils. >============= There have been about 20 different schools of Buddhism in early time. Theravada was only one of them. Not every school accepted Abhidhamma and some schools had their own vastly different Abhidhamma. While early schools had similar suttas, they had very big disagreements on Abhidhamma. There have been many ancient commentators that did not accept Theravada Abhidhamma. With metta, Alex #124488 From: Vince Date: Fri May 25, 2012 11:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Audio 2012 KK - metta, no one can have it! cerovzt@... Send Email Send Email Sarah wrote: > KS: So right understanding will purify all kusala better than just clinging to my > kusala or "I can do this only for that person, not the others". It's unlimited, so it > can be pure metta. very inspiring words. Thanks for uploading this :) best, Vince. #124489 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 1:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, > > > >RE: The question regarding cittas is open for me -- is it possible >to have many many mental events take place of which we are not >conscious? > >============== > > What I understand "mental event" to mean is conscious of something. > To me, it makes no sense to speak of consciousness which we are not conscious of. It is just plain contradictory. I don't think you're addressing the more specific distinctions I'm trying to make, or maybe you just disagree, but since you keep reducing my various nuances to some form of unconscious consciousness, which is not what I'm talking about at all, I'd say we're not communicating very well for one reason or another. The fact remains that we do have experiences which we either don't acknowledge or quickly forget, or quickly translate into a conceptual form, and that does *not* mean that those things are not experienced, but we do not retain awareness that all these little events have taken place. And that's a fact. > >RE: Even science acknowledges that there are constant acts of mental >activity that we cannot "consciously" register. > >================================== > > Consciousness (as subjective "how it feels like") is very "hard" problem for science which is designed to keep as much subjectivity out of observation as possible. There are some scientists who claim that consciousness doesn't exist. I'm talking about mind-moments, moments of experience that are registered by the mind on one level or another. I don't consider that strictly subjective or objective, but they are objective in the sense that they do take place, and they are subjective in the sense that they have an experiential element that is specific to that experience. I can be conscious of these events in different ways. You seem to be continuing to identify "consciousness" with the normal waking-state sense of self, but that is not the only way in which we consciously experience things. It's just what you can wrap your sense of self around, I would say, ie, personal and something that you can grasp and retain. > Yes, I am aware of the idea that trillions of neuron firings per second occurs. But "neuron firing" is not consciousness. It is physical event, and perhaps highly abstract one at that. I would not characterize neurons firing as abstract in any way. It corresponds to a mental event. Neurons don't fire just for the fun of it. > Maybe for one state of consciousness there needs to be trillions of neurons firing. Then you are defining the state of consciousness in a way that suits your own definition, but a discrete mental event is a mental event. > Again, what is YOUR experience? How many distinct mental states do you experience in a second? I believe that that is the answer which can be different for all of us and varies with different circumstances. I don't think you or I have full access to scoping out what we have or haven't experienced at a given moment. The mental faculties have to be a lot sharper to pick up, register and retain the understanding of all the mental events that take place, many of which are quickly reinterpreted or forgotten. So a discipline that is based on development of the faculties and understanding cannot be based on what we experience as deluded, distracted beings. It has to be based on what happens when we develop mindfulness and greater understanding, which allows a different kind of focus and knowledge of what we experience. As I asked you before, if that is not the case, what is the purpose of the path? Is it just superfluous, does it improve the mental faculties, or is it just an intellectual exercise? And what is the end point, the same sloppy attention and thinking that we have when we start out? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #124490 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 2:05 pm Subject: Re: bhavanga citta seems to occur very often epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, > > >RE: That was not my understanding. Do you have a quote that I can >read by any chance? I'd like to see what they say about Bhavanga >Cittas. > >===================================== > > > Here is what Nina has said: > "Also when we are awake there are countless bhavanga-cittas arising; they arise in between the different processes of citta. " > http://www.vipassana.info/nina-abhi-12.htm > > Alex: Seems to be a very common experience. Not just when one falls into a total coma, or enters cessation of perception & feelings. Okay, thanks for citing that. Well, I can imagine that there is a sense of consciousness with a subtle object or image that is left as an impression when there is no new experience arising. Doesn't seem too far a stretch to me to say that consciousness is continuously active while one is alive. Do you think it just turns off completely and goes dead in deep sleep or in a coma, even when the eeg is showing a brainwave pattern? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #124491 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 2:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > There have been about 20 different schools of Buddhism in early time. Theravada was only one of them. Not every school accepted Abhidhamma and some schools had their own vastly different Abhidhamma. While early schools had similar suttas, they had very big disagreements on Abhidhamma. There have been many ancient commentators that did not accept Theravada Abhidhamma. I am interested in this subject. Do you have any citations from ancient commentaries that speak against the Abhidhamma or do not accept it as part of the tipitaka? I would like to see that. You said there are many - any commentators in particular that you can mention, that I can look up? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #124492 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 3:20 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhs ptaus1 Hi RobE, > > *RobE, please note this issue in our discussion - I was wrong to point out that with dhamma as object, cittas of the mind-door process must necessarily be kusala, and thus, can be akusala as well. > > Yes, this is interesting to me as well - I have asked Sarah about it, as I am confused as to this combination of seeing dhammas directly and yet still having akusala attachment. I guess that makes sense as some attachment only goes away very late on the path, but I am interested in how those stages take place. < I think what is being said is that a dhamma can be an object of an akusala citta with moha. In that case, it probably can't be said that there is "seeing dhamma directly". There's just ignorance, attachment, etc, at the time, so nothing to do with kusala, insight, panna, etc, that would imply "seeing directly". Like you, I'm still not quite sure how can a dhamma be an object of a citta and yet there would be no awareness of its general or particular characteristics at the time. Perhaps the fact that it is an akusala citta with moha means that there is in fact ignorance at the time of the characteristics of a dhamma (general and particular), so no "seeing directly". I presume that "seeing" a dhamma directly would in essence equate to being aware of its general and particular characteristics (so an instance of kusala citta with panna). Anyway, I thought that a dhamma can be only an object of a kusala citta, but it is said that a dhamma can be an object of an akusala citta as well, and it also seems very commonplace as well. Best wishes pt #124493 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri May 25, 2012 5:56 pm Subject: 2007 audio - 10. What kind of citta? sarahprocter... Dear Friends, ***** Ven P: ....[My teacher] said an enlightened person just gives. If you just do it, then the self doesn't come into it at all. The point is that for unenlightened people, when we give to people on the street, there's often a lot of 'should I give this?', 'is this person going to go out to buy drink with the money?', but my understanding is that an enlightened person just gives and lets it go and then moves on. It seems to me that the most wholesome things that I do are the things I don't think about, things that become automatic, the things you do automatically, that's why they're wholesome, because there is no thinking involved - 'should I do this?'. You do something that's wholesome. KS: I'd like to know whether there is panna or not, just the matter of panna, not just the story. Ven P: in a case where you act very quickly because, say, someone is in danger or something like that, isn't that wisdom already? <...> KS: I think that kusala sila, akusala sila and abyakatha sila are daily life. It doesn't mean that the one who has panna doesn't eat, doesn't walk, doesn't help, but with what kind of citta? Ordinary people do not know anything about kusala with panna. So they just have kusala sila without panna. But for the one who understands reality, [they] can do anything with right understanding. It doesn't mean that person will not help anyone at all, but citta at the moment of helping can be different levels of kusala. The eating manner or the sitting is the same, but panna can be there depending on the individual's accumulation. While the Buddha was eating and his disciple was eating and while the putthujana was eating, different cittas, but the manners are the same - eating. ***** Metta Sarah ====== #124494 From: "sarah" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 6:12 pm Subject: Re: A letter about my dear friend... sarahprocter... Hi Phil, As you know, I'm always behind with my replies. As I said (before I'd read it!!), I'm glad you went to the trouble to revise the first letter to Ned's family and friends, leaving out the "harsh language" and irritation and giving a "warm, well-toned" letter. Anumodana! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > I think this part is especially good: "We can assign the role of sufferer to people, but we don't know, so it isn't fair. Happy people don't commit suicide, right? Wrong. Because there are no "happy people", there are only moments of happiness, or fear, or guilt, or generosity, or compassion or whatever that come and go. So let's not latch on to the idea of "Ned the sufferer." It is not fair." ... S: This was the part I liked most as well. We're so used to putting people in compartments, instead of understanding the changing dhammas. You did a good job putting it all into language anyone could understand and relate to. Let us know (in your 11th "reincarnation here") if you write anymore. It's not easy being on the other side of the world when dear ones pass away, even though we know (in theory), the problems just lie in the thinking.... Metta Sarah ====== #124495 From: "sarah" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 6:18 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: what "dhamma" includes sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > >H:While time is proceeding in other mind > >streams, it does not proceed "there". It is not that time marches on > during a > >consciousness gap, but in fact there is no gap at all and no time > passage at > >all. (After the fact, upon awakening, the state of consciousness is > >radically different from the moment before, and the inference drawn is > "Oh, I was > >out!". > .... > S: Actually, a better question would be, how is this state different from > nirodha samapatti said to only be possible to be experienced by anagamis > and arahats who had attained jhanas just prior to enlightenment? For them > there is said to be a cessation of consciousness for the specified time. > =============================== >H: How would we know, Sarah? I don't. What is your knowledge of either of > these? ... S: A lot of things we don't know in life. Unless there is awareness of bhavanga cittas, for example, we can only read and consider whether it makes sense that there are cittas at each instant of life, including when we are in deep sleep without any 'gaps'. I think that we can have confidence that those a lot, lot wiser than us, i.e. the Buddha and ancient Theras, knew what they were talking about. I appreciate that you have other theories and look to other Teachings which give different explanations. Metta Sarah ===== #124496 From: "sarah" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 6:42 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: mindfulness and its object in time sarahprocter... Dear Alan, I'd like to (belatedly) continue our discussion, even though Alex & Nina have already given their comments. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "alanpmcallister" wrote: > >If I remember correctly, you are a psychologist in Ontario. > > Yes, that's me, although I am fading into retirement at present. .... S: Hope it's a happy and wise retirement..... more time for the Dhamma, perhaps? It's always an adjustment, but then there's an "adjustment" at each moment, isn't there? ... >.... I get that (I think), but what I am really trying to do right now is nail the temporal aspect of the relationship of awareness (mindfulness) to its object. Saying something can be the object of awareness "now" does not resolve things because it leaves open (for me) whether the awareness and its object are concurrent or not. .... S: Except in the case of a sense object, such as visible object or sound, being experienced by wholesome cittas with awareness in the sense-door process, i.e. the eye-door or ear-door process, the dhamma or reality has always fallen away when its characteristic *appears* or is experienced by awareness (of satipatthana). For example, suppose there is thinking with metta about someone. At that moment of thinking with metta, there must be awareness (sati), because sati arises with all wholesome cittas. However, the object at this time is the other person. Immediately afterwards, however, that characteristic or quality of metta may be the object of right understanding and awareness. The metta itself has fallen away, but it is considered as "present object" as its nature is known at this moment. ... > Presumably unwholesome states would have to have passed away to be objects of awareness? .... S: There cannot be any kind/level of awareness at the same time as unwholesome states, but, as explained above, any kind of wholesome or unwholesome state must have fallen away in order to be the object of satipatthana. ... >And, if so, would the awareness be adjacent to (in the next mind moment) its object or could the awareness arise several mind moments later? ..... S: The wholesome/unwholesome mind door process is followed by several bhavanga (life-continuum) cittas and, in this case, the reality, such as the metta or the dosa is then the object of the next mind door process/processes. .... >And is it correct that awareness accompanies (is concurrent with) all wholesome states? .... S: See above. Yes, but there are different kinds/levels of awareness. It is one of the 19 sobhana (beautiful) cetasikas that arise with all sobhana cittas - kusala, kusala vipaka and kiriya (of the arahat) cittas. So, talking of the bhavanga cittas above, in the human realm where birth is a result of kusala kamma in the past, all these bhavanga cittas are accompanied by sati too. I mention this not to confuse, but just to indicate that you've touched on some intricate and complex areas. What is important now is to know that there can be awareness of any reality appearing. It doesn't matter at all if, strictly speaking, that reality has just fallen away. It is still *present* awareness of a *present* object. Cittas arise and pass away incredibly fast. I'll be glad to hear how you find these replies and what further questions/comments you have. [There is also a section on this intricate topic in "useful posts" in DSG files under "Navattabba (Not so Classifiable) objects", but you may get more confused!] Metta Sarah ===== #124497 From: "sarah" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 7:21 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > S: .....Jhana literally means 'burning'. Here it is the defilements which are 'burnt', eradicated. In the case of mundane jhana, it is sensuous clinging which is temporarily 'burnt'. ... > Okay - just wondering - is there any relation between this "burning off" of defilements and the other popular attributes of jhana, ie, concentration and peacefulness? It would make sense that the burning away of a defilement could be related to pacifying it, but I am interested if there is anything there, or if it is just the eradication of the defilements that defines the 'jhana' in this case? .... S: The meaning of jhana is "burning", not concentration. In the case of samatha bhavana which leads to mundane jhana, it is the development of calm with understanding of the object that leads to the "burning" of the sense objects, through the understanding of the danger of attachment to them. The right concentration (of samatha bhavana) develops to the degree of absorption at moments of jhana. In the case of the lokuttara cittas, when there is the burning or eradication of the defilements (for good), the cittas are calm, 'adhi', higher calm has been developed with the right understanding. The anagami has perfected the adhi calm, there is the total eradication of attachment to sense objects. Right concentration is also a path factor which has developed with right understanding. The samadhi and vitakka/sankappa 'focus on' and 'touch' the lokuttara object, nibbana, with appana, absorption. ... > > S: Hope it's clear above. Now our cittas all bend towards conditioned dhammas, so we cannot understand the unconditioned dhamma and its influence. > > That is also very interesting. That way of describing the pull of attachment - 'bending towards conditioned dhammas' is very intriguing. Though we say that the object is not the cause of the attachment, but rather the state of the citta + cetasikas, it seems like the object has a kind of magnetism to it, maybe leant to it by the mental condition of the citta, but still giving the object this pull. So I wonder if certain kinds of conditioned dhammas have greater magnetism for akusala citta than others? Or are they all similar? .... S: Yes, very desirable objects condition attachment in this way or highly esteemed objects or nibbana condition right understanding and enlightenment in this way. For example, we read in the texts about how sense objects experienced are said to be undesirable (any.t.tha), moderately desirable (i.t.tha) and extremely desirable (ati-i.t.tha). of course, this is a very complex topic. Even if the object experienced is extremely desirable, it'll depend on the accumulates as to what kind of cittas arise. An arahat won't experience attachment and as discussed in the recent audio transcripts I've given, the sight of the Buddha may be a condition for dosa in some. ... >Obviously some cittas would be more attracted to particular kinds of akusala dhammas, such as a citta that desires to be dulled maybe having a pull towards objects of inebriation...etc.... .... S: Yes, different accumulations. .... > So the desire to have or own or cling more fully to the object makes it predominant, whereas one can be attracted but not clinging/craving the object and then it is just object-condition. > But in the case of nibbana, the unconditioned object, it becomes a condition for the kusala citta, and since nibbana is unconditioned, it would be pulling the conditioned citta towards the unconditioned state, yes? So nibbana conditions the citta to move towards the unconditioned state. Would this be correct? [Pretty exciting stuff.] .... S: As we read, it is by fully understanding the conditioned dhammas as anicca, dukkha and anatta, that the panna turns away from the conditioned and towards the unconditioned. Without a full comprehension of the conditioned, there cannot be any abandoning, nibbana doesn't have any "pull" - instead we go on clinging to life, to sense objects, to all that is conditioned. .... > What are the objects of the jhanas? Are they definite objects for each jhana? ... S: 40 objects are given for samatha bhavana. Not all can be objects of jhana. The higher jhanas, arupa jhanas have very specific objects. Read under "kammathana" in U.P. I also highly recommend you get a copy of CMA if you don't have one, just as a reference text. Another discussion, perhaps. ... > Thank you, Sarah - I feel I'm getting the better end of the bargain, and I appreciate your help. :-) I also enjoy the conversations very much. When we get into details like the above, esp. when I occasionally understand them, it is very enjoyable. ... S: Likewise. As Nina always says, we learn a lot from discussing and considering all these topics, dhammas now. The above is just my understanding to date - you help me reflect more, like on the intricacy of conditions. Metta Sarah ===== #124498 From: "sarah" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 7:29 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: eating animal corpses sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > I like this quote and the description of the person who doesn't care very much - it was put very clearly. > > ...this average man is filled with such > > indifference as is not able to transcend the visible object. ... Owing to its similarity in not > > considering faults and merits, it is the near enemy of the Divine State of > > equanimity (upekkha>. > > Then the discussion of the far enemies is very good too, leaving equanimity squarely in the middle [way] between lust and aversion, which outlines very clearly where equanimity lies. .... S: Except that equanimity is not really between lust and aversion at all. It's the opposite of lust and aversion. ... >I happened to be thinking about equanimity today. I have gone back to doing some simple meditation with the un-lofty goal of reaching a more relaxed state, and by taking on this simple meditation it was much easier than in the past. I found that the usual pulls and anxieties went away for a little while, and that is what I'm focusing on for the moment, close to yoga really. I was thinking that equanimity was a very simple state, really, where the physical and mental state were 'okay' and there wasn't the usual concern and turbulence. .... S: We can't tell from the "situation". Usually, the 'okay' is just ignorance or more subtle attachment. Equanimity can only arise with wholesome states and these never last more than an instant:-) ... > > > From their dissimilarity in nature, both lust and > > aversion are its distant enemies. ... It is impossible that one should cultivate equanimity, > > and at the same time be enamoured with, or hurt another...." > > > There are "cheating dhammas" that can easily mislead us into taking what is akusala, such as cold indifference, for what is kusala, true equanimity.Thanks for helping me to reflect further. It's been a useful thread. > > Very good for me to hear about this and reflect on it as well! Thanks for the additional details and thoughts. > > I like those "cheating dhammas." Got to watch out for those little gremlins! ... S; Yes, attachment would like the present citta to be kusala, for equanimity to be present, but understanding is detached from what appears. There's a part of the audio I've been transcribing parts of where a friend talks about all the tumult in her life, all the difficulties. K.Sujin's response is not one of feeling sorry, but "just passing dhammas". I may add it tomorrow. Metta Sarah ======== #124499 From: "Buddhatrue" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 9:28 pm Subject: Re: Hello dear friends! buddhatrue Hi Sarah, It is so lovely to hear from you again! Sorry it took me a while to respond but I have been up to my eyeballs with this and that...(with eyes of newts and tongues of snakes hehehe...i.e., Macbeth): --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi James, > > I swear I had been thinking of you the morning you posted. James: Oh yes, no matter how long I stay away I often think of you also! I love and appreciate you and Jon so much! :-) To me, it is so strange and awesome how kamma works that way to connect teachers. The fact that we are both teachers of very small children to very large children connects us. As the Buddha said, teaching is a special psychic gift and not everyone has it (well, he was referring to the Dhamma, but nevermind..hehehe). So even though you and I disagree on occasion we always have that trait of teaching to connect us. I had read Phil's lovely letter about his cousin and I was thinking about how he and you write at your best when you're writing to people (like the Starkids, remember?) who have next to no knowledge of the Buddha's Teachings at all. It's a really great skill you both have - extremely difficult for most of us to put Deep Dhamma into simple language. Rob E has a lot of skill in that regard as well - the only person who gets my mother's attention when we're reading out loud and she's around. > James: Wow, I missed that letter from Phil's cousin. I'm sorry I missed that. I think that explaining spirituality, no matter what spirituality, to younger generations is super important. I think that future generations will be even more spiritual than past generations. It is time for the pendulum to swing back from the material to the spiritual. I am glad to be a part of that, with you Sarah! xoxo > Anyway, welcome back! > James: Thank you, glad to be back for a bit. > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Buddhatrue" wrote: > >I have been banned from several Buddhist Yahoo groups and was just recently banned (last week) from a Yahoo group called Magical Knowledge! LOL! Nah, I just get into too much trouble...but it is nice to pop in every now and then. > .... > S: Sounds like the James we know:-) > James: LOL! Yeah! I don't know how I always get in such trouble. > Anyway forget all the Magical Knowledge and come back to the here and now Dhamma! James: Hehehe...yeah, but the Dhamma is also magical...it isn't ordinary...at least I think so. I'm glad to hear your job is going smoothly and that you and Sebastian are still well. Taiwan has worked well for you. > James: Maybe so. I hope so....one never know how kamma works..hmmm... I have my fingers crossed. :-)))) > There's always time for meditation because meditation is just about the development of understanding and there can be understanding of life, of dhammas that are arising, at any time at all, no matter how busy, how tired we are. > James: Yeah, yeah, now you lost me. There can't be meditation without mindfulness and there can't be mindfulness with sloth and sleepiness. Okay, I don't want to end this post on a negative note. Love you!! > Thanks for the updates:) > > Metta > > Sarah > ===== > Metta, James #124500 From: "Buddhatrue" Date: Fri May 25, 2012 9:59 pm Subject: Re: Delisting announcement #10 buddhatrue Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > Dear moderators, and all > > One of the things that is good about Dhammawheel is that in the area devoted to discussion about Abhidhamma, questioning the place of Abhidhamma in tge tipitika is not permitted. James: What is Dhammawheel? I never heard of it. I din't think this is because people have knee-jerk sensitivity about having it questioned, everybody here and there is well aware of the historical evidence that Abhidhamma was a later addition. But I think the prohibition against arguing based on that is in order to have focussed and productive discussions about Abhidhamma. Here at DSG the order of the day every day is people who accept Abhidhamma "discussing" with people who don't. I think the group's home page description should be changed to make it clearer that respect for Abhidhamma is not necessary at DSG. James: This is just about the most ridiculous thing I have ever read from you! Have you lost your marbles, you silly boy!?? hehehe... :-)) I know I should be able to avoid threads in which Guys On The Internet Who Understand Better Than Abhidhamma participate, but that is impossible, they are completely dominant here and the purpose of this group seems to be to cater to their needs and demands. No thanks. So until my next guilt pangs ("I am so ungrateful") James: Yeah, it should be panging pretty soon about now. :-) I will guve a byebye kiss to the kalamites and sincere thanks to Sarah, Jon Nina and others who share my interest in Abhidhamma, not as a supplemental aid to understanding suttas, but an absolutely necessary one. > James: I think it is really great that you are so open to learning new things and new viewpoints. And I think it is really great that you are so dedicated to learning the spiritual truth about life. After all, those were the two major characteristics of the Buddha! He was open to learning the truth (without devotion) and he was 100% dedicated to learning the truth. Personally, I think that is really wonderful about you. I wish I was more open to new ideas...and not so Taurus stubborn. But, Phil, you really shouldn't bite the hand that feeds you. This group has been the most honest, open, accepting, wise, balanced, and intelligent group I have ever encountered on the Internet (and I have encountered a lot!). Just because they accept diverse viewpoints that isn't a reason to criticize. As someone who has been kicked out of many groups, I know. Phil, you have found your port in the storm. Don't knock it. > Phil Metta, James #124501 From: Alan McAllister Date: Fri May 25, 2012 10:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: mindfulness and its object in time alanpmcallister Sarah, Nina, and Alex: I am sorry not to have replied to your very informative and helpful posts. Unfortunately, (semi) retirement is turning into a very busy time. I would like to give due consideration to what you have said, and I definitely will, if I can just find the time! with metta, Alan On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 4:42 AM, sarah wrote: > ** > > > Dear Alan, > > I'd like to (belatedly) continue our discussion, even though Alex & Nina > have already given their comments. > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "alanpmcallister" > wrote: > > > >If I remember correctly, you are a psychologist in Ontario. > > > > Yes, that's me, although I am fading into retirement at present. > .... > S: Hope it's a happy and wise retirement..... more time for the Dhamma, > perhaps? It's always an adjustment, but then there's an "adjustment" at > each moment, isn't there? > ... > >.... I get that (I think), but what I am really trying to do right now is > nail the temporal aspect of the relationship of awareness (mindfulness) to > its object. Saying something can be the object of awareness "now" does not > resolve things because it leaves open (for me) whether the awareness and > its object are concurrent or not. > .... > S: Except in the case of a sense object, such as visible object or sound, > being experienced by wholesome cittas with awareness in the sense-door > process, i.e. the eye-door or ear-door process, the dhamma or reality has > always fallen away when its characteristic *appears* or is experienced by > awareness (of satipatthana). > > For example, suppose there is thinking with metta about someone. At that > moment of thinking with metta, there must be awareness (sati), because sati > arises with all wholesome cittas. However, the object at this time is the > other person. Immediately afterwards, however, that characteristic or > quality of metta may be the object of right understanding and awareness. > The metta itself has fallen away, but it is considered as "present object" > as its nature is known at this moment. > ... > > > Presumably unwholesome states would have to have passed away to be > objects of awareness? > .... > S: There cannot be any kind/level of awareness at the same time as > unwholesome states, but, as explained above, any kind of wholesome or > unwholesome state must have fallen away in order to be the object of > satipatthana. > ... > > >And, if so, would the awareness be adjacent to (in the next mind moment) > its object or could the awareness arise several mind moments later? > ..... > S: The wholesome/unwholesome mind door process is followed by several > bhavanga (life-continuum) cittas and, in this case, the reality, such as > the metta or the dosa is then the object of the next mind door > process/processes. > .... > > >And is it correct that awareness accompanies (is concurrent with) all > wholesome states? > .... > > S: See above. Yes, but there are different kinds/levels of awareness. It > is one of the 19 sobhana (beautiful) cetasikas that arise with all sobhana > cittas - kusala, kusala vipaka and kiriya (of the arahat) cittas. So, > talking of the bhavanga cittas above, in the human realm where birth is a > result of kusala kamma in the past, all these bhavanga cittas are > accompanied by sati too. > > I mention this not to confuse, but just to indicate that you've touched on > some intricate and complex areas. > > What is important now is to know that there can be awareness of any > reality appearing. It doesn't matter at all if, strictly speaking, that > reality has just fallen away. It is still *present* awareness of a > *present* object. Cittas arise and pass away incredibly fast. > > I'll be glad to hear how you find these replies and what further > questions/comments you have. > > [There is also a section on this intricate topic in "useful posts" in DSG > files under "Navattabba (Not so Classifiable) objects", but you may get > more confused!] > > Metta > > Sarah > ===== > > > -- Dr. Alan McAllister, C.Psych. 91 Chemaushgon, Box 459 Bancroft, Ontario K0L 1C0 613-332-3115 website: attentivemind.ca #124502 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 26, 2012 12:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: mindfulness and its object in time nilovg Dear Alan, Op 25-mei-2012, om 14:19 heeft Alan McAllister het volgende geschreven: > Unfortunately, (semi) retirement is turning into a very busy time. ------- N: I understand, you have to adapt to a new way of life. No matter how busy, there are just conditioned naamas and ruupas, and they appear one at a time thorugh one of the six doors. As Ken H would say: there is always the present moment. Nina. #124503 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 26, 2012 12:09 am Subject: Our Vacation, 4. nilovg Dear friends, continuation of the quotation from a "Survey of Paramattha Dhammas": < It should be known that the rúpa appearing at this moment through the eyes only lasts seventeen moments of citta and that it must fall away before sound can be experienced through ears. It seems that there can be hearing and seeing at the same time, but in between the moment of hearing and the moment of seeing there is an interval of more than seventeen moments of citta. The visible object, which appears through the eyes, and lasts seventeen moments of citta, must have fallen away before the citta that hears arises. It seems that there can be hearing and seeing at the same time, but these are different moments of citta experiencing different objects. Rúpas arise and fall away and succeed one another. Visible object appears through the eye-door and after there have been bhavanga-cittas in between, it appears through the mind-door. Then, there are many mind-door processes of cittas that think of concepts. That is why people who walk, lift their hands or move, can appear. When we see people lifting their hands or walking there are countless nåma dhammas and rúpa dhammas arising and falling away all the time. So long as we don’t realize the arising and falling away of nåma and rúpa, we cling to the idea that what appears are people, women, men, this or that thing. We cling to the concept of somebody or something. > ---------- Nina. #124504 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat May 26, 2012 4:10 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhs epsteinrob Hi pt, and Sarah... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi RobE, > > > > *RobE, please note this issue in our discussion - I was wrong to point out that with dhamma as object, cittas of the mind-door process must necessarily be kusala, and thus, can be akusala as well. > > > > Yes, this is interesting to me as well - I have asked Sarah about it, as I am confused as to this combination of seeing dhammas directly and yet still having akusala attachment. I guess that makes sense as some attachment only goes away very late on the path, but I am interested in how those stages take place. < > > > I think what is being said is that a dhamma can be an object of an akusala citta with moha. In that case, it probably can't be said that there is "seeing dhamma directly". There's just ignorance, attachment, etc, at the time, so nothing to do with kusala, insight, panna, etc, that would imply "seeing directly". This is what is difficult for me - I don't see how a dhamma can be the object of anything unless it is directly experienced. What would it be then - a thought about the dhamma? That would not be about the dhamma but about the concept of the dhamma. So it seems to me that it has to be that the dhamma is directly experienced, but that there is still akusala attachment to the dhamma. Maybe Sarah can clarify this for us. ... > I presume that "seeing" a dhamma directly would in essence equate to being aware of its general and particular characteristics (so an instance of kusala citta with panna). I think maybe you can be aware of the dhamma's characteristics and still be attached. > Anyway, I thought that a dhamma can be only an object of a kusala citta, but it is said that a dhamma can be an object of an akusala citta as well, and it also seems very commonplace as well. Yeah, I think we should find out what the conditions of the citta and cetasikas are at that time, and how the dhamma is being experienced when there is still akusala. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #124505 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat May 26, 2012 6:41 am Subject: Re: experience and the path truth_aerator Hello RobertE, >RE:The fact remains that we do have experiences which we either >don't >acknowledge or quickly forget, or quickly translate into a >conceptual form, and that does *not* mean that those things are not >experienced, but we do not retain awareness that all these little >events have taken place. And that's a fact. >============================================= I understand it like this: what you experience is what you experience. If you experience 3 or 4 mental states per second, then it is your experience. If you somehow manage to experience trillions of them per second (is this even possible?) then that is also true for you on that occasion. Here there is no one right answer for all times. >RE: I would not characterize neurons firing as abstract in any way. >It corresponds to a mental event. Neurons don't fire just for the >fun of it. >==================================================== Does "one neuron firing = one state of consciousness" Or "*many neurons firing = one state of consciousness"? *where many can equal trillions. Water molecule is one substance, but it is emergent quality of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom. Also, the relationship between brain and consciousness is very tricky. There is this way of looking at it this. How do we know about the brain and its workings? We see it through devices. We can also see someone's dead brain with the eyes when it is placed on a table. Seeing is consciousness, so brain and the neurons firing in a brain is what one is conscious off + interpretation of it. Without consciousness we cannot know it. Without consciousness we cannot consider this idea at all... >RE:As I asked you before, if that is not the case, what is the >purpose of the path? Is it just superfluous, does it improve the >mental faculties, or is it just an intellectual exercise? And what >is the end point, the same sloppy attention and thinking that we >have when we start out? >============================ What is the purpose of teaching anicca, asubha, dukkha, anatta? To convince us that arising of craving leads to arising of dukkha and non-arising of craving leads to non-arising of dukkha. There is no magic in these teachings. They are purely conventional and merely serve a certain purpose. What is most important is: Don't produce "I really want this", or "I really don't want that". Don't produce greed, anger or confusing. The idea of "I am unawakened, and there is something wrong with me. Thus I need to study and I need to practice so that later on I will become Awakened" is wrong. Both for study and meditation. With best wishes, Alex #124506 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat May 26, 2012 3:53 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > S: The meaning of jhana is "burning", not concentration. In the case of samatha bhavana which leads to mundane jhana, it is the development of calm with understanding of the object that leads to the "burning" of the sense objects, through the understanding of the danger of attachment to them. The right concentration (of samatha bhavana) develops to the degree of absorption at moments of jhana. I guess I'm still wondering what the relation is between absorption and the burning off of attachment to sense objects. It seems to me that being absorbed in the object of jhana, which is internal and subtle, is related to the burning off the interest in the usual external object, ie, you have inner absorption rather than external distraction. > In the case of the lokuttara cittas, when there is the burning or eradication of the defilements (for good), the cittas are calm, 'adhi', higher calm has been developed with the right understanding. The anagami has perfected the adhi calm, there is the total eradication of attachment to sense objects. Right concentration is also a path factor which has developed with right understanding. The samadhi and vitakka/sankappa 'focus on' and 'touch' the lokuttara object, nibbana, with appana, absorption. Seems, as I make sense of this in a crude way, that it makes sense that calm and concentration would be able to focus on and touch the object of absolute detachment and stillness/cessation only if the pull of external objects were burned off completely and the focus and calm were close to absolute so that it could approach such an object with steady absorption. Anyway, it seems to make sense that those factors would work together in that way. > .... > S: ...very desirable objects condition attachment in this way or highly esteemed objects or nibbana condition right understanding and enlightenment in this way. ... > S: As we read, it is by fully understanding the conditioned dhammas as anicca, dukkha and anatta, that the panna turns away from the conditioned and towards the unconditioned. Without a full comprehension of the conditioned, there cannot be any abandoning, nibbana doesn't have any "pull" - instead we go on clinging to life, to sense objects, to all that is conditioned. > .... That seems to make sense with the above as well. If external objects are still pulling one outward, then the citta can't turn inward, can't reach stillness, detachment, and the absorption necessary to pull towards the object of cessation/detachment. > ...The higher jhanas, arupa jhanas have very specific objects. Read under "kammathana" in U.P. Okay, good, I will look at that. > I also highly recommend you get a copy of CMA if you don't have one, just as a reference text. > Another discussion, perhaps. I do have a pdf copy edited by Narada Maha Thera, as well as B. Bodhi's descriptive summary of the A. Sangaha. > > Thank you, Sarah - I feel I'm getting the better end of the bargain, and I appreciate your help. :-) I also enjoy the conversations very much. When we get into details like the above, esp. when I occasionally understand them, it is very enjoyable. > ... > S: Likewise. As Nina always says, we learn a lot from discussing and considering all these topics, dhammas now. The above is just my understanding to date - you help me reflect more, like on the intricacy of conditions. Well I appreciate the conversation. It's a lot to understand, but little pieces get clearer it seems, gradually. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #124507 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat May 26, 2012 4:55 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat jonoabb Hi Rob E (124480) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > Isn't this fun? :-) > =============== J: Well, sort of … :-)) > =============== > > J: Secondly, given that a `correct' concept could be the object of a citta with wrong view, the whole notion of a `correct concept' seems to be misplaced. > > RE: Well now that I look at it, how could there be a correct statement accompanied by wrong view? If that were the case, the concept would not be understood, so it would not reflect the person's understanding. I think we can stipulate that if someone mouths some words of which they have no or wrong understanding, they are not actually saying what that concept means, just making sounds, or reading words, but with no relation to conceptual understanding. > > So I would say in that case that there is no "right concept" there, since the concept that is correct is not understood or expressed. > =============== J: Yes. So the definition, if you like, of a `right' concept is a concept, any concept, that is the object of right understanding. And that's it. There's nothing else that can be said about it. It cannot, for example, be said that a given concept (such as "all dhammas are anatta") is a `right' concept, since everything depends on the citta of which the concept is object. Hoping we have at last come to an agreement on this (but somehow doubting that this could be so :-)). > =============== > > J: All lined up on this particular point :-)) > > RE: The journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step! :-) > =============== J: Not daring to count the steps at this stage :-)) Jon #124508 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 26, 2012 7:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhs sarahprocter... Hi Rob E (& Pt), >________________________________ > From: Robert E >>PT: I think what is being said is that a dhamma can be an object of an akusala citta with moha. In that case, it probably can't be said that there is "seeing dhamma directly". There's just ignorance, attachment, etc, at the time, so nothing to do with kusala, insight, panna, etc, that would imply "seeing directly". .... S: Right, different cittas. .... > >R: This is what is difficult for me - I don't see how a dhamma can be the object of anything unless it is directly experienced. What would it be then - a thought about the dhamma? That would not be about the dhamma but about the concept of the dhamma. So it seems to me that it has to be that the dhamma is directly experienced, but that there is still akusala attachment to the dhamma. Maybe Sarah can clarify this for us. .... S: Each citta experiences its object. So if the object is, say, visible object, it can be experienced with ignorance, attachment or possibly awareness and right understanding. When it is experienced with ignorance and/or attachment, clearly, there's no awareness, no understanding at such moments. Usually, throughout the day, visible object, sound and other sense objects are experienced in just this way - with ignorance, attachment or aversion. At these moments in the sense door processes or immediately afterwards, it is the dhamma itself which is experienced. Afterwards, there is thinking about all kinds of concepts regarding those visible objects and other sense objects, but these are different moments. At these times, through the mind door processes, they are concepts thought about dhammas as you suggest. If there are wholesome cittas with awareness (and possibly right understanding), then either concepts of dhammas or the dhammas themselves are the objects. So, in other words, life goes on as usual and it just depends on our accumulations from moment to moment whether kusala or akusala cittas arise and experience the dhammas and concepts about dhammas. ... >> I presume that "seeing" a dhamma directly would in essence equate to being aware of its general and particular characteristics (so an instance of kusala citta with panna). >I think maybe you can be aware of the dhamma's characteristics and still be attached. ... S: The particular characteristics of dhammas have to be known first. For example, if there is no understanding and awareness of visible object as distinct from seeing, there can't be any understanding of its anicca nature, let alone its unsatisfactoriness. Of course, there can be awareness of a dhamma such as visible object and immediately afterwards be attached to it, or attachment, then awareness. Only an anagami has no more attachment to sense objects. ... >> Anyway, I thought that a dhamma can be only an object of a kusala citta, but it is said that a dhamma can be an object of an akusala citta as well, and it also seems very commonplace as well. .... S: Yes, all day long! .... > >Yeah, I think we should find out what the conditions of the citta and cetasikas are at that time, and how the dhamma is being experienced when there is still akusala. ... S: Just remember there's always a citta arising and mostly these are akusala cittas. In the sense door experiences it's easy to understand, because it's always a dhamma, a reality that is experienced. For example after seeing of visible object and following vipaka cittas, there are 7 javana cittas which experience that object in a wholesome or (usually) unwholesome way. In the mind door processes, after the sense door process, it's the dhamma experienced in the first one (or more) mind door processes and namas can also be experienced by akusala or kusala cittas. For example, there can (usually is) attachment to pleasant feeling, but there can also be awareness of it. If not, it would be impossible to be aware of dhammas. Hope it's a bit clearer. Metta Sarah ===== #124509 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun May 27, 2012 2:37 pm Subject: Re: eating animal corpses epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Then the discussion of the far enemies is very good too, leaving equanimity squarely in the middle [way] between lust and aversion, which outlines very clearly where equanimity lies. > .... > S: Except that equanimity is not really between lust and aversion at all. It's the opposite of lust and aversion. Well, I see what you mean, but I see it in the middle in terms of lust and aversion being two opposite extremes; so equanimity is being unmoved by attraction in one direction, and unmoved by aversion in the other direction. Usually there is push and pull between attraction and aversion, a constant back-and-forth, summed up well in romantic comedies where the same person who is desperately chasing one love-object is trying just as desperately to get away from the person who is after them. Equanimity is the opposite in that it doesn't move either way, just maintains steadiness in the midst of various forces, so I get your point. Still, I think the "middle way" is always between two extremes, so I think that works too. ... > ...Equanimity can only arise with wholesome states and these never last more than an instant:-) I think it is true though, isn't it, that when one is more developed there are many moments in succession of such a state? ... > > I like those "cheating dhammas." Got to watch out for those little gremlins! > ... > S; Yes, attachment would like the present citta to be kusala, for equanimity to be present, but understanding is detached from what appears. > > There's a part of the audio I've been transcribing parts of where a friend talks about all the tumult in her life, all the difficulties. K.Sujin's response is not one of feeling sorry, but "just passing dhammas". I may add it tomorrow. I could see how the view that difficulties are "just passing dhammas" would tend to promote equanimity too - since there is no need or possibility to do anything about what is happening. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #124510 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun May 27, 2012 2:53 pm Subject: Re: experience and the path epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > How do we know about the brain and its workings? We see it through devices. We can also see someone's dead brain with the eyes when it is placed on a table. Seeing is consciousness, so brain and the neurons firing in a brain is what one is conscious off + interpretation of it. Without consciousness we cannot know it. Without consciousness we cannot consider this idea at all... Well I don't disagree with that at all - just trying to make the point by analogy that there are different levels of being conscious and that they are all existent, all experiences, but I guess we are not going to get anywhere in establishing that. When I talk about different examples of different kinds of consciousness on different levels, you never really answer the specifics - usually you snip them. Why is that? To me, it would be worth considering them. Consciousness is not just a general, abstract idea. The examples I give are suggestive of different specific ways in which consciousness is apparent in everyday experience. I'm suggesting those as analogies to what happens with consciousness itself at a given moment. > What is the purpose of teaching anicca, asubha, dukkha, anatta? > To convince us that arising of craving leads to arising of dukkha and non-arising of craving leads to non-arising of dukkha. There is no magic in these teachings. They are purely conventional and merely serve a certain purpose. What is most important is: > > Don't produce "I really want this", or "I really don't want that". > Don't produce greed, anger or confusing. The teachings are only in part to convince you of how things work. The other part is showing how to practice to actually get out of this pattern. One can't stop ignorance or attachment just by wishing it. It takes a concerted practice over many years. That's like me trying to stop a magnet from attracting metal by thinking about it. It won't work. It's just wishful thinking. > The idea of "I am unawakened, and there is something wrong with me. Thus I need to study and I need to practice so that later on I will become Awakened" is wrong. Both for study and meditation. So are you saying that the path is not necessary, or perhaps that there is no path? It would be great to just suddenly let everything go and be completely free and enlightened, but for most of us it's not going to happen that way. So the path is there to go in the right direction. Do you not believe in that? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #124511 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 27, 2012 2:54 pm Subject: 2007 audio - 11. To do or not to do? sarahprocter... Dear Friends, ***** Ven P: Yesterday, talking about the famous quotation from the Malunkayaputta sutta about when seeing is only seeing, hearing is only hearing*, now this question "is there a difference between a monk and a glass of tea", or whatever, and the reason I ask is because I go to [a temple name] for the Vassa [S: rains retreat] this year in Burma and the [temple name] Sayadaw said: "if you hear something, that's hearing, but if you know what you hear, then you're not meditating any more, you've gone too far, which is the same thing - you've gone into thought". If I look at the mircrophone and I don't say "Oh this is a microphone", I don't label it, then as soon as I start to see it as a concept, a thing as an object, then what should I do? Should I stop myself? Should I try to stop the thinking process and switch to something else in order to avoid that akusala, to try to to cut out that aspect of seeing or hearing? KS: Did he [the Sayadaw] tell you to do anything? Ven P: No, only to watch. KS: That is to do. To watch is to do. Ven P: to be aware. KS: That is to do, to be aware again. ***** Metta Sarah *http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.095.than.html "Then, Malunkyaputta, with regard to phenomena to be seen, heard, sensed, or cognized: 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, Malunkyaputta, there is no you in connection with that. When there is no you in connection with 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." ========== #124512 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun May 27, 2012 3:11 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > Isn't this fun? :-) > > =============== > > J: Well, sort of … :-)) Ha ha - well I'm sorry for torturing you! (:-/ > > > J: Secondly, given that a `correct' concept could be the object of a citta with wrong view, the whole notion of a `correct concept' seems to be misplaced. ... > > So I would say in that case that there is no "right concept" there, since the concept that is correct is not understood or expressed. > > =============== > > J: Yes. So the definition, if you like, of a `right' concept is a concept, any concept, that is the object of right understanding. And that's it. There's nothing else that can be said about it. It cannot, for example, be said that a given concept (such as "all dhammas are anatta") is a `right' concept, since everything depends on the citta of which the concept is object. > > Hoping we have at last come to an agreement on this (but somehow doubting that this could be so :-)). I think that's basically true. Certainly there cannot be a right conceptual statement that is rightly said or understood without it being the object of right understanding. There is still a missing link there though, as you suspected, and that is the fact that the concepts that are written out from the spoken word of the Buddha do represent "right understanding in conceptual form," even though they are just "concepts" in that form. What I would say is that they represent "right understandings" that have been codified into language, but that they are indeed meaningless unless they are met by further "right understanding" when they are read or spoken. So to me it is still a combination. The wisdom of the Buddha is stored in those words, so it is not just about the citta that encounters them, but also about what it encounters. Those correct concepts given by the Buddha have to be there, or there would be nothing of value for the 'right understanding' to understand. I would give up that notion if it were not for the fact that *hearing the Dhamma* is a prerequisite for right understanding, so the concepts in language *give rise to* right understanding under the right conditions; they are not just the accidental outcome of right understanding that exists without those concepts. Without the Buddha's conceptual communication, there would be no right understanding possible. > > =============== > > > J: All lined up on this particular point :-)) > > > > RE: The journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step! :-) > > =============== > > J: Not daring to count the steps at this stage :-)) Given the above I certainly don't blame you - one step at a time, as they say in some other discipline... Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #124513 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun May 27, 2012 3:20 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhs epsteinrob Hi Sarah, and pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: Rob E: > >Yeah, I think we should find out what the conditions of the citta and cetasikas are at that time, and how the dhamma is being experienced when there is still akusala. > > ... > S: Just remember there's always a citta arising and mostly these are akusala cittas. In the sense door experiences it's easy to understand, because it's always a dhamma, a reality that is experienced. For example after seeing of visible object and following vipaka cittas, there are 7 javana cittas which experience that object in a wholesome or (usually) unwholesome way. In the mind door processes, after the sense door process, it's the dhamma experienced in the first one (or more) mind door processes and namas can also be experienced by akusala or kusala cittas. For example, there can (usually is) attachment to pleasant feeling, but there can also be awareness of it. If not, it would be impossible to be aware of dhammas. > > Hope it's a bit clearer. I think this talk has begun to make it clearer - let's see if I am on the right track. It seems that I am getting a distinction between experiencing a dhamma and understanding it clearly, and also a distinction between experiencing and that which follows the initial experience. So we are always experiencing dhammas, but we may not be doing so with sati and panna, in which case that experience is lost immediately afterwards in a sea of confusion and proliferation. That does not take away dhamma as object, but it does take it away as an object of direct discernment that understands what it has experienced. Am I thinking about this correctly? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #124514 From: "Yawares Sastri" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 12:19 am Subject: Bhikkhu Sok [ Presented by Hanzze_ @ Dhamma Wheel ] yawares1 Dear Members, This beautiful Sunday I proudly present a very nice story to you all. ********************** The story of Bhikkhu Sok [ Presented by Hanzze_ @ Dhamma Wheel ] Many year ago, there was a great famine in Kampuchea. A Phnong man called Chow Phnong Kruu came down from his mountain village to the town Senmonorom to try to find food for his family. When he returned home some time later, the sperstitious villagers were afraid of him because he had dared to leave their secluded village and live boldly among the lowland strangers. During the next few weeks, Chow Phnong Fruu began to show his family some of the new things that he had learned about cooking and preserving food. These new ways greatly disturbed the simple-living Phnongs. They began to whisper to each other that Chow was practicing evil magic. Then one day, a neighbor's small child became ill and died. The villagers blamed Chow Phnong Kruu's magic for the child's death and demanded that the chief of the Phnongs punish him. Now, the chief of the Phnongs had forbidden his people to practice blach magic. He was furious when he heard that Chow had disobeyed his orders. So the Phnong chief immediatley sent for a group of hunters from the village and ordered them to kill Chow Phnong Kruu and all of his family with seven sharp razors. The hunter did their job well. Within a few hours, Chow Phnong Kruu and all of his family were dead. All, that is, except for one small boy named chow Sok. That morning, Chow Sok had been sent to the rice field at the edge of the forest to wait for the rice buds to ripen for harvesting. Late that afternoon, while he was camped there, he heard an angry group of hunters pass through behind the trees. He listened in horror as they spoke about the killing of his mother, his father, his grandarents, his sister and brother, his aunts and uncles - his entire family. He trembled with terror when the hunters grumbled impatiently that one small boy was still alive and no one could find him. When the hunters had passed, Chow Sok quickly climed to the top of a tall tree and hid himself in a thick tangle of liana vines. From the treetop, he watched as the hunters stomped through the rice field, searching along every crevice of the valley and in every pile of brushwood for the missing boy. When the sun set, the discouraged hunters turned back and headed for their village in the upper hills. Sick with grief and fear, chow Sok sat in the safe tangle of liana vines until the middle of the night. Then he slowly crept down from the free and carefully made his way across the rice field, into the forest, and down to amother Phnong village nestled in the lower hills. At the edge of the village was a small hut with fruit in thickly woven baskets leaning against the doorway. Chow Sok was cold and tired and hungry. He ate some fruit and then, curling up between the baskets, fell asleep. In the morning, the old man who lived alone in the hut saw the sleeping boy. He knew immediatly that this must be the child that the hunters from the upper village had been looking for. The old man pitied the child. Waking the boy and warning him to be very quiet, the old man took him into the hut and hid him under some old straw mats.Later that morning the hunters went down to the lower Phnong village to search again for the boy. When they saw the old man sitting in the doorway of his small hut, of fruit, and Chow Sok quickly ran down the road to find the merchant from Kratieh. Soon he saw the merchant with his oxcart piled high with brushwood and dried fish. Feeling too shy to speak to the merchant who came from a strange land, Chow Sok walked far behind the cart for a long time. Then, feeling very tired, he edged closer and jumped up to lie down on the praek of the cart. The oxcart swayed, and the merchant turned quickly to see the small Phnong boy hanging on behind the wheel."Hey there! Who are you, boy? Where are your parents? Why are you hanging on behind my oxcart?" he called out the boy in the Phnong language. The embarrassed child quickly scrambled down from the wooden preak. He timidly told the merchant the sad story about his family, the chief's hunters, and the kindly old man.The merchant understood everything and pitied the frightened boy. "Ah, my poor child," he said. "You must come with me away from the Phnong villages. You may live with me in Kratieh. I have always wanted a son. Come, come now. Jump up here with me on this wood pile and let us leave this place quickly."They journeyed together safely and reached Kratieh in good time. The merchant grew to love Chow Sok as dearly as if he were really his own son. He taught Chow Sok the Khmer language and the customs of the country. In turn, Chow Sok was completely devoted to his new-found father. He studied with great care and eagerly helped the merchant with all of his work. After a few years, the merchant sent Chow Sok to study at the monastery school of Kratieh. The monks were impressed with the boy's keen mind and good character. When Chow Sok was fifteen years old, he was ordained as a novice. When he was twenty-one, the monks fully ordained him as a monk - a bhikkhu. He was now called Bhikkhu Sok. Bhikkhu Sok became a noble and honored monk. His wisdom and justice were respected throughout the land. (note: Phnong are indigenous people in the north of Cambodia - Mondolkir, Rattanakiri, Kruu comes from guru and is the usual title for a teacher, doctor or a shaman, Sok is the khmer-pali pronunciation of pali word "sokha" which means "agreeable, pleasant, blest") retyped from: Cambodian Folk Stories from the Gatiloke Last edited by hanzze_ on Sun May 27, 2012 1:42 +00:00May, edited 1 time in total. *************** Love Buddha's dhamma, yawares/sirikanya #124515 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 28, 2012 12:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Sok [ Presented by Hanzze_ @ Dhamma Wheel ] nilovg Dear Yawares, I like this Cambodian story very much. An illustration of kamma and vipaaka. Nina. Op 27-mei-2012, om 16:19 heeft Yawares Sastri het volgende geschreven: > Cambodian Folk Stories #124516 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 2:18 am Subject: Re: experience and the path truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >RE: Well I don't disagree with that at all - just trying to make the >point by analogy that there are different levels of being conscious >and that they are all existent, all experiences, but I guess we are >not going to get anywhere in establishing that. When I talk about >different examples of different kinds of consciousness on different >levels, you never really answer the specifics - usually you snip >them. Why is that? To me, it would be worth considering them. >============================================= What is experienced is experienced. To try to read-in more into experience than experienced, is IMHO speculation. What someone else experiences is not what you experience. If someone experiences trillions of conscious moments arising and ceasing in a second, then it is valid for that person and that occasion. If someone experiences 3-4 conscious states in a second, than that is valid for that person at that time. In experience should be only the experienced. Remember Bahiya sutta and Kalakarama sutta? >The teachings are only in part to convince you of how things work. >The other part is showing how to practice to actually get out of >this pattern. One can't stop ignorance or attachment just by >wishing it. It takes a concerted practice over many years. That's >like me trying to stop a magnet from attracting metal by thinking >about it. It won't work. It's just wishful thinking. >======================================= My understanding is one is willfully creating samsara moment by moment. When one fully realizes the drawback of this, nibbana can instantly be realized. The fault is not out there, it is here and now. >A: The idea of "I am unawakened, and there is something wrong with >me. Thus I need to study and I need to practice so that later on I >will become Awakened" is wrong. Both for study and meditation. >==================================================== >RE:So are you saying that the path is not necessary, or perhaps that >there is no path? It would be great to just suddenly let everything >go and be completely free and enlightened, but for most of us it's >not going to happen that way. So the path is there to go in the >right direction. Do you not believe in that? >============================================================== As long as one considers "I, me, mine" (be it My meditation, or My Abhidhamma studies, or My knowledge, etc) path cannot occur. And with every step one gets further and further away. No matter how "right" the knowledge is, as long as you consider it "mine" that automatically makes it wrong view. Trying to create Nibbana is moving into opposite direction. Nibbana is when there isn't creation of Self views, greed, anger, and delusion. With metta, Alex #124517 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 6:30 am Subject: Re: Bhikkhu Sok [ Presented by Hanzze_ @ Dhamma Wheel ] epsteinrob Hi Yawares. Thank you for another great story! Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Yawares Sastri" wrote: > > Dear Members, > > This beautiful Sunday I proudly present a very nice story to you all. > > ********************** > > The story of Bhikkhu Sok > [ Presented by Hanzze_ @ Dhamma Wheel ] > ********************** #124518 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 6:58 am Subject: [dsg] Re: mindfulness and its object in time epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > S: Except in the case of a sense object, such as visible object or sound, being experienced by wholesome cittas with awareness in the sense-door process, i.e. the eye-door or ear-door process, the dhamma or reality has always fallen away when its characteristic *appears* or is experienced by awareness (of satipatthana). > > For example, suppose there is thinking with metta about someone. At that moment of thinking with metta, there must be awareness (sati), because sati arises with all wholesome cittas. However, the object at this time is the other person. Immediately afterwards, however, that characteristic or quality of metta may be the object of right understanding and awareness. The metta itself has fallen away, but it is considered as "present object" as its nature is known at this moment. This discussion suddenly made me realize that I have not understood how a dhamma that has just passed away is, or can be, considered by subsequent cittas and mental processes. In what way, or in what form, does the recently fallen-away dhamma appear in order to be "known" by the subsequent citta with sati or panna? Is it left behind in the form of a nimitta for that citta, does it pass on characteristics that can be understood by the subsequent citta, or how exactly does that take place? Also, are there any other examples of a dhamma being known exactly at the time it is present, other than sensory object in the sense-door process? Your example of that above seemed to suggest that the sati or panna that accompanies a kusala citta experiencing a sense-door process would all experience the dhamma at the time that it actually exists, but that other experiences of dhammas that are not sensory in nature take place after the object has fallen away. Does this mean that only rupas are known at the time that they are present? Or is a current mind-door process also known by the present kusala citta that experiences it? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - #124519 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 7:08 am Subject: Re: bhavanga citta seems to occur very often truth_aerator Hello RobertE, >RE:Okay, thanks for citing that. Well, I can imagine that there is a >sense of consciousness with a subtle object or image that is left as >an impression when there is no new experience arising. Doesn't seem >too far a stretch to me to say that consciousness is continuously >active while one is alive. Do you think it just turns off completely >and goes dead in deep sleep or in a coma, even when the eeg is showing >a brainwave pattern? >================================================= You made an interesting point. In deep sleep there is some sort of subtle consciousness which allows one to wake up when alarm bell rings because one can still hear it. I am not sure about coma thought. There it is questionable how much consciousness is there. With best wishes, Alex #124520 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 7:12 am Subject: Re: experience and the path epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > >RE: Well I don't disagree with that at all - just trying to make the >point by analogy that there are different levels of being conscious >and that they are all existent, all experiences, but I guess we are >not going to get anywhere in establishing that. When I talk about >different examples of different kinds of consciousness on different >levels, you never really answer the specifics - usually you snip >them. Why is that? To me, it would be worth considering them. > >============================================= > > What is experienced is experienced. To try to read-in more into experience than experienced, is IMHO speculation. What someone else experiences is not what you experience. > > If someone experiences trillions of conscious moments arising and ceasing in a second, then it is valid for that person and that occasion. > > If someone experiences 3-4 conscious states in a second, than that is valid for that person at that time. In experience should be only the experienced. Remember Bahiya sutta and Kalakarama sutta? Well I guess this is beating a dead horse, but I am not saying that unexperienced things are experienced. I am saying that we have many actual experiences that we either don't acknowledge or don't remember, because we're processing a lot of information at the same time. I may become aware later that I have been uncomfortable for 10 minutes because of a pebble in my shoe, but I was not paying it much conscious attention because I was involved in conversation. That does not mean I didn't experience the pebble that whole time, it means I ignored it in favor of another more important object. Now if you are saying only that which I acknowledge to myself as an experience is an experience, then I think you're in for problems. We forget or interpret things in a way that is not experiential, but just circumstantial or conceptual, and that does not take those experiences away. If you are saying that only that which we remember clearly and acknowledge as an experience is an experience, then you are really saying that only that which we bother to keep track of is an experience, and that is clearly not true. What if I have amnesia and forget a bunch of things that I experienced in the past. Does that mean they were never experiences and no longer count as experiences? Obviously not. Even in the moment I may see a rope and think it is a snake, but that doesn't mean I experienced an actual snake, does it? According to your experiential theory, if I think it's a snake it really is a snake. I think we can distinguish between experiences that really do take place, and what we *think* is taking place at the time or afterwards. There is a difference between experiencing things and what we know or think we know about them. > >The teachings are only in part to convince you of how things work. >The other part is showing how to practice to actually get out of >this pattern. One can't stop ignorance or attachment just by >wishing it. It takes a concerted practice over many years. That's >like me trying to stop a magnet from attracting metal by thinking >about it. It won't work. It's just wishful thinking. > >======================================= > > My understanding is one is willfully creating samsara moment by moment. When one fully realizes the drawback of this, nibbana can instantly be realized. The fault is not out there, it is here and now. And how do you intend to suddenly realize this? By accident? Or do you think you can will yourself into full realization? Please tell me, if you are not currently in "full realization" how you expect this to take place,and how much longer you think it will take? Forever? To me, that is too long to wait. The path is there for a reason - because people go through many many many years [or lifetimes if you believe such] without having the sudden realization you are fantasizing about. So as I said before, it is just wishful thinking to think in that way, unless it actually gives you enlightenment, which it clearly hasn't. It would be better I think to see what the Buddha has provided in order to actually get that realization, not just think about it. > >A: The idea of "I am unawakened, and there is something wrong with >me. Thus I need to study and I need to practice so that later on I >will become Awakened" is wrong. Both for study and meditation. > >==================================================== > >RE:So are you saying that the path is not necessary, or perhaps that >there is no path? It would be great to just suddenly let everything >go and be completely free and enlightened, but for most of us it's >not going to happen that way. So the path is there to go in the >right direction. Do you not believe in that? > >============================================================== > > > As long as one considers "I, me, mine" (be it My meditation, or My Abhidhamma studies, or My knowledge, etc) path cannot occur. And with every step one gets further and further away. No matter how "right" the knowledge is, as long as you consider it "mine" that automatically makes it wrong view. And how do you propose that you stop thinking of "I, me, mine?" Please tell me the method for arranging that, and has it worked for you yet? It sounds like you are talking about theory, not actuality, but correct me if I am wrong. I think it is better to look into the unreality of "I, me, mine" and develop understanding, rather than just thinking it will suddenly happen through wishful thinking. > Trying to create Nibbana is moving into opposite direction. Nibbana is when there isn't creation of Self views, greed, anger, and delusion. Again, if you don't think there's a path to follow in that direction which has been given by the Buddha, I'd like to know how you think that is every going to happen. Have you ever experienced the cessation of Self views, greed, anger and delusion? Do you think you ever will? How do you expect that to take place without a path to follow? I think what you are suggesting is the equivalent of staring at your car, hoping that when you have the right thought about it, the car will just start driving all by itself. I think it's better to use the key. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #124521 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 7:15 am Subject: Re: bhavanga citta seems to occur very often epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, > > >RE:Okay, thanks for citing that. Well, I can imagine that there is a >sense of consciousness with a subtle object or image that is left as >an impression when there is no new experience arising. Doesn't seem >too far a stretch to me to say that consciousness is continuously >active while one is alive. Do you think it just turns off completely >and goes dead in deep sleep or in a coma, even when the eeg is showing >a brainwave pattern? > >================================================= > > You made an interesting point. In deep sleep there is some sort of subtle consciousness which allows one to wake up when alarm bell rings because one can still hear it. I am not sure about coma thought. There it is questionable how much consciousness is there. There are different kinds of comas too. Some seem completely free of brain activity, and there are others that show brain activity but the person has damage that keeps them from waking up. Some of those latter do eventually wake up, sometimes many years later, and that suggests that the subtle consciousness you refer to in deep sleep, or something like it, is still active in such people. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #124522 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 7:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >RE: I am interested in this subject. Do you have any citations from >ancient commentaries that speak against the Abhidhamma or do not >accept it as part of the tipitaka? I would like to see that. You >said there are many - any commentators in particular that you can >mention, that I can look up? >======================= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schools_of_Buddhism#Early_schools "Scholars, however, generally date the Abhidhamma works to originating some time around the third century BCE, 100 to 200 years after the death of the Buddha. Therefore the seven Abhidhamma works are generally claimed by scholars not to represent the words of the Buddha himself, but those of disciples and scholars.[6]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhidhamma#Origins That is about canonical Abhidhamma, not its commentaries. ============================================== Numerous apparently independent and unrelated Abhidharma traditions arose in India, roughly during the period from the 2nd or 3rd Century BCE to the 5th Century CE. The 7th century Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang reportedly collected Abhidharma texts from seven different traditions. The various Abhidhammic traditions have very fundamental disagreements with each other. These various Abhidhammic theories were (together with differences in Vinaya) the major cause for the majority of splits in the monastic Sangha, which resulted in the fragmented early Buddhist landscape of the 18 Early Buddhist Schools. In the modern era, only the Abhidharmas of the Sarvastivadins and the Theravadins have survived intact, each consisting of seven books, with the addition of the Sariputra Abhidharma. The Theravada Abhidharma, the Abhidhamma Pitaka (discussed below), is preserved in Pali, while the Sarvastivadin Abhidharma is mostly preserved only in Chinese - the (likely Sanskrit) original texts having been lost, though some Tibetan texts are still extant. A small number of other Abhidharma texts of unknown origin are preserved in translation in the Chinese canon. These different traditions have some similarities, suggesting either interaction between groups or some common ground antedating the separation of the schools.[13] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhidharma#Variety_of_Abhidhammic_teachings_and_boo\ ks =================================== There was also Abhidharma Kosa: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhidharma-kosa ====================================== There was school called sutrantika who rejected Abhidhamma http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sautr%C4%81ntika ========================================= With metta, Alex #124523 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 7:28 am Subject: Re: experience truth_aerator Hello RobertE, >RE:Well I guess this is beating a dead horse, but I am not saying >that >unexperienced things are experienced. I am saying that we >have many >actual experiences that we either don't acknowledge or >don't >remember, because we're processing a lot of information at >the same >time. I may become aware later that I have been >uncomfortable for >10 minutes because of a pebble in my shoe, but I >was not paying it >much conscious attention because I was involved >in conversation. >That does not mean I didn't experience the pebble >that whole time, >it means I ignored it in favor of another more >important object. >=================================================== You made a good point. If one has experience, but forgets it the next moment - what kind of experience is it? While you had experience of a pebble in your sure, then new experience where you forgot about pebble was true at that time. Later on you had another experience where you remembered all of this. >RE: Now if you are saying only that which I acknowledge to myself as >an >experience is an experience, then I think you're in for problems. >We forget or interpret things in a way that is not experiential, >================ Here is what we need to be careful about. From the current experience not to interpret what might have occurred in the past. >RE:If you are saying that only that which we remember clearly and >acknowledge as an experience is an experience, then you are really >saying that only that which we bother to keep track of is an >experience, and that is clearly not true. >============================================= At different periods of time, experience is different. At one occasion you experience one thing, on another occasion you experience something else. During some experiences you can remember something, during experience happening some time later, you do not. >RE: What if I have amnesia and forget a bunch of things that I >experienced in the past. Does that mean they were never experiences >and no longer count as experiences? >==================================== Those past events were experienced. But today your experience is something else and without memory of those past experiences. >Even in the moment I may see a rope and think it is a snake, but >that doesn't mean I experienced an actual snake, does it? You seen (incorrectly) what you only interpreted as a snake. This event is a certain experience. IMHO, With metta, Alex #124524 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 7:39 am Subject: Re: the path truth_aerator Hello RobertE, >A:My understanding is one is willfully creating samsara moment by >moment. When one fully realizes the drawback of this, nibbana can >instantly be realized. The fault is not out there, it is here and >now. > >RE: And how do you intend to suddenly realize this? By accident? >=================================== By fully realizing the futility of creating "I, me, mine, greed, anger and delusion.". By fully giving up. >RE: Or do you think you can will yourself into full realization? >Please tell me, if you are not currently in "full realization" how >you expect this to take place,and how much longer you think it will >take? >=============== It can occur at any time. What I don't believe is in accumulating theory for aeons in hope that in distant future, Awakening will occur. I believe that "far future" never comes. It is always in the future. >RE: The path is there for a reason - because people go through many >many many years [or lifetimes if you believe such] without having >the sudden realization you are fantasizing about. >==================== They are are not having sudden realization because they have been going the wrong way. The path is subtle. >A:The idea of "I am unawakened, and there is something wrong with >me. Thus I need to study and I need to practice so that later on I >will become Awakened" is wrong. Both for study and meditation. >==================================================== >RE:So are you saying that the path is not necessary, or perhaps that >there is no path? It would be great to just suddenly let everything >go and be completely free and enlightened, but for most of us it's >not going to happen that way. So the path is there to go in the >right direction. Do you not believe in that? >============================================================== Path needs to be correct and one needs to go in the proper direction otherwise with every step one takes, one gets further away. > >RE:And how do you propose that you stop thinking of "I, me, mine?" >============= By not-thinking that. Beforehand, contemplation about drawbacks of thinking "I, me, mine" can be helpful. >RE: I think it is better to look into the unreality of "I, me, mine" >and develop understanding, rather than just thinking it will >suddenly happen through wishful thinking. >============================================= The point of seeing unreality of "I" is to stop thinking "I, me, mine". I understand that this is the point of seeing anicca, dukkha, anatta. There is no magic in these teachings other than to hammer the point that don't consider "I, me, mine". My current understanding is that ignorance is a willful activity and it can be stopped. At first it may be on "restraint" level, but with enough insight it will be permanent. >RE: How do you expect that to take place without a path to follow? >=============================================== That is the path. With metta, Alex #124525 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 8:02 am Subject: Re: experience (Typo fix) truth_aerator Hello RobertE, I made a typing mistake: >RE:Well I guess this is beating a dead horse, but I am not saying >that >unexperienced things are experienced. I am saying that we >have many >actual experiences that we either don't acknowledge or >don't >remember, because we're processing a lot of information at >the same >time. I may become aware later that I have been >uncomfortable for >10 minutes because of a pebble in my shoe, but I >was not paying it >much conscious attention because I was involved >in conversation. >That does not mean I didn't experience the pebble >that whole time, >it means I ignored it in favor of another more >important object. > >=================================================== > > You made a good point. If one has experience, but forgets it the next moment - what kind of experience is it? > >While you had experience of a pebble in your sure, then new >experience where you forgot about pebble was true at that time. >Later on you had another experience where you remembered all of this. >================================== "While you had experience of a pebble in your sure," should be "While you had experience of a pebble in your shoe" At different moments in time experience is different. Sometimes one remembers something, sometimes on forgets something and experiences something else. For example: experience 1) At 10:00-10:01am one might experience pebble in the show. experience 2) At 10:01-10:02am one experiences something interesting and doesn't remember the feeling of "pebble in the shoe". experience 3) At 10:02-10:03am one is aware of pebble in the shoe and doesn't pay much attention to something else. All three are different experiences with different experiences. What was experienced at one interval of time is different from experience during another interval of time. With best wishes, Alex #124526 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 2:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > > >RE: I am interested in this subject. Do you have any citations from >ancient commentaries that speak against the Abhidhamma or do not >accept it as part of the tipitaka? I would like to see that. You >said there are many - any commentators in particular that you can >mention, that I can look up? > >======================= > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schools_of_Buddhism#Early_schools > > > "Scholars, however, generally date the Abhidhamma works to originating some time around the third century BCE, 100 to 200 years after the death of the Buddha. Therefore the seven Abhidhamma works are generally claimed by scholars not to represent the words of the Buddha himself, but those of disciples and scholars.[6]" > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhidhamma#Origins > > That is about canonical Abhidhamma, not its commentaries. Thanks for the discussion and references, Alex. I will look through these as I have time - good to have. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #124527 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 2:24 pm Subject: Re: experience epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > >RE: What if I have amnesia and forget a bunch of things that I >experienced in the past. Does that mean they were never experiences >and no longer count as experiences? > >==================================== > > Those past events were experienced. But today your experience is something else and without memory of those past experiences. Well that is true. > >Even in the moment I may see a rope and think it is a snake, but >that doesn't mean I experienced an actual snake, does it? > > You seen (incorrectly) what you only interpreted as a snake. This event is a certain experience. I would have to agree with that too. Your view is very phenomenological, Alex - have you been taking lessons from Howard...? :-) Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #124528 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 2:34 pm Subject: Re: the path epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > >RE: Or do you think you can will yourself into full realization? >Please tell me, if you are not currently in "full realization" how >you expect this to take place,and how much longer you think it will >take? > >=============== > > It can occur at any time. What I don't believe is in accumulating theory for aeons in hope that in distant future, Awakening will occur. > > > I believe that "far future" never comes. It is always in the future. I'm not a big fan of the future, but I think you have to cultivate the conditions for awakening, not just hope for it, which is putting stock in...what? Wish-fulfillment? My view is that the Buddhist path is a path of developmental study and practice, not one of wishing or suddenly having a magical event. It doesn't have to take aeons, that depends on conditions. But it won't happen at all if you don't do anything to foster greater awareness. ... > Path needs to be correct and one needs to go in the proper direction otherwise with every step one takes, one gets further away. Well, I agree with that. Road map provided by the Buddha, yes? ... > My current understanding is that ignorance is a willful activity and it can be stopped. At first it may be on "restraint" level, but with enough insight it will be permanent. > > > >RE: How do you expect that to take place without a path to follow? > >=============================================== > > That is the path. Not sure if that's specific enough for me. I think it's better to take concrete steps, whether it is in study or in meditation. You can't make progress in something that you can't see in concrete terms, and in some sense measure. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #124529 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 2:42 pm Subject: Re: experience (Typo fix) epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, > > I made a typing mistake: > "While you had experience of a pebble in your sure," should be > "While you had experience of a pebble in your shoe" No problem - I understood what you were saying. But then, you made a similar mistake again: > experience 1) At 10:00-10:01am one might experience pebble in the show. C'mon Alex! Pebble in the Show? Sounds like a post-modern New Wave band. > experience 2) At 10:01-10:02am one experiences something interesting and doesn't remember the feeling of "pebble in the shoe". > > experience 3) At 10:02-10:03am one is aware of pebble in the shoe and doesn't pay much attention to something else. > > All three are different experiences with different experiences. What was experienced at one interval of time is different from experience during another interval of time. I would have to agree with this, although I'm not sure what the point of contention is any more. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #124530 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 28, 2012 6:11 pm Subject: 2007 audio - 12. It's dhamma! sarahprocter... Dear Friends, I referred to this extract the other day in the context of whatever happens in life, there are just dhammas, no me at all. I think Lukas and others may find this helpful - however difficult life may seem, "it's dhamma". (Lisa is a Thai friend living in Bangkok.) ***** Lisa: Sometimes you see so much constantly you're like "Oh help!". KS: You know what's the best help? L: I listen more and I try to understand more, but... KS: Only pa~n~naa is the best help. L: I understand that, but I find myself lately, saying "Oh, help!". It's total bombardment, constantly, every day and you see it. Just when then there's an overwhelming feeling of giving in to whatever, it's happening constantly, not understanding, not being aware and it's so meaningless and I'm so involved in it and you don't know what to do...... and I listen to your teachings constantly, every morning, every night - I don't have TV..... - it helps to be in the present a lot if I'm not thinking of other things at the same time when I'm listening..... KS: What about "it's dhamma"? L: Kha [Yes] Which helps to be less scared, but when that overwhelming feeling comes up again, I'm.... KS: It's dhamma again. L. Khop Khun Kha [Thank you] ***** Metta Sarah ===== #124531 From: "sarah" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 6:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy sarahprocter... Hi Rob E & Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > >A: What happens when one enters in a coma or complete cessation of perception and feeling, etc. Then there would be a gap between two normal states of consciousness. > > There may be a gap between "normal" states of consciousness, but it is my view that there is still consciousness in a coma and in the higher states of consciousness, such as cessation of perception and feeling - just not the usual objects of consciousness. Even in the state of perception of nothingness, there is the consciousness of the perception of nothingness, so consciousness continues to be present in those states. I think it may be present in Bhavanga cittas as well, just without a delineated object. .... S: Each citta is succeeded by another citta with no gaps at all. This is by proximity condition - each citta 'triggers' the next one, like in the case of falling dominoes. In the case of a coma, cittas succeed each other, like in a sleep for much of the time. The dream-like cittas have concepts as objects and the deep-sleep cittas are bhavanga cittas which have their own object - the same as the object of the birth and death cittas. Bhavanga cittas always have an object, the same object throughout life. It's unknown to us. In the case of nirodha samapatti, there is the temporary cessation of consciousness, i.e. of all cittas, cetasikas and citta-produced rupas, at this time. This may be attained by those who developed the highest stage of arupa-jhana and for whom this was the basis of attainment of becoming an anagram or arahant, as in the case of the Buddha and some of his disciples. In this case, the first citta which arises after emerging from nirodha samapatti (the phala, fruition citta, of the anagram or arahant respectively which has nibbana as object), is conditioned by the last citta that arose, i.e. the preceding citta which was the 4th arupa jhana citta which arose before the cessation of cittas. The same principle applies when there is rebirth in the plane where there are only rupas (the asanna satta plane). The last death citta prior to that existence conditions the next citta in the following sensuous plane, again by proximity condition. > > If there are no gaps, then that aspect of my argument doesn't work. .... S: Even in the examples above, there are no gaps in consciousness. Metta Sarah ====== #124532 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 28, 2012 6:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: experience and the path nilovg Dear Alex and Rob E, Op 27-mei-2012, om 18:18 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > As long as one considers "I, me, mine" (be it My meditation, or My > Abhidhamma studies, or My knowledge, etc) path cannot occur. And > with every step one gets further and further away. No matter how > "right" the knowledge is, as long as you consider it "mine" that > automatically makes it wrong view. RE:And how do you propose that you stop thinking of "I, me, mine?" >============= A: By not-thinking that. Beforehand, contemplation about drawbacks of thinking "I, me, mine" can be helpful. -------- N: No, not by not thinking, but by understanding it as a dhamma. See Sarah's last audio quote: Kh S: It is good to realize that we take understanding for self, but it is a conditioned dhamma. It is real. Everything that is real can and should be object of awareness and understanding, we should not avoid realities. So often we hear: everything is dhamma. We should not merely repeat those words or be attached to words. We should really understand that everything is dhamma. Nothing in our daily life is to be excluded from understanding. We should understand our accumulations, our defilements, our weaknesses. They are, all of them, dhammas. ------- Nina. #124533 From: "sarah" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 6:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy sarahprocter... Dear Dieter, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > S: There are only realities arising and falling away in daily life - the five khandhas, each reality anatta, as indicated in all the quotes you gave. No matter how we describe our daily life, no matter how much ignorance there is, no matter what we think or imagine, there are only names and rupas arising and falling away now. Anything else is a concept, an idea that is thought about. > ... > > D: and still this is your thought, speech done by/ from this concept, isn't it? There is an acting (kamma) being (khandas) in this social environment, .... S: We think there is a "social environment", but this is just our idea. In actuality, there are just the various dhammas arising and falling away, performing their various functions. So, at the moment of thinking, there are thinking dhammas arising and falling away, thinking about concepts. .... > (conventional:Sarah who was writing to me ) . Concept is my imagination about you while I am writing , but the act is reality . ... S: Again, when you read the message and think of "Sarah" and various concepts about dhammas, in actuality, there are just moments of seeing visible object, thinking about what is seen and so on. "Sarah" and the other concepts are only thought about. At the moment of typing now, again there are only various khandhas which we call "Sarah", arising and falling away. .... > There is a way of action which alone can not be explained only by namas and rupas falling away , despite nothing else can be found by analysis. > This way or better wandering , this status quo in samsara , needs to be seen in perspective of Dependent Orgination, which is the background of our conventional reality. > in other word two realities. reality of daily life ..and absolute reality , paramattha dhamma (the khandas embedded in D.O.) , >.... S: Just dhammas. D.O. is nothing but dhammas conditioning other dhammas. Birth, life, everything we find important, are just dhammas. What we call the "conventional reality" are just stories about dhammas. Without dhammas, no stories, no dreams at all. I'll leave aside the further points on sankhara and super-supra-mundane for now as we've discussed them a lot. You asked at the end about "will (chanda/cetana)" and "if done with right understanding" and gradual development. Cetana arises with every single citta. It is never "done" - it just arises at each instant by conditions. Chanda may be kusala or akusala. Usually it's akusala. I agree, that when right understanding arises, there is gradual development. However, if it's the idea of someone "doing" it, then there's no understanding at such moments. I liked this paragraph Nina recently quoted from a recording of Sujin: "We cannot prevent ourselves from seeing, because seeing arises already, it sees already. We cannot force what appears through the eyes not to appear. This is the meaning of dhamma and anattaa. There is no need to look for dhamma, it is there already, it has arisen already. but we do not know the truth. What appears through the eyes does not know anything, it just appears." Metta Sarah ======= #124534 From: "sarah" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 7:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > >S: There are only realities arising and falling away... > >===================================== > > Is "arising" ultimate or conventional truth? > Is "falling away" ultimate or conventional truth? ... S: The "arising" and "falling away" are characteristics of all conditioned dhammas, of all paramatha dhammas. They are the lakkhana of dhammas. This means there cannot be awareness of just "arising" or "falling away" - it has to be awareness of the the arising and falling away of a dhamma, such as seeing or visible object. Such awareness can only occur when there has been the insight into those dhammas as anatta and the clear distinction between them without any doubt at all. Metta Sarah ======= #124535 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 28, 2012 8:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: experience upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Alex) - In a message dated 5/28/2012 12:27:52 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Alex. --- In _dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com) , "truth_aerator" wrote: > >RE: What if I have amnesia and forget a bunch of things that I >experienced in the past. Does that mean they were never experiences >and no longer count as experiences? > >==================================== > > Those past events were experienced. But today your experience is something else and without memory of those past experiences. Well that is true. > >Even in the moment I may see a rope and think it is a snake, but >that doesn't mean I experienced an actual snake, does it? > > You seen (incorrectly) what you only interpreted as a snake. This event is a certain experience. I would have to agree with that too. Your view is very phenomenological, Alex - have you been taking lessons from Howard...? :-) --------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Actually, it seems to me that it is more than phenomenological. It seems to me to be a view that countenances new experiences and events (such as forgetting) as rewriting the past. That certainly is not my view. What one once experienced was, then and there, an actual experience, and no future forgetting undoes that. Moreover, experiences, even subsequently forgotten ones, still have consequences. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Best, Rob E. ================================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124536 From: Lukas Date: Mon May 28, 2012 11:41 pm Subject: bad moods, looking for trubles szmicio Dear friends I am staying with L. in a buddhist monastery.I listen and study a lot. I am studying Dhammasangani in Pali and I can memorize it quite while. And this is quite helpful cause I can think in daily life of Dhamma. But the last 3 days my dosa shows ups, and it so strong. relly painful bad moods, how 'others ' behave according to me. I will be greatful for help. Now I am starting with akusala cetasikas in Nina's cetasikas. best wishes Lukas #124537 From: "Yawares Sastri" Date: Mon May 28, 2012 11:48 pm Subject: The Great Etadagga yawares1 Dear Members, I would like to thank Bhikkhu Gavesako for giving me this beautifully written story of the great Thera MahaKassapa. This Uposatha Day I'm so delighted to present one of the greatest stories ever told to you all. *************** Thera Maha Kassapa: Father of The Sangha [by Hellmuth Hecker revised and enlarged translation from the German by Nyanaponika Thera @ 1995â€"2012] Among those of the Buddha's disciples who were closest to him, there were two friends, Sariputta and Maha Moggallana, who were the chief disciples of the Buddha, the exemplary pair of disciples. There were also two brothers, Ananda and Anuruddha, who were likewise eminent "Fathers of the Order." In between these two pairs stands a great solitary figure, Pipphali Kassapa, who later was called Maha Kassapa, Kassapa the Great, to distinguish him from the others of the Kassapa clan, such as Kumara Kassapa and Uruvela Kassapa. After Sariputta and Maha Moggallana had passed away, predeceasing the Buddha, it was Maha Kassapa who was held in greatest respect and reverence in the Order. But even after the Buddha's passing away, Maha Kassapa did not become the elected head of the Order of Monks, as it had been the Buddha's express wish that there should not be a supreme authoritative head of the Sangha. Shortly before his passing away, the Buddha had said: "That which I have proclaimed and made known, Ananda, as the Teaching and the Discipline (Dhamma-Vinaya), that shall be your Master when I am gone" (D.16). Yet the natural authority emanating from Maha Kassapa made him particularly honored and venerated in the Sangha. There were many factors that contributed to his pre-eminent position after the death of the Master. He had been praised by the Buddha as being equal to him in many respects[1] and he shared with the Master seven of the thirty-two "Marks of a Great Man." He had been the only monk with whom the Buddha had exchanged robes. Maha Kassapa possessed to the highest degree the ten "qualities that inspire confidence."[2] He was also a model of a disciplined and austere life devoted to meditation. So it is no wonder that he was elected to preside over the First Council of the Sangha which had been summoned on his urgent advice. It may have been on account of all these features of his personality and his life that, much later in China and Japan, Maha Kassapa came to be regarded as the first patriarch of Ch'an or Zen Buddhism. *************** MahaKassapa: The Great Etadagga [by Hellmuth Hecker revised and enlarged translation from the German by Nyanaponika Thera @ 1995â€"2012] Like the two chief disciples, Sariputta and Maha Moggallana, Maha Kassapa too descended from the brahman caste, and again like them, he was older than the Buddha. He was born in the Magadha country, in the village Mahatittha, as the son of the brahman Kapila and his wife Sumanadevi. He was called Pipphali. His father owned sixteen villages over which he ruled like a little king, so Pipphali grew up in the midst of wealth and luxury. Yet already in his young years there was in him the wish to leave the worldly life behind, and hence he did not want to marry. When his parents repeatedly urged him to take a wife, he told them that he would look after them as long as they live, but that after their deaths he wanted to become an ascetic. Yet they insisted again and again that he take a wife, so to comfort his mother he finally agreed to marry â€" on the condition that a girl could be found who conformed to his idea of perfection. For that purpose he shaped a golden statue of a beautiful woman, had it bedecked with fine garments and ornaments, and showed it to his parents, saying: "If you can find a woman like this for me, I shall remain in the home life." His parents approached eight brahmans, showered them with rich gifts, and asked them to take the image with them and travel around in search of a human likeness of it. The brahmans thought: "Let us first go to the Madda country, which is, as it were, a gold mine of beautiful women." There they found at Sagala a girl whose beauty equaled that of the image. She was Bhadda Kapilani, a wealthy brahman's daughter, aged sixteen, four years younger than Pipphali Kassapa. Her parents agreed to the marriage proposal, and the brahmans returned to tell of their success. Yet Bhadda Kapilani also did not wish to marry, as it was her wish, too, to live a religious life as a female ascetic. Such identity between her aspiration and Pipphali Kassapa's may well point to a kammic bond and affinity between them in the past, maturing in their present life and leading to a decisive meeting between them and a still more decisive separation later on. When Pipphali heard that what he had thought most unlikely had actually occurred, he was â€" unhappy and sent the following letter to the girl: "Bhadda, please marry someone else of equal status and live a happy home life with him. As for myself, I shall become an ascetic. Please do not have regrets." Bhadda Kapilani, like-minded as she was, independently sent him a similar letter. But their parents, suspecting such an exchange would take place, had both letters intercepted on the way and replaced by letters of welcome. So Bhadda was taken to Magadha and the young couple were married. However, in accordance with their ascetic yearning, both agreed to maintain a life of celibacy. To give expression to their resolve, they would lay a garland of flowers between them before they went to bed, determined not to yield to sensual desire. This young wealthy couple lived thus happily and in comfort for many years. As long as Pipphali's parents lived, they did not even have to look after the estate's farms. But when his parents died, they took charge of the large property. One day, however, when Pipphali Kassapa was inspecting the fields, it happened that he saw, as if with new eyes, what he had seen so often before. He observed that when his people plowed, many birds gathered and eagerly picked the worms from the furrows. This sight, so common to a farmer, now startled him. It now struck him forcefully that what brought him his wealth, the produce of his fields, was bound up with the suffering of other living beings. His livelihood was purchased with the death of so many worms and other little creatures living in the soil. Thinking about this, he asked one of his laborers: "Who will have to bear the consequences of such an action?" â€" "You yourself, sir," was the answer. Shaken by that insight into kammic retribution, he went home and reflected: "If I have to carry along the burden of guilt for that killing, what use is all that wealth to me? It will be better if I give it all to Bhadda and go forth into the ascetic's life." But at home, at about the same time, his wife had a similar experience. She too saw afresh with a deeper understanding what she had very often seen before. Sesamum seeds had been spread out in the open to dry, and crows and other birds ate the insects that had been attracted by the seeds. When Bhadda asked her servants who it was that had to account morally for the violent death of so many creatures, she was told that the kammic responsibility was hers. Then she thought: "If even by that much I commit a wrong, I won't be able to lift my head above the ocean of rebirths, even in a thousand lives. As soon as Pipphali returns, I shall hand over everything to him and leave to take up the ascetic life." When both found themselves of one accord, they had pale-yellow cloth and clay bowls brought for them from the bazaar, and then shaved each other's head. They thus became like ascetic wanderers, and they made the aspiration: "Those who are Arahats in the world, to them we dedicate our going forth!" Slinging their almsbowls over their shoulders, they left the estate's manor, unnoticed by the house servants. But when they reached the next village, which belonged to the estate, the laborers and their families saw them. Crying and lamenting, they fell to the feet of the two ascetics and exclaimed: "Oh, dear and noble ones! Why do you want to make us helpless orphans?" â€" "It is because we have seen the three worlds to be like a house afire, therefore we go forth into the homeless life." To those who were serfs, Pipphali Kassapa granted their freedom, and he and Bhadda continued on their road. leaving the villagers behind still weeping. When walking on, Kassapa went ahead while Bhadda followed behind him. Considering this, Kassapa thought: "Now, this Bhadda Kapilani follows me close behind, and she is a woman of great beauty. Some people - could easily think, 'Though they are ascetics, they still cannot live without each other! It is unseemly what they are doing.' If they spoil their minds by such wrong thoughts or even spread false rumors, they will cause harm to themselves." So he thought it better that they separate. When they reached a crossroads Kassapa said: "Bhadda, you take one of these roads, and I shall go the other way." She said: "It is true, for ascetics a woman is an obstacle. People might think and speak badly about us. So please go your own way, and we shall now part." She then respectfully circumambulated him thrice, saluted him at his feet, and with folded hands she spoke: "Our close companionship and friendship that had lasted for an unfathomable past comes to an end today. Please take the path to the right and I shall take the other road." Thus they parted and went their individual ways, seeking the high goal of Arahatship, final deliverance from suffering. It is said that the earth, shaken by the power of their virtue, quaked and trembled. ------ Note : This last paragraph really made me cry. ************* Love Buddha's dhamma, yawares/sirikanya #124538 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 29, 2012 12:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] bad moods, looking for trubles nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 28-mei-2012, om 15:41 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > But the last 3 days my dosa shows ups, and it so strong. relly > painful bad moods, how 'others ' behave according to me. > > I will be greatful for help. Now I am starting with akusala > cetasikas in Nina's cetasikas. ------- N: I appreciate your interest. More important than memorizing the Dhsg is realizing that it deals with characteristics of realities that appear now in your life. When we learn to be aware of the reality that appears, it can be known as it truly is, as non-self. "Me and others", yes, that is the problem. I read to Lodewijk something Ven. Dhammadharo had said about "persons" and I thought of you: < When we were in the bus in Calcutta Bhante Dhammadharo reminded me that in the absolute sense there are no people, we are alone. He spoke into my taperecorder the following message for my husband who had encouraged me so much to undertake this pilgrimage: There is nobody there and nobody here. There is not Lodewijk all alone in the Hague and all of us here having a trip in Calcutta. There has only ever been, and only is, and can be, just different moments of experiencing an object, only for a moment, and then there is the next moment of experiencing another object. All alone, everybody completely alone, no matter how many other people we think there are around us the whole time. And if we think that we are surrounded by other people, nice or not nice, we are really deluding ourselves. We have to realize that in the absolute sense there is nothing comforting about thinking that there are people all around us. There is nothing comforting even about thinking, "I am happy all by myself ”. There are just empty phenomena, one after another. It is either the phenomenon which experiences, nama, or it is the phenomenon which does not experience, rupa. Both of them are empty. There is nothing reliable there, there is nothing worthwhile there. It is just the same old thing, life after life, moment after moment. In every life, just like now. So, if while we are here, we have a lot of Dhamma talk but we don’t remember the truth about the phenomena of our life we are not doing the best we can. If you have not much chance for a Dhamma talk, but you are learning honestly to know the phenomena of your life as they are, then that is what really helps. We might not always like to learn about them, but that is what counts most. So I hope and trust that the fundamental understanding of the things I have just been talking about is there and that it is growing. I hope that based on this understanding there are now and will be more and more in the future moments of detachment from the reality which appears.> I remarked that, although I understand in theory that there are no people, only nåma and rúpa, I find it difficult to realize this in my daily life. However, it is right understanding which brings detachment from the notion of people and beings. When we only think about náma and rupa there will not be detachment. The náma and rupa which appear now can be the object of mindfulness and in this way the direct knowledge of realities can be developed. The Buddha could attain enlightenment because he developed for innumerable lives direct understanding of seeing which appears at the present moment, of visible object which appears at the present moment, of all realities which appear at the present moment. Direct understanding of realities can only be developed now. If the Buddha had not attained enlightenment and taught us the truth of all realities we would live in complete darkness, not knowing the way to develop right understanding, not knowing what is right and what is wrong. It is a blessing that the Buddha taught us the way to develop right understanding. It is a blessing that there still is opportunity to hear the Dhamma "which only becomes manifest at rare intervals covering immeasurable aeons". ---------- Nina. #124539 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 29, 2012 2:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Great Etadagga upasaka_howard Hi, Yawares - In a message dated 5/28/2012 9:50:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, yawares1@... writes: Dear Members, I would like to thank Bhikkhu Gavesako for giving me this beautifully written story of the great Thera MahaKassapa. This Uposatha Day I'm so delighted to present one of the greatest stories ever told to you all. ================================ I don't know whether I am correct in inferring from what you write here that you get to see Bhante on occasion. If this is so, please send him a fond "hello" from, me, Upasaka Howard (Howard Wasserman). :-) With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124540 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 2:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: Rob E.: > > There may be a gap between "normal" states of consciousness, but it is my view that there is still consciousness in a coma and in the higher states of consciousness, such as cessation of perception and feeling - just not the usual objects of consciousness. Even in the state of perception of nothingness, there is the consciousness of the perception of nothingness, so consciousness continues to be present in those states. I think it may be present in Bhavanga cittas as well, just without a delineated object. > .... > S: Each citta is succeeded by another citta with no gaps at all. This is by proximity condition - each citta 'triggers' the next one, like in the case of falling dominoes. Is there someplace online or a topic in UP that I can read about the specifics about how one citta triggers the next one? I assume there are some accumulated tendencies that cause the next citta to arise, and that it is related to attachments that cause citta to keep seeking an object, or something like that...? I would like to know more about this mechanism. I am interested in how the next citta is caused to arise, and also how the tendencies and accumulations are transmitted to the next citta, even after the previous citta has just fallen away. > In the case of a coma, cittas succeed each other, like in a sleep for much of the time. ... > > In the case of nirodha samapatti, there is the temporary cessation of consciousness, i.e. of all cittas, cetasikas and citta-produced rupas, at this time. This may be attained by those who developed the highest stage of arupa-jhana and for whom this was the basis of attainment of becoming an anagram or arahant ... ... > > > If there are no gaps, then that aspect of my argument doesn't work. > .... > S: Even in the examples above, there are no gaps in consciousness. Thanks for the great information, you know an awful lot! :-) If consciousness temporarily ceases is that not a gap? Not sure how to understand that. As nibbana is object in nirodha samapatti, does nibbana cease to be object when all cittas have temporarily ceased? I'm a little confused about that as well. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #124541 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 2:44 am Subject: [dsg] Re: experience epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > HCW: > Actually, it seems to me that it is more than phenomenological. It > seems to me to be a view that countenances new experiences and events (such as > forgetting) as rewriting the past. That certainly is not my view. What one > once experienced was, then and there, an actual experience, and no future > forgetting undoes that. Moreover, experiences, even subsequently forgotten > ones, still have consequences. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- Good to hear from you on this. Maybe a little O/T in getting into the phenomenological weeds, but I'll take a chance and hope this discussion is relevant. I do think that phenomenology can take account of past events and their consequences, but it is my view that it would also take stock of the ways in which past events change and transform as they are experienced and reexperienced within the shifting conditions of the present and succeeding moments. Phenomenology always looks at the current situation, including those influences which bear fruit in the current situation, but a phenomenology of memory and past events would be very different than an objective list of what happened as it was experienced in the past, and would be more or at least equally interested in how the understanding or memory of those events has changed, since it does seem to me that phenomenology is first and foremost a descriptive science of experience, and is more interested in the ways in which subjectivity influences one's understanding of experience than an outsider's view of 'the facts' of what has taken place. I'm sure you agree with some of the above - maybe not all. Just wanted to give my sense of how a phenomenological view would look at past events. In terms of memory that has been lost, I think a phenomenological view would want to understand what remains, what influences continue, and exactly what has been involved in the transformation of memory set A to memory set B, rather than taking memory set A, the original memories, as an objective given. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #124542 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 29, 2012 2:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: experience upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 5/28/2012 12:44:44 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. --- In _dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com) , upasaka@... wrote: > HCW: > Actually, it seems to me that it is more than phenomenological. It > seems to me to be a view that countenances new experiences and events (such as > forgetting) as rewriting the past. That certainly is not my view. What one > once experienced was, then and there, an actual experience, and no future > forgetting undoes that. Moreover, experiences, even subsequently forgotten > ones, still have consequences. > ---------------------------------------------------------- Good to hear from you on this. Maybe a little O/T in getting into the phenomenological weeds, but I'll take a chance and hope this discussion is relevant. I do think that phenomenology can take account of past events and their consequences, but it is my view that it would also take stock of the ways in which past events change and transform as they are experienced and reexperienced within the shifting conditions of the present and succeeding moments. Phenomenology always looks at the current situation, including those influences which bear fruit in the current situation, but a phenomenology of memory and past events would be very different than an objective list of what happened as it was experienced in the past, and would be more or at least equally interested in how the understanding or memory of those events has changed, since it does seem to me that phenomenology is first and foremost a descriptive science of experience, and is more interested in the ways in which subjectivity influences one's understanding of experience than an outsider's view of 'the facts' of what has taken place. ----------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Then perhaps I should be called a "phenomenalist" rather than a "phenomenologist". I do NOT consider that "...past events change and transform as they are experienced and reexperienced within the shifting conditions of the present and succeeding moments." We may recollect past events, but the recollections are new experiences. These new experiences are conditioned by the past ones and by many other phenomena as well. ------------------------------------------------------------- I'm sure you agree with some of the above - maybe not all. Just wanted to give my sense of how a phenomenological view would look at past events. In terms of memory that has been lost, I think a phenomenological view would want to understand what remains, what influences continue, and exactly what has been involved in the transformation of memory set A to memory set B, rather than taking memory set A, the original memories, as an objective given. Best, Rob E. ================================ With metta, Howard Impermanence /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #124543 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 3:12 am Subject: [dsg] Re: experience truth_aerator Hello Howard, RobertE, >--------------------------------------------------------------- >HCW: Actually, it seems to me that it is more than >phenomenological. >It seems to me to be a view that countenances new >experiences and >events (such as forgetting) as rewriting the past. >That certainly is >not my view. What one once experienced was, >then and there, an >actual experience, and no future forgetting >undoes that. Moreover, >experiences, even subsequently forgotten >ones, still have >consequences. >----------------------------------------------------------------- It is not so much rewriting the past as that present moment is the only moment that is experienced. Any thought about past or future happens only in the present moment. If one right now does not remember what has happened in the past, then that is what one experiences right now. Of course "ignorance is no excuse" and effects from the past can occur in the present. With metta, Alex #124544 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 3:15 am Subject: Re: experience (Typo fix) truth_aerator Hello RobertE, >Alex: experience 1) At 10:00-10:01am one might experience pebble in >the show. > >RE:C'mon Alex! Pebble in the Show? Sounds like a post-modern New Wave >band. >============================================= "W" is next to "E" on my keyboard. I was not feeling well when I wrote that message and didn't notice that. I barely kept myself in upright posture I was feeling so bad. With metta, Alex #124545 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 29, 2012 3:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: experience upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Robert) - In a message dated 5/28/2012 1:12:45 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, RobertE, >---------------------------------------------------------- >HCW: Actually, it seems to me that it is more than >phenomenological. >It seems to me to be a view that countenances new >experiences and >events (such as forgetting) as rewriting the past. >That certainly is >not my view. What one once experienced was, >then and there, an >actual experience, and no future forgetting >undoes that. Moreover, >experiences, even subsequently forgotten >ones, still have >consequences. >---------------------------------------------------------- It is not so much rewriting the past as that present moment is the only moment that is experienced. ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: It is the only moment that is experienced NOW. But there were prior moments, and they served as conditions for the present and future moments. ------------------------------------------------------- Any thought about past or future happens only in the present moment. ----------------------------------------------------- HCW: Any time anything happens, that is when it happens, and it is called "now" at that time! Later it is called "then"! ----------------------------------------------------- If one right now does not remember what has happened in the past, then that is what one experiences right now. ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: But that does not change the past. -------------------------------------------------- Of course "ignorance is no excuse" and effects from the past can occur in the present. With metta, Alex ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124546 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 3:39 am Subject: Re: the path truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >RE: I'm not a big fan of the future, but I think you have to >cultivate the conditions for awakening, not just hope for it, which >is putting stock in...what? Wish-fulfillment? My view is that the >Buddhist path is a path of developmental study and practice, not one >of wishing or suddenly having a magical event. It doesn't have to >take aeons, that depends on conditions. But it won't happen at all >if you don't do anything to foster greater awareness. >============= Development has to be right. Part of it is that it needs to have proper attitude. Attitude that "I am unlearned, so I need to study Abhidhamma in order that in the future I may become learned and Awakened" is wrong in that it focuses on the *I*. There is this duality of: "I am here" vs "I need to be there". As long as there is this focus on *I*, one can't get rid of sakkayaditthi. >RE:Well, I agree with that. Road map provided by the Buddha, yes? >======================================= Yes. But if one clings to knowledge (*my* knowledge, etc) then no matter how right the knowledge is, the clinging makes it wrong. >A: That is the path. >=================================== >RE: Not sure if that's specific enough for me. >================================================================ There is this desire to know more more and more. Ego loves it, and it is so safer than uncertainty. Maybe there aren't sure signpost along the way to this or that stage. There were cases when a monk or nun felt hopeless and then boom, awakening instantly happened. There was no way that person could have known that (I have progressed 3/4 of the way, etc.) Maybe when one gives up on "*I* am on this stage" or "*I* am on that stage" when real progress happens. Of course the giving up has to be sincere and not something contrived ("I will practice for few years, then give up"). With best wishes, Alex #124547 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 3:40 am Subject: Re: experience truth_aerator Hello RobertE, >RE:Your view is very phenomenological, Alex - have you been taking >lessons from Howard...? :-) >============================ I considered this: There is (in brief) an interesting argument that I come to. How do we know about body, arms, legs, brain and its function? We see it. Seeing it is cognition, and cognition is mental function. And it seems that everything that one says is from experiential POV. With best wishes, Alex #124549 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 3:54 am Subject: what demarcates citta? truth_aerator Dear Sarah, Nina, all, >S: Each citta is succeeded by another citta with no gaps at all. >This >is by proximity condition - each citta 'triggers' the next >one, like >in the case of falling dominoes. >============================== I wonder, based on what criteria do we demarcate one citta from another citta? Why can't there be the same citta (as "knowing", or "cognizing") that sees this, then sees that, and only the objects of citta change? Even if we say that different citta take different objects, any and all citta is still the same in one intrinsic characteristic of "knowing" or "cognizing". ================================================================= "Consciousness, though divided into eighty-nine types, is regarded as one entity because all cittas have the same intrinsic nature-the cognizing of an object." - CMA book pg 264 ================================================================= With metta, Alex #124550 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 5:33 am Subject: Re: the path epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > There were cases when a monk or nun felt hopeless and then boom, awakening instantly happened. There was no way that person could have known that (I have progressed 3/4 of the way, etc.) Not so important, but I'm sure they had been studying and practicing for a long time before "instant awakening." > Maybe when one gives up on "*I* am on this stage" or "*I* am on that stage" when real progress happens. Of course the giving up has to be sincere and not something contrived ("I will practice for few years, then give up"). It's not either/or. Neither a little practice nor no practice will do much of anything in my view. But wishing and hoping to get rid of the "I" sense without practice is probably useless. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #124551 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 29, 2012 5:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] what demarcates citta? upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Sarah & Nina) - In a message dated 5/28/2012 1:54:23 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Dear Sarah, Nina, all, >S: Each citta is succeeded by another citta with no gaps at all. >This >is by proximity condition - each citta 'triggers' the next >one, like >in the case of falling dominoes. >============================== I wonder, based on what criteria do we demarcate one citta from another citta? Why can't there be the same citta (as "knowing", or "cognizing") that sees this, then sees that, and only the objects of citta change? ------------------------------------------------------ HCW: To the extent that we countenance distinguishable things, we should at least think of them as "things in relation". So seeing of one sight is different from seeing another, and certainly seeing a sight is different from hearing a sound. We must be very careful of losing sight of the relational nature of things, it seems to me. ------------------------------------------------------- Even if we say that different citta take different objects, any and all citta is still the same in one intrinsic characteristic of "knowing" or "cognizing". ================================================================= "Consciousness, though divided into eighty-nine types, is regarded as one entity because all cittas have the same intrinsic nature-the cognizing of an object." - CMA book pg 264 ================================================================= With metta, Alex ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124552 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 5:46 am Subject: [dsg] Re: experience epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > I do think that phenomenology can take account of past events and their > consequences, but it is my view that it would also take stock of the ways in > which past events change and transform as they are experienced and > reexperienced within the shifting conditions of the present and succeeding > moments. Phenomenology always looks at the current situation, including those > influences which bear fruit in the current situation, but a phenomenology of > memory and past events would be very different than an objective list of what > happened as it was experienced in the past, and would be more or at least > equally interested in how the understanding or memory of those events has > changed, since it does seem to me that phenomenology is first and foremost a > descriptive science of experience, and is more interested in the ways in > which subjectivity influences one's understanding of experience than an > outsider's view of 'the facts' of what has taken place. > ----------------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Then perhaps I should be called a "phenomenalist" rather than a > "phenomenologist". I do NOT consider that "...past events change and transform as > they are experienced and reexperienced within the shifting conditions of > the present and succeeding moments." Well, past events don't continue to exist after they have taken place, do they? So what is left of them - consequences, sure; further conditioning based on what happened in the past, sure; and memory and reflection which casts a certain light on what took place before, and may remember it more or less perfectly. I'm not sure what it means in that light to say that 'past events aren't changed,' since they no longer exists. Experience does continue to change, doesn't it? So, unless you are saying that events that are no longer present continue to exist in some ideal form, I'm not sure what is meant by the idea that past events are not changed -- in the mind -- by the way in which they are remembered and given meaning. No one is denying that the past events took place. > We may recollect past events, but the > recollections are new experiences. These new experiences are conditioned by > the past ones and by many other phenomena as well. Sure, I don't disagree with that. But defining something as a "new experience" doesn't take away from its relation to the past, nor does it make it a duplicate or prisoner of past events. In being new, it both creates new experience and reflects back on the content and meaning of what it remembers. Is that not true? I'm just honestly not sure what we disagree about. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #124553 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 5:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] what demarcates citta? truth_aerator Hello Howard, all, >------------------------------------------------------ >HCW: To the extent that we countenance distinguishable things, we >should at least think of them as "things in relation". So seeing >of one sight is different from seeing another, and certainly seeing >a sight is different from hearing a sound.... >------------------------------------------------------- What is distinguished is *object* of awareness, not awareness itself. Seeing and hearing have different object (color and sound) but they both have the same quality of "knowing". Even in commenterial Abhidhamma it is said: >================================================================= >"Consciousness, though divided into eighty-nine types, is regarded >as one entity because all cittas have the same intrinsic nature-the >cognizing of an object." - CMA book pg 264 >================================================================= Citta has the same intrinsic nature, the cognizing (alex: being aware) of an object. Objects have different intrinsic nature, but there is only one intrinsic nature of cittas. There is one citta, but 52 kinds of cetasikas, and 18 concretely produced rupas... With metta, Alex #124554 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 29, 2012 6:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: experience upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 5/28/2012 3:46:11 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: > HCW: > Then perhaps I should be called a "phenomenalist" rather than a > "phenomenologist". I do NOT consider that "...past events change and transform as > they are experienced and reexperienced within the shifting conditions of > the present and succeeding moments." Well, past events don't continue to exist after they have taken place, do they? ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: Exactly, and so it is untrue that they change and transform as they are experienced and reexperienced. They are GONE. --------------------------------------------------- So what is left of them - consequences, sure; further conditioning based on what happened in the past, sure; and memory and reflection which casts a certain light on what took place before, and may remember it more or less perfectly. I'm not sure what it means in that light to say that 'past events aren't changed,' since they no longer exists. ------------------------------------------------------ HCW: It means that it is untrue that future experiences alter the past. ----------------------------------------------------- Experience does continue to change, doesn't it? --------------------------------------------------- HCW: Current experiencing differing from past experiencing. There is not some thing called experience that continues to exist but changes. ------------------------------------------------------ So, unless you are saying that events that are no longer present continue to exist in some ideal form, I'm not sure what is meant by the idea that past events are not changed -- in the mind -- by the way in which they are remembered and given meaning. --------------------------------------------------- HCW: I'm not expressing a Sarvastivadin "everything remains" view at all. I'm saying that what was, was: The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ, Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line, Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it. ----------------------------------------------- No one is denying that the past events took place. ------------------------------------------------- HCW: Right. ------------------------------------------------ > We may recollect past events, but the > recollections are new experiences. These new experiences are conditioned by > the past ones and by many other phenomena as well. Sure, I don't disagree with that. But defining something as a "new experience" doesn't take away from its relation to the past, nor does it make it a duplicate or prisoner of past events. ------------------------------------------------ HCW: Nor do I say otherwise. ------------------------------------------------ In being new, it both creates new experience and reflects back on the content and meaning of what it remembers. Is that not true? I'm just honestly not sure what we disagree about. ------------------------------------------------ HCW: LOL! I dunno. ------------------------------------------------ Best, Rob E. ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124555 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 6:06 am Subject: Re: the path truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >RE:...I'm sure they had been studying and practicing for a long time >before "instant awakening." >============================ Maybe the reason they were studying and practicing for a long time is that they were doing something wrong and only when they intuitively realized the mistake, then Awakening occured. If a person does mistakes for 10 years which only prevents Awakening from occuring. Then after 10 years one realizes the mistake and Awakening happens, was that gradual or instant Awakening? >RE:It's not either/or. Neither a little practice nor no practice >will do much of anything in my view. But wishing and hoping to get >rid of the "I" sense without practice is probably useless. >====================================== It depends on what "practice" really means. With metta, Alex #124556 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 29, 2012 6:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] what demarcates citta? upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 5/28/2012 3:59:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, all, >------------------------------------------------------ >HCW: To the extent that we countenance distinguishable things, we >should at least think of them as "things in relation". So seeing >of one sight is different from seeing another, and certainly seeing >a sight is different from hearing a sound.... >------------------------------------------------------- What is distinguished is *object* of awareness, not awareness itself. Seeing and hearing have different object (color and sound) but they both have the same quality of "knowing". -------------------------------------------------- HCW: It seems to me that the quality of knowing changes when the type of object changes. ------------------------------------------------- Even in commenterial Abhidhamma it is said: >================================================================= >"Consciousness, though divided into eighty-nine types, is regarded >as one entity because all cittas have the same intrinsic nature-the >cognizing of an object." - CMA book pg 264 >================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------- HCW: I care little what the CMA says about that. Consciousness is conditioned by the nature of its object. From MN 137 there is the following: "'The six classes of consciousness should be known': thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? Eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, intellect-consciousness. 'The six classes of consciousness should be known': thus was it said. And in reference to thus was it said." ---------------------------------------------------------- Citta has the same intrinsic nature, the cognizing (alex: being aware) of an object. Objects have different intrinsic nature, but there is only one intrinsic nature of cittas. There is one citta, but 52 kinds of cetasikas, and 18 concretely produced rupas... With metta, Alex ================================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124557 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 6:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] what demarcates citta? truth_aerator Hello Howard, all, >HCW:It seems to me that the quality of knowing changes when the >type of object changes. >------------------------------------------------- "Knowing" remains the same, it is only different *object* of knowing. >HCW: Consciousness is conditioned by the nature of its object. From >MN 137 there is the following: "'The six classes of consciousness >should be known': thus was it said. And in reference to what was it >said? Eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, >tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, intellect-consciousness. >'The six classes of consciousness should be known': thus was it >said. And in reference to thus was it said." >========================================================== All 6 types of consciousness are included in one aggregate, vinnana khandha. These 6 types are all mental. They all are same in the "knowing" function. With best wishes, Alex #124558 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 29, 2012 6:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] what demarcates citta? upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - Gee, I guess we disagree. LOL! With metta, Howard In a message dated 5/28/2012 4:39:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, all, >HCW:It seems to me that the quality of knowing changes when the >type of object changes. >------------------------------------------------- "Knowing" remains the same, it is only different *object* of knowing. >HCW: Consciousness is conditioned by the nature of its object. From >MN 137 there is the following: "'The six classes of consciousness >should be known': thus was it said. And in reference to what was it >said? Eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, >tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, intellect-consciousness. >'The six classes of consciousness should be known': thus was it >said. And in reference to thus was it said." >========================================================== All 6 types of consciousness are included in one aggregate, vinnana khandha. These 6 types are all mental. They all are same in the "knowing" function. With best wishes, Alex #124559 From: "sarah" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 8:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy sarahprocter... Hi all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: >attainment of becoming an anagram or arahant, as in the case of the Buddha and some of his disciples. In this case, the first citta which arises after emerging from nirodha samapatti (the phala, fruition citta, of the anagram or arahant respectively which has nibbana as object), .... Huh? My software updater obviously things it understands Pali better than I do and is obviously convinced it is anagrams rather than anagamis that become enlightened. I need to find the switch to turn off these "helpful suggestions" of where I may be going wrong on the path! Metta Sarah ==== #124560 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 9:31 am Subject: [dsg] Re: experience epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > I'm just honestly not sure what we disagree about. > ------------------------------------------------ > HCW: > LOL! I dunno. > ------------------------------------------------ Okay, just checking I guess... :-) Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #124561 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 9:34 am Subject: Re: the path epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > >RE:...I'm sure they had been studying and practicing for a long time >before "instant awakening." > >============================ > > Maybe the reason they were studying and practicing for a long time is that they were doing something wrong and only when they intuitively realized the mistake, then Awakening occurred. > > If a person does mistakes for 10 years which only prevents Awakening from occuring. Then after 10 years one realizes the mistake and Awakening happens, was that gradual or instant Awakening? So you're saying that if you don't awaken instantly, you're doing something wrong? What is it in your case? I don't agree with this view at all. Enlightenment is not something that takes place from an instant twist of the mind, it is the result of sustained systemic work. What you are saying is the equivalent of learning to play the piano by dropping all "piano ignorance." I don't think it works that way. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #124562 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 10:15 am Subject: Re: experience (Typo fix) epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, > > > >Alex: experience 1) At 10:00-10:01am one might experience pebble in >the show. > > > >RE:C'mon Alex! Pebble in the Show? Sounds like a post-modern New Wave >band. > >============================================= > > > "W" is next to "E" on my keyboard. I was not feeling well when I wrote that message and didn't notice that. I barely kept myself in upright posture I was feeling so bad. I was just joking with you - sorry you were not feeling well. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #124563 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 10:31 am Subject: Re: the path truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >So you're saying that if you don't awaken instantly, you're doing >something wrong? >================ Right. >What is it in your case? I don't agree with this view at all. Many suttas regarding instant awakening (ex: Bahiya to Arhatship, and Ven.Sariputta became stream enterer from one line of teaching) >RE: Enlightenment is not something that takes place from an instant >twist of the mind, it is the result of sustained systemic work. >======================== In order to have that twist of the mind, some people need systemic work to understand the benefits of this instant twist of the mind. ""I don't envision a single thing that is as quick to reverse itself as the mind — so much so that there is no feasible simile for how quick to reverse itself it is." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an01/an01.048.than.html In MN85 the Buddha says that He can bring a good student to Arhatship within ONE day. Also satipatthana sutta promises Arhatship within 7 days. >RE:What >you are saying is the equivalent of learning to play the >piano by >dropping all "piano ignorance." I don't think it works >that way. >================================== Nibbana is nothing special. It is absence of greed, anger and delusion. These are something that mind does. So if it stops doing it this moment, Nibbana. Of course we want things and don't want to give up, that prevents awakening. Nibbana is NOT like building Great Wall of China, which would take time. And Ptsm (Chapter On Convergence) say that it is impossible to destroy past, future or present defilements. Rather, one should not generate them. So the path is not about burning up trillions of past defilements. I have this simile. Lets say a small cave was closed and inside of it the darkness was for millions of years. If someone would open it and light the torch, the darkness would instantly be dispelled - even if it was for millions of years. Same with defilements. It doesn't matter that they were appearing and ceasing for countless lifetimes. A liberating "insight" can instantly dispel all the darkness. With metta, Alex #124564 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 10:47 am Subject: Re: the path epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > >So you're saying that if you don't awaken instantly, you're doing >something wrong? > >================ > > Right. > > > >What is it in your case? I don't agree with this view at all. > > Many suttas regarding instant awakening (ex: Bahiya to Arhatship, and Ven.Sariputta became stream enterer from one line of teaching) The Buddha also explains such things due to accumulations in past lives, not by a stand-alone sudden awakening. Even in zen, where sudden awakening is very much part of the discipline, there are years and years of practice leading up to any such event in almost all cases. And that is true in almost all cases in the suttas as well. > >RE: Enlightenment is not something that takes place from an instant >twist of the mind, it is the result of sustained systemic work. > >======================== > > In order to have that twist of the mind, some people need systemic work to understand the benefits of this instant twist of the mind. That's the point - almost everyone does. You can't base your practice on one or two people who "won the lottery." The chances of repeating what they did are slim. How can you tell if you are one of those lucky few? If you're not enlightened already and you've been involved with Buddhism for 10 or 20 or 30 or 40 years, chances are you need to practice. > ""I don't envision a single thing that is as quick to reverse itself as the mind — so much so that there is no feasible simile for how quick to reverse itself it is." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an01/an01.048.than.html I believe in probability, not possibility. If the mind suddenly reverses itself into an enlightened state, I will be quite pleased, but I'm not expecting it. > In MN85 the Buddha says that He can bring a good student to Arhatship within ONE day. With emphasis on "a good student." I wonder what that would be in the Buddha's terms...? > Also satipatthana sutta promises Arhatship within 7 days. And how many have fulfilled that promise? I'm not saying it's not possible, but I don't play such long odds myself. It's a worthless waste of time to imagine you are going to be suddenly enlightened without any effort. > >RE:What >you are saying is the equivalent of learning to play the >piano by >dropping all "piano ignorance." I don't think it works >that way. > >================================== > > > Nibbana is nothing special. It is absence of greed, anger and delusion. These are something that mind does. So if it stops doing it this moment, Nibbana. And has that happened to you lately? How long have you been waiting? I'm just saying - let's be real about it, and not indulge in magical thinking. > Of course we want things and don't want to give up, that prevents awakening. Sure, I can quit heroin any time, as long as I have it nearby when I want it. [This is an example, not a personal confession...] > Nibbana is NOT like building Great Wall of China, which would take time. And Ptsm (Chapter On Convergence) say that it is impossible to destroy past, future or present defilements. Rather, one should not generate them. So the path is not about burning up trillions of past defilements. I don't agree with that interpretation. I don't recall it as saying that the defilements would be in place and that enlightenment would come anyway. I recall that it said that they would be destroyed at a certain stage - do you have the quote handy...? > I have this simile. Lets say a small cave was closed and inside of it the darkness was for millions of years. If someone would open it and light the torch, the darkness would instantly be dispelled - even if it was for millions of years. Same with defilements. It doesn't matter that they were appearing and ceasing for countless lifetimes. > > A liberating "insight" can instantly dispel all the darkness. Just to add to your simile, if a 10-ton rock is in front of the cave, it may be a long time before there is any chance of letting the light in. Ignoring the rock instead of chipping away at it will get you nothing but more darkness. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #124565 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 11:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > Huh? My software updater obviously things it understands Pali better than I do and is obviously convinced it is anagrams rather than anagamis that become enlightened. > > I need to find the switch to turn off these "helpful suggestions" of where I may be going wrong on the path! I was pretty sure you didn't mean "anagrams." Spell checkers can't become enlightened anyway, can they? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #124566 From: A T Date: Tue May 29, 2012 12:23 pm Subject: Re: the path truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >RE: The Buddha also explains such things due to accumulations in past lives, not by a stand-alone sudden awakening.  >============================== Where in the suttas, especially early ones, does Buddha state this? There is NO such teaching in main suttas (4.5 Nikayas). Not only that, but such teaching would contradict what is said. Some quotes (old + new) 1)"I don't envision a single thing that is as quick to reverse itself as the mind — so much so that there is no feasible simile for how quick to reverse itself it is." - AN1.48 2)"For one knowing in this way, seeing in this way, monk, there is the immediate ending of fermentations." ...anantarā āsavānaṃ khayo hotī’ - SN22.55 , SN22.81 3) Dhamma is visible-here-and-now(sandiá¹­á¹­hiko), and timeless (akāliko). >RE: With emphasis on "a good student." I wonder what that would be in the Buddha's terms...? ex (poor translation but I don't want to type what BB wrote): Here the bhikkhu takes faith about the enlightnment of the Thus Gone One:That Blessed One is perfect, rightfully enlightened, endowed with knowledge and conduct, well gone, knows of the worlds, is the incomparable tamer of those to be tamed, Teacher of gods and men, enlightened and blessed. He has few ailments and few disorders, promoting a good digestive system, not too cold and not too hot. He is not crafty nor fraudulent, shows his real self to the Teacher or to the wise co-associates in the holy life. Abides with aroused effort, for the dispelling of demerit and the accumulation of merit. Becomes firm not giving up the yoke for things of merit. [1] Becomes wise endowed with the noble ones penetration of the rising and falling of the five holding masses, for the rightful destruction of unpleasantness http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima2/085-bodhirajak\ umara-e1.html Nowhere is in the main suttas (or early Buddhism) teaching about having to have lots of accumulations (parami) from previous lives. Even if there was, I think that lots of accumulations are required to reach the stage that we are in right now. To be reborn as humans, to be able to hear the Dhamma, to accept it, and to develop it. >RE: Just to add to your simile, if a 10-ton rock is in front of the cave, it may be a long time before there is any chance of letting the light >in. Ignoring the >rock instead of chipping away at it will get you nothing but more darkness. >========================== Except that Awakening is mind work and mind can instantly alter its ways. Again, Nibbāna is described as not-born, not-became, not-made, not-conditioned. ajātaṃ abhÅ«taṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ. Ud 8.3 So what are we trying to create, "give birth to", or condition?  With metta, Alex #124567 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 12:37 pm Subject: Re: the path (2) Ptsm quote truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >RE: I don't agree with that interpretation. I don't recall it as >saying that the defilements would be in place and that enlightenment >would come anyway. I recall that it said that they would be >destroyed >at a certain stage - do you have the quote handy...? >================================================ Ptsm says this: "He does not abandon past defilements, he does not abandon future defilements, he does not abandon presently-arisen defilements."- pg389 Alex: It it then stated that one simply does not produce them rather than trying to destroy them (which would be impossible anyway). "12. Suppose there were a young tree with unborn fruit, and a man cut its root, then the unborn fruit of the tree remain unborn and do not come to be born, they remain ungenerated and do not come to be generated, they remain unarisen and do not come to be arisen, they remain unmanifest and do not come to be manifested. So too, arising is a cause, arising is a condition, for the generation of defilements. Seeing danger in arising, cognizance enters into (launches out into) non-arising." - pg 390 This is what I was talking about, non-arising of defilements. With metta, Alex #124568 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 2:06 pm Subject: Re: the path epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, A T wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > >RE: The Buddha also explains such things due to accumulations in past lives, not by a stand-alone sudden awakening. > >============================== > > Where in the suttas, especially early ones, does Buddha state this? There is NO such teaching in main suttas (4.5 Nikayas)... ... > Nowhere is in the main suttas (or early Buddhism) teaching about having to have lots of accumulations (parami) from previous lives. Well I don't have any at hand, but I have read countless passages about the results of past life actions/kamma influencing directly the attributes the person has in the next succeeding lives, including good looks and intelligence, and the potential to progress in that lifetime. I'll try to find some if I can... > Even if there was, I think that lots of accumulations are required to reach the stage that we are in right now. To be reborn as humans, to be able to hear the Dhamma, to accept it, and to develop it. Well then you have just seemingly contradicted what you said above. If accumulations lead to human birth and accepting the Dhamma, they can also lead to one's propensity for enlightenment and how much work may be necessary before awakening. > >RE: Just to add to your simile, if a 10-ton rock is in front of the cave, it may be a long time before there is any chance of letting the light >in. Ignoring the >rock instead of chipping away at it will get you nothing but more darkness. > >========================== > > Except that Awakening is mind work and mind can instantly alter its ways. Again, Nibbāna is described as not-born, not-became, not-made, not-conditioned. ajātaṃ abhÅ«taṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ. Ud 8.3 > > So what are we trying to create, "give birth to", or condition? The mind doesn't exist as a static object, it is a pattern of various thoughts and tendencies. The idea that you can just "turn it around" as if it were an empty shell does not make much sense. Try going without chocolate for a day before thinking you can turn the mind around to let go of all its treasured objects and go directly towards cessation of all defilements. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #124569 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 4:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy jonoabb Hi Rob E --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Sarah. > ... > RE: Spell checkers can't become enlightened anyway, can they? > =============== J: Not true. Because of their repeated exposure to all those 'Dhamma concepts' that are so full of meaning they can develop a kind of insight :-))!! Jon #124570 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 4:46 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat jonoabb Hi Rob E (124512) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > RE: I think that's basically true. Certainly there cannot be a right conceptual statement that is rightly said or understood without it being the object of right understanding. There is still a missing link there though, as you suspected, and that is the fact that the concepts that are written out from the spoken word of the Buddha do represent "right understanding in conceptual form," even though they are just "concepts" in that form. What I would say is that they represent "right understandings" that have been codified into language, but that they are indeed meaningless unless they are met by further "right understanding" when they are read or spoken. > =============== J: You speak as if it was one and the same concept that is spoken by the Buddha in the first place and then subsequently `met' by a moment of right understanding. That is surely giving substance and a quality to the concept. > =============== > RE: So to me it is still a combination. The wisdom of the Buddha is stored in those words, so it is not just about the citta that encounters them, but also about what it encounters. Those correct concepts given by the Buddha have to be there, or there would be nothing of value for the 'right understanding' to understand. > =============== J: Regarding, "it is not just about the citta that encounters them [the words of the Buddha], but also about what it [i.e., the citta] encounters", you speak as if the words representing the teachings of the Buddha have an existence or substance or quality of some kind such that they can be encountered/met by an arising citta. But that would make the `concept' a dhamma!! Regarding, "Those correct concepts given by the Buddha have to be there, or there would be nothing of value for the 'right understanding' to understand", you speak as if these `correct concepts' have an existence or substance or quality of some sort such that they can become the object of insight understanding. Again, that would bring them within the class of things called dhammas. Concepts are not `encountered' by citta. A concept that is the object of right understanding is `created' by that moment of consciousness itself. It is neither the same concept as, nor a replica of, a concept that had been heard previously. It is `correct' to the extent that is appropriate to the level of right understanding that accompanies the moment of consciousness. > =============== > RE: I would give up that notion if it were not for the fact that *hearing the Dhamma* is a prerequisite for right understanding, so the concepts in language *give rise to* right understanding under the right conditions; they are not just the accidental outcome of right understanding that exists without those concepts. Without the Buddha's conceptual communication, there would be no right understanding possible. > =============== J: Yes, but "hearing the Dhamma" does not mean hearing specific `Dhamma concepts'. Hearing the Dhamma is the product of the communication of one persons' understanding to another to another person, and this communication could be expressed in any form of words. Besides, the fact that all communication is conceptual does not mean that concepts should be seen as being endowed with any special meaning. As I mentioned previously, `Dhamma concepts' spoken by a person who is without understanding are not capable of conditioning the arising of understanding in another. In addition, you seem to be suggesting a special rule for `Dhamma concepts', i.e., different from what would apply as regards other concepts. Jon #124571 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 11:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Rob E > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Sarah. > > ... > > RE: Spell checkers can't become enlightened anyway, can they? > > =============== > > J: Not true. Because of their repeated exposure to all those 'Dhamma concepts' that are so full of meaning they can develop a kind of insight :-))!! Hm...well that is good to know. It makes me feel hopeful that my constant exposure to Dhamma concepts may rub off on me eventually too! [Both for me and the spell checker it may take a while.] Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #124572 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 29, 2012 11:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - nilovg Dear Alex, Op 28-mei-2012, om 19:48 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > >Sarah: Each citta is succeeded by another citta with no gaps at > all. This >is by proximity condition - each citta 'triggers' the > next one, like >in the case of falling dominoes. > >============================== > > Alex:I wonder, based on what criteria do we demarcate one citta > from another citta? Why can't there be the same citta (as knowing, > cognizing) that sees this, then sees that? > > Even if we say that seeing citta depends on eye & color, hearing > citta depends on ear & sound, etc, any and all citta is still the > same in one intrinsic characteristic of "knowing" or "cognizing". > > "Consciousness, though divided into eighty-nine types, is regarded > as one entity because all cittas have the same intrinsic nature-the > cognizing of an object." - CMA book pg 264 ------- N: It is true that the function of citta is clearly cognizing an object. But still cittas are different, there isn't any citta that can stay and experience now this, then that. Quote from "Buddhism in Daily Life": -------- Nina. #124573 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 29, 2012 11:22 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Besides, the fact that all communication is conceptual does not mean that concepts should be seen as being endowed with any special meaning. As I mentioned previously, `Dhamma concepts' spoken by a person who is without understanding are not capable of conditioning the arising of understanding in another. > > In addition, you seem to be suggesting a special rule for `Dhamma concepts', i.e., different from what would apply as regards other concepts. Well, I am just trying to make sense of the facts. As Joe Friday used to say on the detective show "Dragnet" many years ago, when told the story of what happened to someone, "Just the facts, ma'am." The fact that I am trying to make sense of, and which your otherwise very worthy explanation seems to have so far not quite explained, is how the communication of the concepts given by the Buddha, such as "all dhammas are anatta," are not only the vehicle by which understanding begins to develop, but are said to be absolutely necessary to any understanding of the nature of dhammas. So I start with that fact, and I look for a viable explanation of why this is the case, and how it comes about. In practical terms, someone either reads about and studies the written Dhamma in sutta and scripture, or someone tells them about it and discusses it with them, and through these conceptual introductions, the person begins to develop some form of conceptual understanding of the Dhamma. Leaving aside what happens after that, including continued conceptual contact with the Dhamma through more reading and discussion, can we look at that beginning situation where the person is first introduced to the Dhamma via words? What happens at that time? Prior to the introduction of the Dhamma, by definition as given in the scriptures there is no possibility of understanding the nature of reality, that all life consists of momentary, temporary, selfless dhammas not worth clinging to, to summarize. Without the appearance of a Buddha in the world, we are told, there is no possibility of enlightenment. You have to hear the teachings. So this person starts out without any understanding, no understanding of Dhamma at all. As soon as they hear and consider the concepts of the Dhamma, perhaps the four noble truths in a simple, conceptual outline, or perhaps the nature of reality as anicca or anatta, they have the first possibility of a glimmering understanding by considering such concepts as are given. So it is indeed the spoken or written concept itself that awakens the possibility of understanding. The understanding doesn't come first, the written or spoken concepts come first. So the understanding at first is conceptually based, in the form given by the Buddha, or paraphrased by someone else, but with the same meaning as the words given by the Buddha. I would agree with you that without the arousal of understanding in the cittas of the person who has been thus given the concepts of the Dhamma, there is no possibility of those concepts awakening any understanding. The person would be like the spell checker who can only repeat the concepts with no meaning or understanding, or perhaps helpfully translate anagami into "anagram," something that it already understands. But without the correct written or spoken words, that understanding cannot be aroused. Yes, the Dhamma concepts have a special status, because the ordinary concept cannot arouse understanding of the Dhamma. Only the Dhamma concepts can do this. So yes, it is dependent on both. The codified concepts have to be expressed in speech, or encountered in writing, AND the concepts have to be understood with some degree of understanding by the person hearing and considering. Please account for the Dhamma end of this. I think we both agree about the understanding of the person on the other end. But it is also necessary to have the right concepts expressed in words for there to be something that can be understood; otherwise no Dhamma, no path, no understanding of the nature of realities is possible. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #124574 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 29, 2012 11:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the path (2) Ptsm quote nilovg Dear Alex, Op 29-mei-2012, om 4:37 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > Ptsm says this: > > "He does not abandon past defilements, he does not abandon future > defilements, he does not abandon presently-arisen defilements."- pg389 > > Alex: It it then stated that one simply does not produce them > rather than trying to destroy them (which would be impossible anyway). > > "12. Suppose there were a young tree with unborn fruit, and a man cut > its root, then the unborn fruit of the tree remain unborn and do > not come to be born, they remain ungenerated and do not come to be > generated, they remain unarisen and do not come to be arisen, they > remain unmanifest and do not come to be manifested. So too, arising > is a cause, arising is a condition, for the generation of > defilements. Seeing danger in arising, cognizance enters into > (launches out into) non-arising." - pg 390 > > This is what I was talking about, non-arising of defilements. --------- N: I can add to the texts you quoted from the Ptsm. These are from the Anusaya studies I translated from Thai. Coarse defilements are actual transgressions. Medium defilements are arising with the akusala citta. Subtle defilements are the latent tendencies, anusayas. < [Suppose that] he abandons past defilements. If he abandons past defilements, he destroyed what has already been destroyed, causes to cease what has already ceased, causes to vanish what has already vanished, causes to subside what has already subsided. What is past, which is non-existent, that he abandons? He does not abandon past defilements. [Suppose that] he abandons future defilements. If he abandons future defilements, he abandons what has not been born, he abandons what has not been generated, he abandons what has not been arisen, he abandons what has not become manifest. What is future, which is non-existent, that he abandons? He does not abandon future defilements. [Suppose that] he abandons presently-arisen defilements. If he abandons presently-arisen defilements, then though inflamed with greed, he abandons greed, though corrupted by hate, he abandons hate, though deluded, he abandons delusion, though shackled, he abandons conceit, though misapprehending, he abandons wrong view, though distracted, he abandons agitation, though undecided, he abandons uncertainty, though having inveterate habits, he abandons underlying-tendency, dark and bright ideas (dhammas) occur coupled together, and there is development of a path that has defilement. He does not abandon past defilements and he does not abandon future defilements and he does not abandon presently-arisen defilements.” This refers to medium defilements, pariyutthåana kilesa, defilements arising with the akusala citta. If he does not abandon past defilements and he does not abandon future defilements, and he does not abandon presently-arisen defilements, then there is no development of the path, there is no realization of its fruition, there is no convergence of ideas? That is not so. There is development of the path, there is realization of its fruition, there is convergence of ideas! In what way? Suppose there were a young tree with unborn fruit, and a man cut its root, then the unborn fruit of the tree remain unborn and do not come to be born, they remain ungenerated and do not come to be generated, they remain unarisen and do not come to be arisen, they remain unmanifest and do not come to be manifested. So too, arising is a cause, arising is a condition, for the generation of defilements. Seeing danger in arising, cognizance enters into non-arising . With cognizance's entering into non-arising the defilements that would be generated with arising as their condition remain unborn and do not come to be born, ... remain unmanifested and do not come to be manifested. So with the cessation of the cause there is the cessation of suffering. Occurrence is a cause ... the sign is a cause ... Accumulation is a cause, accumulation is a condition, for the generation of defilements. Seeing danger in accumulation, cognizance enters into non-accumulation. With cognizance's entering into non-accumulation the defilements that would be generated with accumulation as their condition remain unborn and do not come to be born, ... remain unmanifested and do not come to be manifested. So with the cessation of the cause there is the cessation of suffering. Thus there is development of the path, there is realization of its fruition, there is convergence of ideas (dhammas).” From the foregoing text quotations it can be concluded that there is development of the path, that there is eradication of defilements. The path does not eradicate past, future or present defilements. The defilements that arose in the past have already ceased, thus, they are not present at the moment the path-consciousness arises. As to the defilements that will arise in the future, these have not yet arisen. As to presently arising defilements, it is impossible that these could arise together with the magga-citta. Someone who eradicates past defilements, future defilements and presently arisen defilements cannot be found. However, the path eradicates latent tendencies which are there at that moment. The latent tendencies are defilements that do not arise, they are timeless . When the magga-citta, path-consciousness, has eradicated latent tendencies there are no more conditions for the arising of akusala, since there are no germs of it in the form of latent tendencies. That is why it is said that when someone eradicates latent tendencies he actually eradicates akusala of past, future and present. Thus, akusala has no opportunity to arise. As it is said “This person eradicates defilements of the past, the future and the present.” This is compared to a tree which does not produce fruition yet. When its roots have been cut off there is no opportunity for the production of fruition. Evenso, in the past that has gone there is no production of fruition. In the future there is no oportunity for the arising of fruition. At the present time there is no arising either of fruition. --------- Nina. #124575 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 30, 2012 12:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the path (2) Ptsm quote upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Alex) - This is excellent, Nina!! (IMO, of course.) This is one of the best things I've read about abandonment of defilements. I will be saving this post of yours! Thank you for it! :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 5/29/2012 9:42:08 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear Alex, Op 29-mei-2012, om 4:37 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > Ptsm says this: > > "He does not abandon past defilements, he does not abandon future > defilements, he does not abandon presently-arisen defilements."- pg389 > > Alex: It it then stated that one simply does not produce them > rather than trying to destroy them (which would be impossible anyway). > > "12. Suppose there were a young tree with unborn fruit, and a man cut > its root, then the unborn fruit of the tree remain unborn and do > not come to be born, they remain ungenerated and do not come to be > generated, they remain unarisen and do not come to be arisen, they > remain unmanifest and do not come to be manifested. So too, arising > is a cause, arising is a condition, for the generation of > defilements. Seeing danger in arising, cognizance enters into > (launches out into) non-arising." - pg 390 > > This is what I was talking about, non-arising of defilements. --------- N: I can add to the texts you quoted from the Ptsm. These are from the Anusaya studies I translated from Thai. Coarse defilements are actual transgressions. Medium defilements are arising with the akusala citta. Subtle defilements are the latent tendencies, anusayas. < [Suppose that] he abandons past defilements. If he abandons past defilements, he destroyed what has already been destroyed, causes to cease what has already ceased, causes to vanish what has already vanished, causes to subside what has already subsided. What is past, which is non-existent, that he abandons? He does not abandon past defilements. [Suppose that] he abandons future defilements. If he abandons future defilements, he abandons what has not been born, he abandons what has not been generated, he abandons what has not been arisen, he abandons what has not become manifest. What is future, which is non-existent, that he abandons? He does not abandon future defilements. [Suppose that] he abandons presently-arisen defilements. If he abandons presently-arisen defilements, then though inflamed with greed, he abandons greed, though corrupted by hate, he abandons hate, though deluded, he abandons delusion, though shackled, he abandons conceit, though misapprehending, he abandons wrong view, though distracted, he abandons agitation, though undecided, he abandons uncertainty, though having inveterate habits, he abandons underlying-tendency, dark and bright ideas (dhammas) occur coupled together, and there is development of a path that has defilement. He does not abandon past defilements and he does not abandon future defilements and he does not abandon presently-arisen defilements.” This refers to medium defilements, pariyutthÃ¥ana kilesa, defilements arising with the akusala citta. If he does not abandon past defilements and he does not abandon future defilements, and he does not abandon presently-arisen defilements, then there is no development of the path, there is no realization of its fruition, there is no convergence of ideas? That is not so. There is development of the path, there is realization of its fruition, there is convergence of ideas! In what way? Suppose there were a young tree with unborn fruit, and a man cut its root, then the unborn fruit of the tree remain unborn and do not come to be born, they remain ungenerated and do not come to be generated, they remain unarisen and do not come to be arisen, they remain unmanifest and do not come to be manifested. So too, arising is a cause, arising is a condition, for the generation of defilements. Seeing danger in arising, cognizance enters into non-arising . With cognizance's entering into non-arising the defilements that would be generated with arising as their condition remain unborn and do not come to be born, ... remain unmanifested and do not come to be manifested. So with the cessation of the cause there is the cessation of suffering. Occurrence is a cause ... the sign is a cause ... Accumulation is a cause, accumulation is a condition, for the generation of defilements. Seeing danger in accumulation, cognizance enters into non-accumulation. With cognizance's entering into non-accumulation the defilements that would be generated with accumulation as their condition remain unborn and do not come to be born, ... remain unmanifested and do not come to be manifested. So with the cessation of the cause there is the cessation of suffering. Thus there is development of the path, there is realization of its fruition, there is convergence of ideas (dhammas).” From the foregoing text quotations it can be concluded that there is development of the path, that there is eradication of defilements. The path does not eradicate past, future or present defilements. The defilements that arose in the past have already ceased, thus, they are not present at the moment the path-consciousness arises. As to the defilements that will arise in the future, these have not yet arisen. As to presently arising defilements, it is impossible that these could arise together with the magga-citta. Someone who eradicates past defilements, future defilements and presently arisen defilements cannot be found. However, the path eradicates latent tendencies which are there at that moment. The latent tendencies are defilements that do not arise, they are timeless . When the magga-citta, path-consciousness, has eradicated latent tendencies there are no more conditions for the arising of akusala, since there are no germs of it in the form of latent tendencies. That is why it is said that when someone eradicates latent tendencies he actually eradicates akusala of past, future and present. Thus, akusala has no opportunity to arise. As it is said “This person eradicates defilements of the past, the future and the present.” This is compared to a tree which does not produce fruition yet. When its roots have been cut off there is no opportunity for the production of fruition. Evenso, in the past that has gone there is no production of fruition. In the future there is no oportunity for the arising of fruition. At the present time there is no arising either of fruition. --------- Nina. #124576 From: Ken O Date: Wed May 30, 2012 1:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 2007 audio - 9. Sila as foundation? ashkenn2k Dear Rob E Sila is kamma during speech, acts and mind. They are taught as foundation because sila restraints ones nama and rupa. When one is restraint, one mind is easily concentrated cheers KC > > #124577 From: Ken O Date: Wed May 30, 2012 1:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy ashkenn2k Dear Alex the present consciousness is a one of the trillion of citta. It cannot be otherwise. We should rather not concern about the trillions of citta, we should be more concern with the present one, the one of the trillion citta. KC > #124578 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 2:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy moellerdieter Dear Sarah (and Nina), you wrote: I'll leave aside the further points on sankhara and super-supra-mundane for now as we've discussed them a lot. D: allow me please to pick up for now only above sentence from your message . Is just that the mundane (our daily life ) , the super-mundane (Dependent Origination) and the supra- mundane (Nibbana) is a base of understanding to which level we are refering to ( mundane ,absolute and ultimate truth). . When you say in reality there are only dhammas rising and falling away , then it misses the point that this rising and ceasing is submitted to the Law of D.O. , which describes our wandering in the rounds (Samsara) and it lacks to see the very decisive power behind it: Kamma (which brings us to Sankhara ( and its condition Avijja= not knowing /having penetrated the 4 Noble Truths). Does this make sense to you? with Metta Dieter I #124579 From: Ken O Date: Wed May 30, 2012 2:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhs ashkenn2k Dear pt and Rob K Like you, I'm still not quite sure how can a dhamma be an object of a citta and yet there would be no awareness of its general or particular characteristics at the time. Perhaps the fact that it is an akusala citta with moha means that there is in fact ignorance at the time of the characteristics of a dhamma (general and particular), so no "seeing directly". KC: citta knows an object but it is panna that knows the general and particular characteristics of an object. for eg a coin, citta knows it is a coin where panna knows the value of the coin. To see directly, there would be at vipassana level and not at conventional level. cheers KC #124580 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 2:56 am Subject: Re: the path truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >RE:Well I don't have any at hand, but I have read countless passages >about the results of past life actions/kamma influencing directly >the attributes the person has in the next succeeding lives, >including good looks and intelligence, and the potential to progress >in that lifetime. I'll try to find some if I can... >====== >Well then you have just seemingly contradicted what you said above. >If accumulations lead to human birth and accepting the Dhamma, they >can also lead to one's propensity for enlightenment and how much >work may be necessary before awakening. >============================================== Bad kammavipaka and lack of good vipaka can hinder one's progress in this way: If one is born in sub-human plane. Or even if one is born in good realm, there is no Dhamma teaching available. If one is born as a human, one is "mentally deranged". Or if not mentally deranged, one is born in extreme circumstances (poor starving kid in Africa) where one can't hear the dhamma. None of this applies to us. So in this case we have already good kammavipaka in this regard. I believe that we must "use it" when there is a chance. I think what is unfortunate if the person doesn't make use of these relatively good circumstances that we are in. Unfortunate kamma is to avoid this precious chance we have now. Who knows how many lifetimes we did good kamma to be where we are now. Please see AN 3.61. Quote in the bottom of this post. >Alex: So what are we trying to create, "give birth to", or >condition? > >RE:The mind doesn't exist as a static object, it is a pattern of >various thoughts and tendencies. >========================================= Exactly. >RE:The idea that you can just "turn it around" as if it were an >empty >shell does not make much sense. >========================================= Because mental states can alter so quickly, and are not static, precisely because of that Awakening can occur quickly. You aren't trying to fix one huge "boulder" of the mind that existed relatively unchanged for trillions of years. The mind can change any moment because it is not static and defilements are not intrinsic to it. ======================================================= "Having approached the brahmans & contemplatives who hold that... 'Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold that... "Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past?"' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.' Then I said to them, 'Then in that case, a person is a killer of living beings because of what was done in the past. A person is a thief... unchaste... a liar... a divisive speaker... a harsh speaker... an idle chatterer... greedy... malicious... a holder of wrong views because of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.061.than.html Wrong views and bad behavior is not caused by what was done in the past. It is present fault. With metta, Alex #124581 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 3:05 am Subject: [dsg] Re: the path (2) Ptsm quote truth_aerator Dear Nina, Thank you for your post. I am not sure about what we disagree. By defilements I think that all three levels are included. And the "path moment" eradicates corresponding defilements. Eradicates in the sense that mind will not produce them anymore. One cannot eradicate past or future defilements because they don't exist, unless, of course, we believe that past and future exists. See Example of the tree and fruit. By cutting down the tree, the tree cannot produce its fruit. Cutting of the tree does not literally destroy existing fruit of the past, present, or future. Rather, the cause is removed. With metta, Alex #124582 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 3:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy truth_aerator Dear KC, >KC: the present consciousness is a one of the trillion of citta. It >cannot be otherwise. We should rather not concern about the trillions >of citta, we should be more concern with the present one, the one of >the trillion citta. >=========================================================== You are right. With best wishes, Alex #124583 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 7:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy kenhowardau Hi Robert E (and Jon), ---- <. . .> RE: [Both for me and the spell checker it may take a while.] ---- KH: I would like to say my money was on you, Rob. :-) Conventionally speaking of course my money is on you. But at a Dhamma forum we must concede that both a sentient being and a spell checker are concepts, and ultimately non-existent. In ultimate truth and reality neither will ever attain anything. Ken H #124584 From: "azita" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 8:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy gazita2002 hallo KenH and others, Appreciate yr reminders about realities. was listening to a recording and someone was making a query about Nibbana. If its kilesa that keeps 'us' in the round of birth and death; that there is no 'us' jst arising and falling of citta, cetasika and rupa, then the reality called wisdom develops to the strength to condition the eradication of kilesa which in turn is a condition to end the round of birth/death. So it occurred to me that it doesnt matter what Nibbana is other than the end of conditioned arisings and fallings. Until paramattha dhammas are known and known thoroughly then 'we' are lost in this 'sea of concepts' [quote]:) This post doesnt need a reply, jst wanted to drop into dsg and put into words some thoughts. Am currently living in an area with no electricity therefore no internet, unless I go back to Cairns to visit family, which is where I am at present. So, Ken, when I do read its great to have some pertinent comments about realities. Patience, courage and good cheer azita > Conventionally speaking of course my money is on you. But at a Dhamma forum we must concede that both a sentient being and a spell checker are concepts, and ultimately non-existent. In ultimate truth and reality neither will ever attain anything. > > Ken H > #124585 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 11:07 am Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' jonoabb Hi Chris (124390) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine" wrote: > > Hello all, > > I wonder if those with a little more knowledge than I have would please read and comment on this article: > > Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy by Ven. Paññobhāsa Bhikkhu > http://pathpress.wordpress.com/2012/04/20/some-evidence-suggesting-the-spurious-\ nature-of-abhidhamma-philosophy-2-2/ > > with metta > Chris Have just got around to reading the article. The bulk of the article (paragraphs 1 to 5) deals with the evidence supporting the proposition that "there was no Abhidhamma Piṭaka in the earliest days of Buddhism" and, accordingly, that "Abhidhamma philosophy was never taught by the Buddha" (end of paragraph 5). As a general comment, I would say that the second of those propositions. ("Abhidhamma philosophy not taught by the Buddha") does not necessarily follow from the first ("no Abhidhamma Piṭaka in the earliest days of Buddhism"). As I see it, regardless of the view one takes on the compilation of the Abhidhamma Pitaka, there is still the question of whether or not the details of the Abhidhamma philosophy are a correct description of the way things are. And this question involves a consideration of whether or not those details are fully consistent with the other 2 baskets of the Tipitaka. As the arguments cited in support of the main proposition have all been aired here before, I'll move on to the rest of the article. In the final paragraph (paragraph 6) of his article, the Venerable goes on to assert that certain aspects of the Abhidhamma are contradicted by observations of science. To support this contention the Ven. considers the Abhidhammic notions of (a) sense-door consciousness and the manner by which the 5 sense-door objects are experienced and (b) the rupa-kalapas. The Ven. seems to prefer modern scientific observations over the Abhidhamma, and in doing so he also seems to equate certain dhammas with their conventional counterparts, which in my view is not how they are meant to be understood. I have selected below one or two passages from paragraph 6 of the article. In the course of his discussion under (a) (sense-door consciousness), the Ven. says the following: "Sensory consciousness is claimed [by the Abhidhamma scholars] to occur in the sense organs themselves, not in the brain" and "according to the Abhidhamma scholars, thought arises not in the brain but in a small quantity of variously colored blood contained in a chamber of the heart." It seems that the Ven. accepts without question the modern scientific view that all consciousness arises in the brain. He rejects the possibility of citta having a base ("vatthu") other than the brain, yet he does not explain why this could not possibly be the case. The Ven. goes on to say: "This belief [of the Abhidhamma scholars] is closely interrelated with the fundamental concept that all mentality is strictly linear, only one specific image at a time existing in the mind, arising and passing away spontaneously through the metaphysical power of kamma. The generally prevalent and empirically consistent concept of a complex, physical generator of feeling and thought is quite foreign to Abhidhamma, . . Here the Ven. seems to reject the Abhidhammic notion of one citta (and one object) at a time, in favour of the current scientific notion of a "complex, physical generator of feeling and thought". Again, though, there is no consideration as to why the Abhidhammic notion could not be the case. In his discussion under (b) (rupa-kalapas), the Ven. says: "color, as such, exists only in the mind and is merely a symbolic interpretation of a certain bandwidth of electromagnetic radiation; . . . odor and flavor exist only in the mind, and are the result of molecules and ions of certain configurations interacting with specific neurosensory receptor sites" The idea that sense-door objects "exist only in the mind" seems to run counter to the inclusion of those objects among the rupa-khandhas, dhatus and ayatanas that feature so extensively in the suttas. The Ven. does not say what he understands the significance of the references to sense-door objects in the suttas to be. Specifically, the Ven. does not seem to allow for the possibility of a 5 sense-door object being that which is actually experienced at a moment of sense-door consciousness and having a unique characteristic (and, as such, not equivalent to scientific/conventional notions of colour, sound, smell, etc.). Finally, the Ven. comments on the lack of scientific confirmation of the existence of rupa-kalapas. He says: "although rūpakalāpas are declared by the authorities to be ubiquitous and of appreciable size by modern scientific standards (roughly the size of an electron according to one authority), no physicist or chemist in a normal, waking state of consciousness has ever experimentally isolated or otherwise verified the existence of one"(!!) Again, modern science as the way to go ... It seems to me the Ven. may not fully appreciate the significance of the sense-door objects as pertaining to the present moment and of their classification in the suttas by way of the khandhas, dhatus, ayatanas, etc. What is clear, however, is that he is not impressed with the "authorities" or the "Abhidhamma scholars" (whoever these may be!). Jon #124586 From: "chandimag1984" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 8:14 am Subject: What is the most correct meaning of kāma-rāga? chandimag1984 Today someone told me that kāma-rāga is only the desire for sexuality and not the desire for five sensual objects. But I believe that the real meaning of kāma-rāga is the desire for five sensual pleasures and not just the sexuality. However, I am keen to see my fellow dhamma friends perceptions on this. #124587 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 30, 2012 3:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What is the most correct meaning of kaama-raaga? nilovg Dear Chandimag, Op 30-mei-2012, om 0:14 heeft chandimag1984 het volgende geschreven: > Today someone told me that kaama-raaga is only the desire for > sexuality and not the desire for five sensual objects. But I > believe that the real meaning of kaama-raaga is the desire for five > sensual pleasures and not just the sexuality. However, I am keen to > see my fellow dhamma friends perceptions on this. -------- N:kaamaraaga is desire for the sense objects, such as visible object, sound, etc. We cling to all objects that can be experienced through the senses time and again. After seeing has fallen away there is likely to be clinging to visible object, although we may not notice it. Clinging may be subtle, and cittas succeed one another so fast. Kaamaraaga time and again and we keep on accumulating it, so that there are conditions for its arising again and again. Kaamaraaga is one of the latent tendencies, anusayas, accumulated in each citta. So long as it has not been eradicated it conditions the arising of akusala citta whenever there is an opportunity. ------ Nina. #124588 From: "Christine" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 5:25 pm Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' christine_fo... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Chris > > Have just got around to reading the article. > Thanks Jon - much to ponder over in your response - much appreciated. with metta Chris #124589 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 30, 2012 5:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the path (2) Ptsm quote nilovg Dear Alex, Op 29-mei-2012, om 19:05 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > Thank you for your post. I am not sure about what we disagree. ----- N: No disagreement. When seeing your quote, I just thought of the texts about the latent tendencies I have been gone through with Han. Nina. #124590 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 30, 2012 6:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bad moods, looking for trubles sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, >________________________________ > From: Lukas >Dear friends I am staying with L. in a buddhist monastery.I listen and study a lot. I am studying Dhammasangani in Pali and I can memorize it quite while. And this is quite helpful cause I can think in daily life of Dhamma. > >But the last 3 days my dosa shows ups, and it so strong. relly painful bad moods, how 'others ' behave according to me. > >I will be greatful for help. Now I am starting with akusala cetasikas in Nina's cetasikas. .... S: I listened to part of a recording this morning and thought of your comments. K.Sujin was talking about the importance of learning more about wholesomeness and unwholesomeness when they arise. For example, understanding when there is metta vs attachment to having metta arise, conditions the seeing more and more of the danger of having dosa and lack of metta. No matter whether we're walking along the street, driving in a car or bus when things are not as we'd like them to be, if there is metta at such times, we think of the others' needs, we're understanding of their situation. She was stressing that instead of sitting in a dark room or a corner of a temple, thinking about having metta to this or that person, far more precious is the panna which understands the difference between kusala and akusala as this is what will condition more kusala until calmness develops and appears with other wholesome mental factors. Later, she stressed again how metta in daily life - anywhere, anytime - is more important than just trying to have it by thinking with attachment or clinging to it. "It depends on panna to develop calmness, to know the difference between cittas which are kusala and akusala. LIke now, if there is no panna, who can tell whether there is akusala citta after seeing?" And a bit further on: "Who will develop calmness? Only the one who sees the danger of akusala. If one does not see the danger of akusala, attached to visible object and things and having dosa at any moment of seeing and experiencing objects, can that person [develop calm]? So it needs panna. BUT, if anyone wants to have it, is it panna or attachment?" Metta Sarah p.s Btw, which monastery are you staying at? Is it in UK? If you contact Alan, perhaps he might visit you there for a chat. I'm glad you can listen and study there. Best wishes to Luraya as well. ===== #124591 From: "sarah" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 6:23 pm Subject: Re: Hello dear friends! sarahprocter... Hi James, Thx for all you kind words. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Buddhatrue" wrote: > James: Wow, I missed that letter from Phil's cousin. I'm sorry I missed that. ... S: Phil's cousin Ned, who he was very close to, died recently (suicide). Phil wrote a lovely letter to his cousin's family and friends. Here it is" http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/124354 ... >I think that explaining spirituality, no matter what spirituality, to younger generations is super important. I think that future generations will be even more spiritual than past generations. It is time for the pendulum to swing back from the material to the spiritual. I am glad to be a part of that, with you Sarah! xoxo ... S: I agree that it is lovely to share with young people if one has the chance. I was thinking of that good letter you wrote (about Patti? & ?) - both obsessed with attachment to themselves, whether full of joy or anger. I was going to share it with Phil. Maybe you can find the link again. Many of your old letters are in UP under "Children - teaching Dhamma to". > >S: There's always time for meditation because meditation is just about the development of understanding and there can be understanding of life, of dhammas that are arising, at any time at all, no matter how busy, how tired we are. > > > > James: Yeah, yeah, now you lost me. There can't be meditation without mindfulness and there can't be mindfulness with sloth and sleepiness. .... S: True - no mindfulness at moments of sloth and inertia of kusala of any kind. However, even when we feel very sleepy, there isn't sloth and inertia all the time. It's like when we're dreaming, sometimes we may wake up and there can be mindfulness at those moments, aware of the sloth, the laziness, the thinking - any reality at all. It's like when friends think they've been upset or had dosa all day - really, so many different moments. Lots of seeing, hearing and sense experiences, lots of attachment, but they focus on the dosa because of the unpleasant feeling which we don't like. ... >Okay, I don't want to end this post on a negative note. Love you!! Thx James - good to chat again. Hope your parents are well too. Do you still go back to the States? Metta Sarah ====== #124592 From: "sarah" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 6:35 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: >R: I guess I'm still wondering what the relation is between absorption and the burning off of attachment to sense objects. ... S: As I understand, the panna associated with the development of calm (samatha) sees the danger in attachment to more and more subtle kinds of attachment to sense objects until that calm and associated mental factors, such as concentration, is of the degree of upacara and then appanna (absorption). At this degree, because all attachment to sense objects has been temporarily suppressed, there are no conditions for sense objects to be experienced and the jhana cittas are "absorbed" in the jhana object. ... >R:It seems to me that being absorbed in the object of jhana, which is internal and subtle, is related to the burning off the interest in the usual external object, ie, you have inner absorption rather than external distraction. .... S: yes, no more interest in the usual sense objects we're usually so attached to. LIke now, do we want to see? to hear? .... > Well I appreciate the conversation. It's a lot to understand, but little pieces get clearer it seems, gradually. .... S: Same for us all..... Metta Sarah ===== #124593 From: "sarah" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 6:38 pm Subject: Re: 2007 audio - 9. Sila as foundation? sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > KS: I think that before we can talk more about anything, what about the question 'what is it?' from the very beginning. Even the word sila - in reality, what is it? The rupas don't have any sila, right? So it has to be the nama, citta and cetasika only and in Tipitaka there are 3 kinds of sila, another way to explain: the akusala sila, the kusala sila and the abyakata sila*, all 3. > > Thanks for this worthwhile discussion of the roots of sila in kusala citta, and very good way to look at the Vinaya. ... S: Thx for the feedback. Metta Sarah ===== #124594 From: "sarah" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 6:44 pm Subject: Re: unexperienced experience sarahprocter... Hi Alex (& Rob E) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > >RE: Bhavanga is a special case, but why not leave that aside since >it is not the norm? > >============== > > According to Comy Abh it occurs after ever citta or so. So in that sense it is much more normal than falling into a coma. .... S: I'm sure this will have been clarified later, but just to stress: Bhavanga IS citta. As Nina wrote, there are bhavanga cittas in between every sense and mind door process. In deep sleep, there are uninterrupted bhavanga cittas. With all due respect, I usually find that those who doubt and criticise the Abh commentaries are usually those who don't understand what they are talking about. I think, and probably Rob E will agree with me at this point, that the more understanding there is of the Abhidhamma, especially as it applies to daily life, to ife at this moment, the more interested one becomes in the commentaries and the less doubt one has about their value. Metta Sarah ======= #124595 From: "sarah" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 6:52 pm Subject: Re: Pali glossary to be found in the file section of DSG sarahprocter... Dear Dieter, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > I did not recognize DSG Pali glossary and just copied it for easier agreement on the definition of terms . ... S: Good to hear. ... > Perhaps there is as well the opportunity to discuss differences of interpretations if any .. > > e.g.. the entree ' lobha' - attachment or greed > > may I suggest : ' greed ' only , or to add ' as a condition for attachment'? .... S: Good to discuss. Now, is there attachment, however subtle, to what is seen, to what is heard? Lobha includes all degrees from the most subtle of attachments to the grossest kinds of greed and grasping. Perhaps 'clinging' also? Others may add their ideas. The important thing is to understand the lobha arising now! Metta Sarah ----- #124596 From: "sarah" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 6:59 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > S: The way I see it is that If there's no understanding now of when the citta is really calm, really kusala as opposed to just feeling pleasant and relaxed, there's no way that calm and understanding can grow. > > Does one have to directly experience the citta that is calm to have any understanding that will lead to samatha bhavana? .... S: Bhavana is the development of understanding, so if there is no direct understanding and awareness of the true quality of calm when it arises with kusala cittas, it cannot develop. As I think Jon's been emphasising in your discussions, the development of any kind of kusala depends on the citta rather than the object. ... >Or can one have insight in relation to the citta that is calm and the breath on the concept or nimitta level and still have development? > > As a corollary question, can you remind me in what instances panna can arise with concept, and how that is different than panna that discerns individual dhammas? ... S: I don't follow the first qu, but follow this one. At moments of insight or satipatthana, panna discerns a dhamma. When it is a moment of samatha or pariyatti (pre-satipatthana), it is concept as object. For example, now we're reflecting on the Dhamma. With the kusala cittas during such reflection, there is calm and the concepts of dhammas are the objects. Hope this is clearer. Metta Sarah ===== #124597 From: "sarah" Date: Wed May 30, 2012 7:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > >S:I think all the support is very clearly stated in the ancient >commentaries, accepted and recited by the "ancient" Theras at many >Councils. > >============= > > There have been about 20 different schools of Buddhism in early time. Theravada was only one of them. Not every school accepted Abhidhamma and some schools had their own vastly different Abhidhamma. While early schools had similar suttas, they had very big disagreements on Abhidhamma. There have been many ancient commentators that did not accept Theravada Abhidhamma. .... S: I don't see how this is relevant to what I wrote in response to the comment by the Ven that the assertion that the Abhidhamma was included in the Kuddaka Nikaya "receives no support from the ancient texts themselves". I have quoted extensively from the ancient commentaries which give exactly the support which was suggested not to exist. You quote from Wiki about different schools of Buddhism which has nothing to do with the point that there is no support in the Theravada teachings. And which is a more reliable source of information? The ancient commentaries carefully preserved by the Mahavihara arahats or Wikileaks? :-) For anything further on this topic, please see "Abhidhamma - origins", "Abhidhamma vs Suttanta" and so on, in U.P. Metta Sarah ====== #124598 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 31, 2012 12:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pali glossary to be found in the file section of DSG nilovg Dear Alex and Sarah, Op 30-mei-2012, om 10:52 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > S: Good to discuss. Now, is there attachment, however subtle, to > what is seen, to what is heard? Lobha includes all degrees from the > most subtle of attachments to the grossest kinds of greed and > grasping. Perhaps 'clinging' also? > > Others may add their ideas. The important thing is to understand > the lobha arising now! ------ Alex, I use Sarah's quote for an important point. You were wondering about the different schools of the Abhidhamma. We can solve dilemmas by considering what the Abhidhamma teaches and verify it in daily life. Then we shall see that it is "not in the book", as Kh Sujin so often stresses. The Abhidhamma teaches about the different types of lobha-muula-cittas, and what about lobha now? Seeing arises and shortly after seeing there is clinging to visible object. Different types of citta, all taught in the Abhidhamma. It is not different from the teaching of the Sutta. So often the Buddha speaks about seeing and then being infatuated with seeing. No more doubt about the right Abhidhamma among different schools. We can check: does the Abhidhamma help us to know ourselves better? To know our defilements more? ------- Nina. #124599 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 12:17 am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - epsteinrob Hi Nina. I like this sutta very much. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: ...if consciousness > arises because of mind and mental objects, it is known as mental > consciousness. I am wondering, when nibbana is the object of citta, would the consciousness still be considered a form of "mental consciousness," or does this have its own category that is different? I realize the cittas have a different name, but just wanted to clarify this point for myself. Thanks, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = =