#129400 From: "azita" Date: Thu Mar 7, 2013 12:36 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. gazita2002 Hallo RobE, > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder wrote: > > What do you mean by substantial entities? Must one always tie real with > > substantial? Can something not be conditioned and real at the same time? > > I think that's an excellent question, but the answer might not be quite so pat as one would hope. I really think it would be worthwhile to discuss what "real" means. What I have in mind is that dhammas are "real" in the sense that they really do arise and fall away, but whether there is a "dhamma per se" that exists as a frozen entity in a moment of time, I would say 'no,' and I think the Abhidhamma -- as far as I have seen -- bears this out. The dhamma is an activity in a sense, not an object. It is never an x or a y per se, because it is always in a process of change. When it is arising, it is forming up, when it is functioning, it is doing what it was conditioned to do, and when it is falling away, it is dissolving until it no longer exists. Therefore there is never a moment that it is definable as an absolute this or that, it is changing continuously. It is this understanding of anicca on the most microscopic level that would lead one to say that there is never a moment when you can put your finger on a dhamma and say "it is exactly that." Azita: I think its jus the opposite when its panna that understands on this so-called microscopic level, panna knows exactly what the dhamma is. We ordinary people with little developed wisdom can never know a dhamma exactly as it is; sure we can think about it, endlessly, but that's never going to reveal a moment of arising, existing, or falling away. Who cares what its called, because that's just a whole lot of thinking. Isn't it better to develop the wisdom that understands exactly how things really are? RobE: Therefore I would say it is not "real as a definable object," it is real "as an active formation and dissolution in process" that never stops to be defined. We can talk about the cetasikas that are involved and the processes involved - contact, or vitakkha, et al, but not at any moment say that the dhamma is frozen as "this." So I think we mistakenly think of dhammas as static objects like a table or chair that we can stop and look at, and it is not that. Azita: Not sure who this 'we' is because I don't think of dhammas as static objects as you suggest, altho you do also say 'it is not that'. RobE: In that sense, "own-being" does not make sense to me, because the dhamma is not just one thing, but a changing process. Of what could its "being" consist of, other than constant transformation? Azita: Only panna can know, really know, what a characteristic of an appearing dhamma is. I think in the early stages of understanding, there is weak knowledge of passing dhammas but not until well developed panna begins to arise and experience again and again, a reality will there be less doubt about how things really are. Why not begin to develop panna now and then maybe there will be less wondering how dhammas 'work' patience, courage and good cheer, azita #129401 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Mar 7, 2013 3:35 pm Subject: Re: Question on List of Factors in Dependent Origination by Thanissaro Bhikkhu jonoabb Hi Antony --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "antony272b2" wrote: > > "...here is a list of these factors — enough to give a general sense of the shape of dependent co-arising, and to show how unwieldy it can seem. The factors will be explained in more detail in the body of the book. Here they are numbered starting with the most fundamental factor, ignorance, for ignorance is the most strategic factor in causing the other factors to contribute to stress. > > 1) Ignorance: not seeing things in terms of the four noble truths of stress, its origination, its cessation, and the path to its cessation. > > 2) Fabrication: the process of intentionally shaping states of body and mind. > These processes are of three sorts: > a) bodily fabrication: the in-and-out breath**, > b) verbal fabrication: directed thought and evaluation, and > c) mental fabrication: feeling (feeling tones of pleasure, pain, or neither pleasure nor pain) and perception (the mental labels applied to the objects of the senses for the purpose of memory and recognition). > ... > ** Antony: According to Bhikkhu Bodhi bodily fabrication is more than just the in-and-out breath, that there are more than a dozen types of bodily fabrication (wholesome and unwholesome volition) in his Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma (CMA). I don't have a copy of CMA at the moment. Could someone elaborate? > =============== J: Both BB's CMA and Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary explain the second factor of DO (i.e., 'sankhara') as meaning the cetana that is associated with wholesome and unwholesome kamma. The explanation given by TB differs from this (it is a different meaning of sankhara as used in the texts). Hope this helps. Jon #129402 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Mar 7, 2013 5:21 pm Subject: Re: On Siila 18. sarahprocter... Dear Lukas & all, http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books/Acariya_Dhammapala_A_Treatise_on_the_Paramis.ht\ m "Again, he conceals his virtues and reveals his faults. He is few in his wishes, content, fond of solitude, aloof, capable of enduring suffering, and free from anxiety. He is not restless, puffed up, fickle, scurrilous or scattered m speech. but calm in his faculties and mind. Avoiding such wrong means of livelihood as scheming, etc., he is endowed with proper conduct and a suitable resort (for alms). "He sees danger in the slightest faults, and having undertaken the rules of training, trains himself in them, energetic and resolute, without regard for body or life. He does not tolerate even the slightest concern for his body or life but abandons and dispels it; how much more then excessive concern. He abandons and dispels all the corruptions such as anger, malice, etc., which are the cause for moral depravity. "He does not become complacent over some minor achievement of distinction and does not shrink away, but strives for successively higher achievements. In this way the achievements he gains do not partake of diminution or stagnation. *** to be contd Metta Sarah ===== #129403 From: han tun Date: Fri Mar 8, 2013 10:37 am Subject: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha hantun1 Dear Friends,  I have heard about 84,000 Dhamma-khandha. But I do not know how it is calculated. Then I come across a book, King Asoka and Buddhism. http://www.urbandharma.org/pdf/king_asoka.pdf  In Chapter 6 Images of Asoka, there is an interesting account which stated that 84,000 is the *symbolic* representation of the Buddha's dhammakaaya, the corpus of his Teaching, or the 84,000 atoms that traditionally were thought to make up a human body, and thus representing the Buddha's ruupakaaya, his physical form.  ----------------------  4. The 84,000 Stuupas or Vihaaras  Despite this failure to gather all the relics of the Buddha, Asoka proceeds, at least in the Asokaavadaana, to redistribute and re-enshrine those that he has collected into 84,000 stuupas which he has built throughout the whole of Jambudiipa. This was to become Asoka's most famous legendary act, and, for centuries, pilgrims visiting the holy sites of India habitually ascribed almost every ancient stuupa they came across to Asoka. The Asokaavadaana version of the episode is as follows:  [Then Assoka had eighty-four thousand boxes made of gold, silver, cat's eye, and crystal, and in them were placed the relics. Also eighty-four thousand urns and eighty-four thousand inscription plates were prepared. All of this was given to the yaká¹£as for distribution in the eighty-four thousand stuupas he ordered built throughout the earth as far as the surrounding ocean, in the small, great, and middle-sized towns, wherever there was a population of one hundred thousand persons. Asoka then went to the Kukkuá¹­aaraama Monastery and spoke to the Elder Yasas: "This is my wish; I would like to complete the building of all eightyfour thousand stÅ«pas on the same day, at the same time."  "Very well," replied the Elder, "when the moment comes, I shall signal it by hiding the orb of the sun with my hand." Then, not long thereafter, he eclipsed the sun with his hand, and all at once the eighty-four thousand stuupas were completed.]  This relation corresponds to the similar account, in the Mahaava.msa, of Asoka's construction of 84,000 monasteries (vihaaras):  [When he heard: "There are eighty-four thousand sections of the Dhamma," the king said: "Each one of them I will honour with a vihaara." Then, bestowing ninety-six koá¹­is of money in eightyfour thousand towns, the ruler bade the kings all over the earth to begin to build vihaaras, and he himself began to build the Asokaaraama.  All those beautiful vihaaras then begun they duly finished in all the cities within three years; and, by the miraculous power of the Thera Indagutta, who watched over the work, the aaraama named after Asoka was likewise quickly brought to completion. On every side, from the eighty-four thousand cities came letters on one day with the news: "The vihaaras are completed."]  There are numerous parallels between these two versions of the story. For example, in both texts, all the stuupas (vihaaras) are completed on the same day, and this completion then signals the occasion for a great festival of merit-making. Moreover, both construction projects are supervised by a monk with magical powers (Indagutta in the Pali tradition, Yasas in the Sanskrit). Both are symbolic of the spread and establishment of Buddhism throughout Asoka's empire, and both mark an official change in Asoka's status: up until this time, he had been known as Ca.n.daasoka; thenceforth he is to be known as Dharmaasoka.  But there are some noteworthy differences between these two accounts as well, and these are worth exploring here. First, and not be minimized, is the difference between stuupas and vihaaras. In the Asokaavadaana, Asoka's concern is with honouring the remains of the Buddha's physical body, his relics, andthe construction of commemorative markers (stuupas) over those. In the Mahaava.msa, no mention is made of the relics in this context. Instead, Asoka seeks to honour the Sangha by building not stuupas but monasteries (vihaaras) for monks.  Secondly, related to this are the different accounts of what inspires Asoka to build eighty-four thousand stuupas or vihaaras.  The number 84,000 is, of course, symbolic of totality in the Buddhist tradition, but its specific connotations here should not be overlooked. In the Mahaava.msa, we are told that Asoka decides to undertake the vihaara construction project when he learns from Moggaliputta Tissa that there are 84,000 sections of the Buddha's Dhamma, his Teaching. The vihaaras are thus not just for the Sangha, but also symbolic of the Dhamma; they represent, so to speak, the Buddha's dhammakaya, the corpus of his Teaching. The 84,000 stuupas, on the other hand, do not directly symbolize the Dharma but are commemorative of the 84,000 atoms that traditionally were thought to make up a human body. They represent, therefore, the Buddha's ruupakaaya, his physical form.  ----------------------  Han: However, you may have a different opinion about the 84,000 Dhamma-khandha and how it is calculated. If you have, kindly share it with me.  Thank you very much.  with metta and respect, Han #129404 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Mar 8, 2013 6:21 pm Subject: Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha jonoabb Hi Han --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Friends, >  > I have heard about 84,000 Dhamma-khandha. But I do not know how > it is calculated. Then I come across a book, King Asoka and Buddhism. > http://www.urbandharma.org/pdf/king_asoka.pdf >  > In Chapter 6 Images of Asoka, there is an interesting > account which stated that 84,000 is the *symbolic* representation of the Buddha's dhammakaaya, the corpus of his Teaching, or the > 84,000 atoms that traditionally were thought to make up a human body, and thus > representing the Buddha's ruupakaaya, his > physical form. > =============== J: I understood it to refer to the number of 'sentences' (or the Pali equivalent) in the Tipitaka. But I can't now remember where I got that idea from. Is this number mentioned in the list of different kinds of teaching (verses, prose, etc)? Jon #129405 From: han tun Date: Fri Mar 8, 2013 8:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha hantun1 Dear Jon,  Thank you very much for your response.  J: I understood it to refer to the number of 'sentences' (or the Pali equivalent) in the Tipitaka. But I can't now remember where I got that idea from. Is this number mentioned in the list of different kinds of teaching (verses, prose, etc)? Han: I do not think it refers to the number of sentences. But I do not know.  No, it is not mentioned in the list of different kinds of teaching (1) Sutta (2) Geyya (3) Veyyakarana (4) Gatha (5) Udana (6) Itivuttaka (7) Jataka (8) Abbhutadhamma(9) Vedalla. But one source says that adhammakhandha is an item of dhamma, which could be a sutta, a question or an explanation. [Han: which is very vague.] with metta and respect, Han ________________________________ From: jonoabb To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 8, 2013 2:21 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha  Hi Han --- In mailto:dhammastudygroup%40yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Friends, >  > I have heard about 84,000 Dhamma-khandha. But I do not know how > it is calculated. Then I come across a book, King Asoka and Buddhism. > http://www.urbandharma.org/pdf/king_asoka.pdf >  > In Chapter 6 Images of Asoka, there is an interesting > account which stated that 84,000 is the *symbolic* representation of the Buddha's dhammakaaya, the corpus of his Teaching, or the > 84,000 atoms that traditionally were thought to make up a human body, and thus > representing the Buddha's ruupakaaya, his > physical form. > =============== J: I understood it to refer to the number of 'sentences' (or the Pali equivalent) in the Tipitaka. But I can't now remember where I got that idea from. Is this number mentioned in the list of different kinds of teaching (verses, prose, etc)? Jon #129406 From: han tun Date: Fri Mar 8, 2013 8:50 pm Subject: Correction Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha hantun1 Dear Jon,  I want to correct my last reply to you.  Jon: I understood it to refer to the number of 'sentences' (or the Pali equivalent) in the Tipitaka. But I can't now remember where I got that idea from. Is this number mentioned in the list of different kinds of teaching (verses, prose, etc)?  Han: I do not think it refers to the number of sentences. But I do not know. Well, it must be the sum total of the different kinds of teaching: (1) Sutta (2) Geyya (3) Veyyakarana (4) Gatha (5) Udana (6) Itivuttaka (7) Jataka (8) Abbhutadhamma (9) Vedalla. But how will you count them to get 84,000?  One source says that a dhammakhandha is an item of dhamma, which could be a sutta, a question or an explanation. [Han: which is very vague.]  That was why before I can find a concrete evidence of the calculation to get 84,000, I would prefer to take the figure as just the *symbolic* representation [not acttual counting] of the Buddha's dhammakaaya, and/or the Buddha's ruupakaaya, as mentioned in the book which I have referred to.  with metta and respect, Han ________________________________ From: jonoabb To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 8, 2013 2:21 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha  Hi Han --- In mailto:dhammastudygroup%40yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Friends, >  > I have heard about 84,000 Dhamma-khandha. But I do not know how > it is calculated. Then I come across a book, King Asoka and Buddhism. > http://www.urbandharma.org/pdf/king_asoka.pdf >  > In Chapter 6 Images of Asoka, there is an interesting > account which stated that 84,000 is the *symbolic* representation of the Buddha's dhammakaaya, the corpus of his Teaching, or the > 84,000 atoms that traditionally were thought to make up a human body, and thus > representing the Buddha's ruupakaaya, his > physical form. > =============== J: I understood it to refer to the number of 'sentences' (or the Pali equivalent) in the Tipitaka. But I can't now remember where I got that idea from. Is this number mentioned in the list of different kinds of teaching (verses, prose, etc)? Jon #129407 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 9, 2013 1:25 am Subject: Re: Correction Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha nilovg Dear Han and Jon, Introductory Discourse in the Expositor, p. 34: "Which are the eighty-four thousand units of text? Eighty-two thousand from the Blessed One Two thousand from the bhikkhu Saariputta- Eighty-four thousand dhammas have I learned." Then it is all analysed. These were rehearsed at the first council. Nina. Op 8-mrt-2013, om 10:50 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Han: I do not think it refers to the number of sentences. > But I do not know. > Well, it must be the sum total of the different kinds of > teaching: (1) Sutta (2) Geyya (3) Veyyakarana (4) Gatha (5) Udana (6) > Itivuttaka (7) Jataka (8) Abbhutadhamma (9) Vedalla. > But how will you count them to get 84,000? #129408 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Mar 9, 2013 1:32 am Subject: Re: 3 gocaras szmicio Dear Sarah, As I understand now, the 3 goracaras. First there is upanissaya gocara, all our tendencies, everything is object for understanding to be develop right now, all strong akusala tendencies also included as upanissaya gocara. Untill it gradually develops into arakkha gocara. All kusalas that start to guard and develop. Until this becomes upanibhandha gocara, that is moment of satipatthana. This is mz thought on that. Best wishes Lukas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > Yes, this is helpful. > > Best wishes > Lukas > > > As we're often reminded, there has to be really firm understanding of the 'right' > > object, the reality appearing now. > > > > What we think about and talk about now, such as seeing or visible object, will be the upanissaya gocara, the object (or arammana) for right understanding. By hearing and wise considering, there will be the development of understanding little by little, so the experiencing of the 'gocera' is accumulated and becomes a habit. > > > > When there's kusala thinking of any kind, it 'protects', such as at moments of sila. This is a arakkha gocara and there is a protection from harmful thinking and behaviour at such times. Arakkha gocara includes all kinds of kusala. All kusala is a protection, a guarding from akusala. ("aarakkhaa" means protection). > > > > Upanissaya gocara leads to the development of satipatthana, unpanibhanda gocara. Upanibhandha gocara is patipatti, direct understanding of realities. ("upanibhandha" means tied closed to). > #129409 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Mar 9, 2013 5:55 am Subject: Dhamma reminders from Poland szmicio Dear friends, Here comes some extracts from Poland, September 13. In between Sarah and Polish friends. #129410 From: han tun Date: Sat Mar 9, 2013 8:57 am Subject: Re: Correction Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha hantun1 Dear Nina (and Jon),  Nina:  Introductory Discourse in the Expositor, p. 34:  "Which are the eighty-four thousand units of text?  Eighty-two thousand from the Blessed One Two thousand from the bhikkhu Saariputta- Eighty-four thousand dhammas have I learned."  Then it is all analysed. These were rehearsed at the first council.  ---------------  Han: Thank you very much for your clarification. Yes, I now read the Introductory Discourse in the Expositor (Atthasaalinii) by Venerable Buddhaghosa.  Page 34: "Which are the eighty-four thousand units of text? Eighty-two thousand from the Blessed One, Two thousand from the bhikkhu Saariputta, Eighty-four thousand dhammas have I learned." [Note 1]  [Note 1] Verse spoken by Aananda to Gopaka Moggallaana . Cf. Majjhima iii 7f.  Thus the whole of the Buddha’s word is composed of eighty-four thousand units of text. Of these, the Sutta containing one theme [Note 2] forms one unit of text.  [Note 2] Anusandhika. Anusandhi is a logical sequence of subjects.  Where a Sutta contains more than one theme, its units of texts are determined by the number of such themes. In verses each query or question asked forms a unit, and each answer forms another. In the Abhidhamma each trinal or dual classification, as well as each classification of conscious intervals, form one unit of text. In the Vinaya there are subjects, tables of contents, classification of terms, offence, innocence, interim offence, and division into triplets, wherein each portion should be understood as a unit of text. Such is the division of the Doctrine into eighty-four thousand units of text.  ---------------  Han: In the above passage, I do not understand the meaning of "as well as each classification of conscious intervals." Do you know what does it mean?  Thank you very much.  with metta and respect, Han  ________________________________ From: Nina van Gorkom To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 8, 2013 9:25 PM Subject: Re: Correction Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha   Dear Han and Jon, Introductory Discourse in the Expositor, p. 34: "Which are the eighty-four thousand units of text? Eighty-two thousand from the Blessed One Two thousand from the bhikkhu Saariputta- Eighty-four thousand dhammas have I learned." Then it is all analysed. These were rehearsed at the first council. Nina. #129411 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Mar 9, 2013 5:30 pm Subject: To Nina. On paramattha dhammas. szmicio Dear Nina, You told this recently: 'As to paramattha dhammas, no need to name anything that appears, but just develop a little bit more understanding of what appears now, such as visible object or seeing. No need to name these or think about them. There are different characteristics and gradually these can be understood.' Can u elaborate more on this, especially how this all pertains to present moment. You also mentioned that thinking can be known. Best wishes Lukas #129412 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Mar 9, 2013 5:40 pm Subject: Being non-forgetful. szmicio Dear friends, That was told I think that wise attention is a reason for panna and unwise for ignorance, isnt it? But during a day I am mostly daydreaming, thinking sories instead of investigating and knowing realities. Like before sleep lying in a bad, instead to investigate or 'apply manasikara' to different characteristics, like a bodily sensations or thinking I am dreaming some stories. Is there any help to be less forgetful? How to have more wise attention? How to lessen an attachement to pleasant feelings and tendency to dreaming a stories? Best wishes Lukas #129413 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Mar 9, 2013 5:47 pm Subject: Re: 3 gocaras sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, I like the way you carefully consider these terms. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > As I understand now, the 3 goracaras. First there is upanissaya gocara, all our tendencies, everything is object for understanding to be develop right now, all strong akusala tendencies also included as upanissaya gocara. ... S: Any reality can be understood now if it appears, including any akusala if there is the accumulated understanding to know it. There is clear understanding that it is only the presently appearing dhamma that can ever be understood. ... >Untill it gradually develops into arakkha gocara. All kusalas that start to guard and develop. Until this becomes upanibhandha gocara, that is moment of satipatthana. This is mz thought on that. ... S: All kinds of kusala are arakkha, protection from akusala. Right understanding leads to more kusala, more guarding. Yes, upanibhandha gocara refers to the direct understanding of realities. Without upanissaya gocara, the firm understanding of realities that can be understood, there cannot be upanibhandha gocara. Metta Sarah ===== #129414 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Mar 9, 2013 5:50 pm Subject: Re: 3 gocaras szmicio Dear Sarah, > Yes, upanibhandha gocara refers to the direct understanding of realities. > Without upanissaya gocara, the firm understanding of realities that can be understood, there cannot be upanibhandha gocara. L: Isnt it that upanissaya gocara leads first to arakkha gocara, like people that follow to know each realities they start to do more kusala and after that it leads to upanibandha gocara, that is awareness? Or upanissaya leads directly to upanibandha gocara? Best wishes Lukas #129415 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Mar 9, 2013 5:55 pm Subject: Re: On Siila 19. sarahprocter... Dear Lukas & all, http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books/Acariya_Dhammapala_A_Treatise_on_the_Paramis.ht\ m "The Great Man serves as a guide for the blind, explaining to them the right path. To the deaf he gives signals with gestures of his hands, and in that way benefits them with good. So too for the dumb. To cripples he gives a chair, or a vehicle, or some other means of conveyance. He strives that the faithless may gain faith, that the lazy may generate zeal, that those of confused mindfulness may develop mindfulness, that those with wandering minds may become accomplished in concentration, and that the dull-witted may acquire wisdom. "He strives to dispel sensual desire, ill-will, sloth and torpor, restlessness-and-worry, and perplexity in those obsessed by these hindrances, and to dispel wrong thoughts of sensuality, illwill, and aggression in those subjugated by these thoughts. Out of gratitude to those who have helped him, he benefits and honours them with a similar or greater benefit in return, congenial in speech and endearing in his words." *** to be contd Metta Sarah ===== #129416 From: "htoonaing@..." Date: Sat Mar 9, 2013 11:19 pm Subject: Re: To Nina. On paramattha dhammas. htoonaing... - "Lukas" Dear Nina, You told this recently: 'As to paramattha dhammas, no need to name anything that appears, but just develop a little bit more understanding of what appears now, such as visible object or seeing. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: This seems right. But without the teaching of the Buddha no one can understand paramattha dhamma. To understand the teaching name takes part in. Scenario: You see a rose now. Names: 1. cakkhu dvaara (cakkhu pasaada) - eye 2. rupaaramma.na -picture(sight, shape, form, colour) 3. cakkhuvi~n~naa.na (eye-consciousness) 1&2 is rupakkhanda. 3 is vi~n~naa.nakkhanda. There also arise feeling that like or dislike or indifferent and that is vedanaklkhanda. sa~n~naakkhanda is the dhamma that recognises. sa`nkhaarakkhanda is volition and other mental faculties that arise at the time of you see a rose. ---------------------------------------- No need to name these or think about them. There are different characteristics and gradually these can be understood.' ----------------------------------- Htoo: Without learning the Buddha's teaching there is no sudden or gradual understanding. The only ones who understand are Sammaasambuddhas and paccekabuddhas. ------------------------------------------------ Can u elaborate more on this, especially how this all pertains to present moment. You also mentioned that thinking can be known. Best wishes Lukas --------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dear Lukas, forgive me if I seemed intruding. Thinking can be known if there is awareness. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing #129417 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Mar 9, 2013 11:28 pm Subject: Re: To Nina. On paramattha dhammas. szmicio Dear Htoo, This have a sense. That's why I appreciate so much listening or reading Dhamma. The words helps too. ---------------------------------- > Htoo: This seems right. But without the teaching of the Buddha no one can understand paramattha dhamma. > > To understand the teaching name takes part in. > > Scenario: You see a rose now. > > Names: > 1. cakkhu dvaara (cakkhu pasaada) - eye > 2. rupaaramma.na -picture(sight, shape, form, colour) > 3. cakkhuvi~n~naa.na (eye-consciousness) > > 1&2 is rupakkhanda. > 3 is vi~n~naa.nakkhanda. > > There also arise feeling that like or dislike or indifferent and that is > vedanaklkhanda. > sa~n~naakkhanda is the dhamma that recognises. > sa`nkhaarakkhanda is volition and other mental faculties that arise at the time of you see a rose. > ---------------------------------------- > No need to name these or think about them. There are different characteristics and gradually these can be understood.' > ----------------------------------- > Htoo: Without learning the Buddha's teaching there is no sudden or gradual understanding. > > The only ones who understand are Sammaasambuddhas and paccekabuddhas. > > Htoo: > > Dear Lukas, forgive me if I seemed intruding. Thinking can be known if there is awareness. L: No, this is fine. All goods friends in Dhamma, welcome to help answer this. Best wishes Lukas #129418 From: "htoonaing@..." Date: Sat Mar 9, 2013 11:34 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Vipassanaa (DT 888 ) to Htoo. htoonaing... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: Dear Htoo, > When develop then there is doing. This doing is kammanta. Sammaa- > > kammanta. It is led by right thinking and right understanding. They > > are pa~n~naa-maggangaa. Again developing has to be associated with > > samaadhi-maggangaa such as right effort, right mindfulness and > > right concentration. Just thinking sitting, just thinking standing > > and just thinking walking or just thinking lying is not developing. > > > ------ > N As you say, just thinking sitting, etc. is no developing. It is > thinking about a whole situatiuon instead of being aware of naama and > ruupa one at a time. Sitting is a whole situation, it is not ruupa. > While sitting there can be mindfulness of naama such as feeling and > ruupa such as hardness, when they appear. > ------- > > > > H: Expectation always associates with wanting something. But when > > there is strong chanda but no lobha it is the right expectation. > > The word expectation cannot explain the word chanda. This chanda is > > almost always mixed with lobha. > > > ------- > N: Yes, people confuse lobha and chanda. Chanda can be akusala or > kusala. > -------- > > > > H: Without pa.tipatti there is no pa~n~naa. > > > ------ > N: There is pa~n~naa of different levels. Intellectual understanding > stemming from listening to the Dhamma is pa~n~naa but not direct > understanding of realities. Through pa.tipatti, awareness and > understanding of characteristics of realities that appear, direct > understanding is developed. > -------- > > Htoo: Bhaavetiiti bhaavanaa. Developing the mind while ripening > > pa~n~naa always directs to the very present. > > > > The very present for example for me now when I am typing is that > > screen is seen, words are seen, hands are typing and nothing stand > > still. So also is thinking. > > > ------- > N: Quite right, pa~n~naa understands the present object. Then you > write about examples, wanting to show that nothing stands still. I > think that you know the difference between awareness and thinking of > a situation, but your words here could be misunderstood. > You also write in this post: ' Just thinking sitting, just thinking > standing and just thinking walking or just thinking lying is not > developing.' Thus, you understand that developing direct > understanding is not thinking. > Since I know that people find it difficult to understand the > difference I shall elaborate a little on this subject. > > Thinking is a reality, no self thinks but citta. We do not see the > screen but we can think of it after seeing what is visible. A screen > does not impinge on the eyesense, it is not visible object. It is a > whole, a collection of things, a concept. However, without seeing > visible object we could not think of a screen or words on the screen. > Visible object and seeing fall away very rapidly, but so long as the > arising and falling away of naama and ruupa has not been directly > understood, it seems that they stay. Because of sa~n~naa we think of > a screen. > Hands are typing: this is thinking of a whole situation, because the > rupas we take for a hand have fallen away as soon as we think of > them. Where is the hand? > ------ > Nina. ---------------------------- Htoo: Dear Nina, thanks for your explanation. I got you meant. Htoo Naing #129419 From: "htoonaing@..." Date: Sat Mar 9, 2013 11:50 pm Subject: Vipassanaa _003 (DT 890 ) htoonaing... Dear Dhamma Friends, Catupaarisuddhi siila is the foundation for vipassanaa. Catu is four. Suddhi is purification. Paari is 'pari' which means all round, from all points of view, from all angles. Siila is practice. Vipassanaa meditators have to fulfil these four kinds of moral constructions. The first is paatimokkha-sa.mvara siila. This is for bhikkhuu there are 227 and for lay people there are 5. 227 are not to be broken as long as exist as bhikkhu. 5 are not to be broken as long as exist as Buddha's deciple. These keepings of moral precepts make foundation for vipassanaa. For beginners there are right places and right time. There are 4 sampaja~n~na. 1. saatthaka sampaja~n~na 2. sappaaya sampaja~n~na 3. gocara sampaja~n~na 4. asammoha sampaja~n~na The first thing to consider is that when something is going to do re-think that if there is good results. The second thing to consider is if 'doing' is appropriate. The third thing to consider is if it is the right object of vipassanaa meditation. And the fourth thing is clear understanding on 'doing'. May you be well and happy, With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing #129420 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 10, 2013 1:30 am Subject: Re: Correction Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha nilovg Dear Han and Connie, Op 8-mrt-2013, om 22:57 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Han: In the above passage, I do not understand the meaning > of "as well as each classification of conscious intervals." Do you > know what does it mean? ------ N: We have to see the Pali, because of this translation. Perhaps Connie can trace the Pali from DPR. ---- Nina. #129421 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Nina. On paramattha dhammas. nilovg Dear Lukas (and Htoo) Op 9-mrt-2013, om 7:30 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > You told this recently: 'As to paramattha dhammas, no need to name > anything that appears, but just develop a little bit more > understanding of what appears now, such as visible object or seeing. > No need to name these or think about them. There are different > characteristics and gradually these can be understood.' > > Can u elaborate more on this, especially how this all pertains to > present moment. > ------ N: It is right that Htoo mentions intellectual understanding, and true, only the Buddha could teach about realities. The intellectual understanding is necessary but it is not enough. It is an introduction to direct understanding. What the Buddha taught pertains to the present moment. Only the present reality can be really understood, not what is past or what will be future. That is why Acharn stressed seeing now, visible object now all the time. These have characterstics that appear and can be attended to without thinking of their names. Htoo stresses rightly: when there is awareness. Yes, but this is conditioned by listening again and again, considering and discussing again and again. There can be a beginning of considering whatever appears at this moment even though understanding cannot be precise. -------- > L:You also mentioned that thinking can be known. > ------- > N: We can find out that thinking is different from seeing, from hearing. We do not have to name it thinking. We usually believe that thinking stays for quite a while, but this is not so. It is extremely short and falls away immediately. It seems that we see a person, but seeing only sees what is visible object, very shortly. Then there is defining and thinking of what is seen but it seems that this occurs right at the moment of seeing visible object. We are deluded, there are many different moments of citta. Cittas arise and succeed one another extremely rapidly. We can just begin to learn what seeing is, and that seeing is different from thinking. Then it will also become clearer what the characteristic of thinking is. ------- Lukas' other post: L: That was told I think that wise attention is a reason for panna and unwise for ignorance, isnt it? ------ N: When there is wise attention to the object the citta is kusala, but not necessarily pa~n~naa. When there is ignorance there is unwise attention. ----- L: But during a day I am mostly daydreaming, thinking stories instead of investigating and knowing realities. Like before sleep lying in a bed, instead to investigate or 'apply manasikara' to different characteristics, like a bodily sensations or thinking I am dreaming some stories. -------- N: We are all dreaming most of the time, very common. It is conditioned. Trying to apply manasikara is doing something, that is not the way. Self wants to do something. ------ L:Is there any help to be less forgetful? How to have more wise attention? How to lessen an attachement to pleasant feelings and tendency to dreaming a stories? ------ N: Remember what Acharn said: how to.. how to... attchment to the self who wants to do something. We have to remember that whatever appears, even if it is not according to your liking, is conditioned, it is conditioned to arise. What can be done? More understanding of its characteristic. The condition for understanding: again, more listening. We learn about the realities the Buddha taught and about the manyfold conditions in detail. Attachment in the past has fallen away but there is the latent tendency of it, accumulated in each citta. It is latent, but very powerful and it can condition the arising of akusala citta at any time. -------- Nina. #129422 From: Tam Bach Date: Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Being non-forgetful. tambach Dear Lukas L: How to have more wise attention? How to lessen an attachement to pleasant feelings and tendency to dreaming a stories? Tam B: When there is the question of how, there is the idea of self who can try to do something...wanting to have less attachment instead of just understanding.... Sarah was saying something similar on your extract earlier. Metta, Tam B #129423 From: han tun Date: Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:03 am Subject: Re: Correction Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha hantun1 Dear Nina,  I have found the Paa.li text.  ---------------  Which are the eighty-four thousand units of text?  Katha.m dhammakkhandhato caturaasiiti dhammakkhandhasahassaaniiti? Sabbameva hida.m buddhavacana.m.  --------------------  Eighty-two thousand from the Blessed One, Two thousand from the bhikkhu Saariputta, Eighty-four thousand dhammas have I learned.  Dvaasiiti buddhato ga.nhi.m, dve sahassaani bhikkhuto; Caturaasiiti sahassaani, ye me dhammaa pavattino ti. (theragaa. 1027);  --------------------  Thus the whole of the Buddha's word is composed of eighty-four thousand units of text. Of these, the Sutta containing one theme forms one unit of text. Where a Sutta contains more than one theme, its units of texts are determined by the number of such themes.  Eva.m paridiipitadhammakkhandhavasena caturaasiitisahassappabheda.m hoti. Tattha ekaanusandhika.m sutta.m eko dhammakkhandho. Ya.m anekaanusandhika.m tattha anusandhivasena dhammakkhandhaga.nanaa.  ---------------  In verses each query or question asked forms a unit, and each answer forms another.  Gaathaabandhesu pa~nhaapucchana.m eko dhammakkhandho, vissajjana.m eko.  ---------------  In the Abhidhamma each trinal or dual classification, as well as each classification of conscious intervals, form one unit of text. In the  Abhidhamme ekameka.m tikadukabhaajana.m ekameka~nca cittavaarabhaajana.m eko dhammakkhandho.  ---------------  Vinaya there are subjects, tables of contents, classification of terms, offence, innocence, interim offence, and division into triplets, wherein each portion should be understood as a unit of text. Such is the division of the Doctrine into eighty-four thousand units of text.  Vinaye atthi vatthu, atthi maatikaa, atthi padabhaajaniiya.m, atthi aapatti, atthi anaapatti, atthi antaraapatti, atthi tikacchedo. Tattha ekameko ko.t.thaaso ekameko dhammakkhandhoti veditabbo. Eva.m dhammakkhandhato caturaasiiti dhammakkhandhasahassaani.  ---------------  with metta and respect, Han ________________________________ From: Nina van Gorkom To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, March 9, 2013 9:30 PM Subject: Re: Correction Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha  Dear Han and Connie, Op 8-mrt-2013, om 22:57 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Han: In the above passage, I do not understand the meaning > of "as well as each classification of conscious intervals." Do you > know what does it mean? ------ N: We have to see the Pali, because of this translation. Perhaps Connie can trace the Pali from DPR. ---- Nina. #129424 From: "connie" Date: Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:17 am Subject: Correction Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha nichiconn dear Han and Nina, Abhidhamme ekameka.m tikadukabhaajana.m ekameka~nca cittavaarabhaajana.m eko dhammakkhandho. > Introductory Discourse in the Expositor (Atthasaalinii) by Venerable Buddhaghosa. > > Page 34: > snip ..... > > In the Abhidhamma each trinal or dual classification, as well as each classification of conscious intervals, form one unit of text. > > ---------- peace, connie Eva.m paridiipitadhammakkhandhavasena caturaasiitisahassappabheda.m hoti. Tattha ekaanusandhika.m sutta.m eko dhammakkhandho. Ya.m anekaanusandhika.m tattha anusandhivasena dhammakkhandhaga.nanaa. Gaathaabandhesu pa~nhaapucchana.m eko dhammakkhandho, vissajjana.m eko. **Abhidhamme ekameka.m tikadukabhaajana.m ekameka~nca cittavaarabhaajana.m eko dhammakkhandho.** Vinaye atthi vatthu, atthi maatikaa, atthi padabhaajaniiya.m, atthi aapatti, atthi anaapatti, atthi antaraapatti, atthi tikacchedo. Tattha ekameko ko.t.thaaso ekameko dhammakkhandhoti veditabbo. Eva.m dhammakkhandhato caturaasiiti dhammakkhandhasahassaani. #129425 From: "philip" Date: Sun Mar 10, 2013 11:35 am Subject: Re: Being non-forgetful. philofillet Hi Lukas As you know from your friends who started that Polish group, there is not shortage of popular teachers who teach attractive techniques for speeding up the development of satipatthana. Why are they wrong? Remember the adze handle simile. And as Ajahn once said, "the shortcut is lobha." Don't press. Keep listening, keep reflecting. If we hope for results, we will be going the way of the misguided masses. Phil p.s if you try to investigate realities, lobha will be trying. Keep listening to wise friends, condiitons for investigating realities may arise. But not by trying, that is just greedy. (lobha with ditthi.) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear friends, > > That was told I think that wise attention is a reason for panna and unwise for ignorance, isnt it? But during a day I am mostly daydreaming, thinking sories instead of investigating and knowing realities. Like before sleep lying in a bad, instead to investigate or 'apply manasikara' to different characteristics, like a bodily sensations or thinking I am dreaming some stories. Is there any help to be less forgetful? How to have more wise attention? How to lessen an attachement to pleasant feelings and tendency to dreaming a stories? > > Best wishes > Lukas > #129426 From: "azita" Date: Sun Mar 10, 2013 11:46 am Subject: Re: Being non-forgetful. gazita2002 Hallo Lucas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear friends, > > That was told I think that wise attention is a reason for panna and unwise for ignorance, isnt it? But during a day I am mostly daydreaming, thinking sories instead of investigating and knowing realities. Like before sleep lying in a bad, instead to investigate or 'apply manasikara' to different characteristics, like a bodily sensations or thinking I am dreaming some stories. Is there any help to be less forgetful? How to have more wise attention? How to lessen an attachement to pleasant feelings and tendency to dreaming a stories? azita: why try to lessen attachment, isn't it a reality that can - and should - be known by panna? Isn't the growth of panna the only way to lessen any of the kilesas? Can we make wise attention arise, no, we cannot. The more we reflect on what we have heard regarding the fleetingness of realities, the more we understand we cannot control anything; in fact, there is no 'we'. Dhammas arise and fall due to many different conditions, wise attention arises because of various conditions, we can't make it arise. But there can be wise attention at this moment, who knows? Live for understanding, not for trying to control dhammas. patience, courage and good cheer azita #129427 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Mar 10, 2013 7:04 pm Subject: Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha sarahprocter... Dear Han, Glad to see you writing here. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > Han: In the above passage, I do not understand the meaning > of "as well as each classification of conscious intervals." Do you > know what does it mean? .... S: The same details are also given in the commentary to the Vinaya. The account of the First Council in the Bahiranidana and Atthasalini explains how the 84,000 units of dhamma are comprised and these include the Abhidhamma units. Below we read about what exactly is included in the 84,000 units. Baahiranidaana (Buddhaghosa's intro to the Commentary to the Vinaya). It is from the section on The First Council, (Jayawickrama's transl). ========================================= Extracts from section 16 (p.14) onwards: 'The word of the Buddha which should be known as uniform in sentiment,twofold 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
Date: Sun Mar 10, 2013 7:39 pm Subject: Re: Correction Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha nilovg Dear Han and Connie, Thank you for the Pali. Citta vaara: a round of cittas, a process of cittas. Cittas that experience objects through the six doorways arise in a process, vaara, as you know. Nina. Op 9-mrt-2013, om 18:17 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > Abhidhamme ekameka.m tikadukabhaajana.m ekameka~nca > cittavaarabhaajana.m eko dhammakkhandho. #129429 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Mar 10, 2013 7:40 pm Subject: Re: Being non-forgetful. sarahprocter... Hi Azita, Lan, Phil, Jessica & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "azita" wrote: > azita: why try to lessen attachment, isn't it a reality that can - and should - be known by panna? Isn't the growth of panna the only way to lessen any of the kilesas? > Can we make wise attention arise, no, we cannot. > > The more we reflect on what we have heard regarding the fleetingness of realities, the more we understand we cannot control anything; in fact, there is no 'we'. Dhammas arise and fall due to many different conditions, wise attention arises because of various conditions, we can't make it arise. But there can be wise attention at this moment, who knows? > Live for understanding, not for trying to control dhammas. ... S: Very well said. All the trying to lessen attachment just leads to more clinging to an idea of self being a certain way. Btw, will you be in Thailand during the first week of June? Lan had said she hoped to be in Thailand at this time and so does our friend Annie from Sydney. So we're planning to be there at that time and Ajahn is keeping the time free for us with a possible trip to Kaeng Krachan. Lan, if you (and any other Vietnamese friends) can confirm (off-list if you like), I'll give you more details. Phil? Jessica? To All: There is also a scheduled Dhamma trip to S.Vietnam during the first 2 weeks of September. Anyone would be very welcome. Pls ask for more details if you might be interested to join us. It's being organised by Tam Bach and other Vietnamese friends, many of whom are members here. Metta Sarah ====== #129430 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 10, 2013 8:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipassanaa _003 (DT 890 )to Htoo. nilovg Dear Htoo, you refer to inspiring texts. I would like to elaborate a little. Op 9-mrt-2013, om 13:50 heeft htoonaing@... het volgende geschreven: > > The first is paatimokkha-sa.mvara siila. This is for bhikkhuu there > are 227 and for lay people there are 5. 227 are not to be broken as > long as exist as bhikkhu. 5 are not to be broken as long as exist > as Buddha's deciple. These keepings of moral precepts make > foundation for vipassanaa. > -------- Catupaarisuddhi siila: there are four purifications of siila, and we can see the connection of these four. I understand why you only want to mention the first one in the beginning, but I would like to stress the connection between the four. The second one: sa"mvara siila, guarding the senses, the third: purity of livelihood, the fourth: purity as to the use of the four requisites. The second one: of this there are many levels and the highest one is satipa.t.thaana. It is mindfulness with regard to the objects presenting themselves through the six doors. As we read in the sutta: when a monk, seeing an object with the eye, guard the doorway of eyesense, he is not overcome by the object, that is, visible object. He "conquers objects, objects do not conquer him." It is sati samapja~n~na , sati and pa~n~naa, not a person who conquers objects, who is not overwhelmed by them. This points to understanding of the present reality. The second purity conditions the observing of the first one: awareness and understanding of whatever dhamma presents itself through one of the six doorways conditions less clinging to self, and, thus, one is more concerned for others, and mettaa increases. This is the condition for seeing the benefit of abstaining from killing, stealing, lying, etc which harm oneself and others. Mettaa ensures the observing of the precepts. It is not so that one must first keep the precepts and then begin with satipa.t.thaana. We should not separate the first purity and the second one and this also concerns the monk. The observing of the Vinaya and satipa.t.thaana are closely connected. When there is awareness he respects each rule. The sotaapanna has developed sati sampaja~n~na in a higher degree then the lay follower, and, thus, we can understand that he does not transgress the five precepts, his siila is purer. The layfollower may keep the five precepts but there is still an idea of self who keeps them. We never know whether he will always keep them when situations become life threatening. As to livelihood and the use of the requisites by the monk, also these are more purified by satipa.t.thaana. He will use the requisites wisely, not with greed and selfishness. We see that being mindful of whatever reality presents itself now affects our daily life and is most beneficial. ------ > > H: For beginners there are right places and right time. There are 4 > sampaja~n~na. > > 1. saatthaka sampaja~n~na > 2. sappaaya sampaja~n~na > 3. gocara sampaja~n~na > 4. asammoha sampaja~n~na > > The first thing to consider is that when something is going to do > re-think that if there is good results. The second thing to > consider is if 'doing' is appropriate. The third thing to consider > is if it is the right object of vipassanaa meditation. And the > fourth thing is clear understanding on 'doing'. > -------- > N: These four are very important. Gocarasampaja~n~na: gocara is here the object that presents itself, and this is the reality appearing right now. That is the object of vipassanaa. No matter it is pleasant or unpleasant, kusala or akusala, it can be investigated with mindfulness and understanding as non-self, not a person, not a thing. Just a conditioned dhamma. Gocara sampaja~n~na is the condition for asammoha sampaja~n~na. It leads to clear understanding, and this is clear understanding of the present reality. When it is more developed it can eradicate wrong view and other defilements. It reaches complete fulfillment at arahatship. Nina. #129431 From: sprlrt@... Date: Sun Mar 10, 2013 9:44 pm Subject: Re: Being non-forgetful. sprlrt Dear Lukas, I'm sure you remember which are the conditions for seeing, are they the same for thinking as well? Alberto > Dear friends, > > That was told I think that wise attention is a reason for > panna and unwise for ignorance, isnt it? But during a day I > am mostly daydreaming, thinking sories instead of > investigating and knowing realities. Like before sleep lying > in a bad, instead to investigate or 'apply manasikara' to > different characteristics, like a bodily sensations or > thinking I am dreaming some stories. Is there any help to be > less forgetful? How to have more wise attention? How to > lessen an attachement to pleasant feelings and tendency to > dreaming a stories? #129432 From: han tun Date: Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:08 am Subject: Re: Correction Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha hantun1 Dear Nina,  Thank you very much.  with metta and respect, Han ________________________________ From: Nina van Gorkom To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 3:39 PM Subject: Re: Correction Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha  Dear Han and Connie, Thank you for the Pali. Citta vaara: a round of cittas, a process of cittas. Cittas that experience objects through the six doorways arise in a process, vaara, as you know. Nina. Op 9-mrt-2013, om 18:17 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > Abhidhamme ekameka.m tikadukabhaajana.m ekameka~nca > cittavaarabhaajana.m eko dhammakkhandho. #129433 From: han tun Date: Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha hantun1 Dear Sarah,  Thank you very much.  with metta and respect, Han  ________________________________ From: sarah To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 3:04 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha  Dear Han, Glad to see you writing here. --- In mailto:dhammastudygroup%40yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > Han: In the above passage, I do not understand the meaning > of "as well as each classification of conscious intervals." Do you > know what does it mean? .... S: The same details are also given in the commentary to the Vinaya. The account of the First Council in the Bahiranidana and Atthasalini explains how the 84,000 units of dhamma are comprised and these include the Abhidhamma units. Below we read about what exactly is included in the 84,000 units. Baahiranidaana (Buddhaghosa's intro to the Commentary to the Vinaya). It is from the section on The First Council, (Jayawickrama's transl). ========================================= Extracts from section 16 (p.14) onwards: 'The word of the Buddha which should be known as uniform in sentiment,twofold 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
Date: Mon Mar 11, 2013 1:36 am Subject: Re: Being non-forgetful. szmicio Dear Phil, Here is a message from good friend kanchana, who sent me this as private message to my recent doubts. This is very good reminder. I forward it to DSG. Kanchana: To have more understanding that every reality which you experience is already appeared and completely falled away. No one can change anything which alerady happened. So just listen more and investigate more. That' s it. with metta, kanchana. Best wishes Lukas > Remember the adze handle simile. And as Ajahn once said, "the >shortcut is lobha." > > Don't press. Keep listening, keep reflecting. If we hope for >results, we will be going the way of the misguided masses. #129435 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Mar 11, 2013 1:40 am Subject: Re: Being non-forgetful. szmicio Dear Azita, Thank you for your reminder. It according to the Truth. Also thanks to Phil for a kind support on 'meditations'. I think 'meditations' are very easy, comparing to really understand realities. Especially while we like to have an easy way, always. Best wishes Lukas > > That was told I think that wise attention is a reason for panna and unwise for ignorance, isnt it? But during a day I am mostly daydreaming, thinking sories instead of investigating and knowing realities. Like before sleep lying in a bad, instead to investigate or 'apply manasikara' to different characteristics, like a bodily sensations or thinking I am dreaming some stories. Is there any help to be less forgetful? How to have more wise attention? How to lessen an attachement to pleasant feelings and tendency to dreaming a stories? > > azita: why try to lessen attachment, isn't it a reality that can - and should - be known by panna? Isn't the growth of panna the only way to lessen any of the kilesas? > Can we make wise attention arise, no, we cannot. > > The more we reflect on what we have heard regarding the fleetingness of realities, the more we understand we cannot control anything; in fact, there is no 'we'. Dhammas arise and fall due to many different conditions, wise attention arises because of various conditions, we can't make it arise. But there can be wise attention at this moment, who knows? > Live for understanding, not for trying to control dhammas. > > patience, courage and good cheer > azita > #129436 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:12 pm Subject: Re: On Siila 19. sarahprocter... Dear Lukas & all, http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books/Acariya_Dhammapala_A_Treatise_on_the_Paramis.ht\ m "He is a companion in misfortune. Understanding the nature and character of beings, he associates with whatever beings need his presence, in whatever way they need it; and he practises together with whatever beings need to practise with him, in whatever way of practice is necessary for them. But he proceeds only by rehabilitating them from the unwholesome and establishing them in the wholesome, not in other ways. For in order to protect the minds of others, bodhisattvas behave only in ways which increase the wholesome. "So too, because his inclination is to benefit others, he should never harm them, abuse them, humiliate them, arouse remorse in them, or incite them to act in ways which should be avoided. Nor should he place himself in a higher position than those who are of inferior conduct. He should be neither altogether inaccessible to others, nor too easily accessible, and he should not associate with others at the wrong time." *** to be contd Metta Sarah ===== #129437 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:10 pm Subject: Re: On Siila 10. sarahprocter... Dear Alberto (& Lukas), I'm glad you reposted the following: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sprlrt@... wrote: > A: Here is Nina's post on Visuddhimagga and its tiika explaining virati cetasikas, which I've found helpful. > dsg #44823 I especially appreciated the following reminders: > The Tiika explains that the three virati cetasikas draw back from evil > because of gentleness (soracca). When the the citta is gentle and kind, one > will not cause any harm to others; one will respect another being's life, > one will not take away his property and one will not commit adultery since > that causes sorrow to someone else. > One may abstain from evil conduct, not because one thinks that one has to > follow rules, but because one has loving-kindness and gentleness towards > other beings. One takes their welfare to heart. .... S: The sotapanna will not knowingly cause harm to others - we see how right understanding leads to gentleness and kindness and metta. "One takes their welfare to heart". Good reminders. So many opportunities in a day for abstention from harmfulness and for taking the welfare of others to heart. Metta Sarah ====== #129438 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:25 pm Subject: Correction Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha jonoabb Hi Nina --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Han and Jon, > Introductory Discourse in the Expositor, p. 34: > "Which are the eighty-four thousand units of text? > Eighty-two thousand from the Blessed One > Two thousand from the bhikkhu Saariputta- > Eighty-four thousand dhammas have I learned." > Then it is all analysed. > These were rehearsed at the first council. > Nina. > =============== J: Thanks for providing a precise answer and a textual source. In the same passage I notice a reference to the eighty-four thousand 'Khandhas', which I assume to be the same as 'units of text'. It is said that these constitute the Buddha's 'middle sayings', i.e., the teaching given between his first words spoken as the Buddha and his last words as recorded in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta. Jon #129439 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:30 pm Subject: Correction Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha szmicio Dear Jon, > In the same passage I notice a reference to the eighty-four thousand 'Khandhas', which I assume to be the same as 'units of text'. L: I think khandhas has many meanings depending on context. The explanation by mean of words were given in Samohavinodhani(Dispeller of delusion). And it may be: a group or instance or a pice I think. Or parts. Best wishes Lukas #129440 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:02 pm Subject: Re: Question on List of Factors in Dependent Origination by Thanissaro Bhikkhu sarahprocter... Hi Lukas & Antony, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > L: The paali is from Vibhangapaali, the second book of abhidhamma. On Dependent origination. Suttanta classification: <...> S: You gave a good translation and explanation about the lines Antony quoted in the context of D.O. on kayasankhara etc. The commentary to the Vibhanga (Sammohavinodani, transl as 'Dispeller') further elaborates: " 'Tattha katamo kaayasa'nkhaaro? Kaayasa~ncetanaa' ('Herein, which is the bodily formation? Bodily volition') and so on. Herein kaayasa~ncetanaa ('bodily volition') is the round twenty volitions, namely the eight profitable volitions and the twelve unprofitable volitions of the sense sphere proceeding from the body door by arousing bodily intimation. It is also permissible to say that it is the twenty profitable and unprofitable volitions arisen when they arrive at taking, seizing and moving in the body door (cf MA ii 364ff). " 'Vaciisa~ncetanaa' ('verbal volition') is the twenty volitions proceeding from the speech door by arousing verbal intimation. It is also permissible to say that it is the twenty volitions arisen when they arrive at motion of the jaw which is speech utterance in the speech door (cf. MA ii 364ff)..... " 'Manosa~ncetanaa ('mental volition') is all the 29 volitions having arisen in the mind door without arousing either [bodily or verbal] intimation. Thus the Blessed One taught the doors for accumulation of kamma [showing] that the limitless beings in the limitless world spheres accumulate their profitable and unprofitable kamma by means of these three doors." ***** Metta Sarah ====== #129441 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:43 pm Subject: Correction Re: [dsg] Re: 84,000 Dhamma-khandha jonoabb Hi Lukas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear Jon, > > > In the same passage I notice a reference to the eighty-four thousand 'Khandhas', which I assume to be the same as 'units of text'. > > L: I think khandhas has many meanings depending on context. The explanation by mean of words were given in Samohavinodhani(Dispeller of delusion). And it may be: a group or instance or a pice I think. Or parts. > =============== J: Thanks for these comments. I'm familiar with the meaning of 'group', which sort of fits the context (group of words forming a unit of the teaching). For some reason, the translation treats 'Khandha' here as a proper noun (similar to the name of a person or place). Jon > Best wishes > Lukas > #129442 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Mar 11, 2013 9:04 pm Subject: Vipallasas szmicio Dear friends, I found that Sutta on Vipallasa: These four, O Monks, are distortions of perception, distortions of thought distortions of view... Sensing no change in the changing, Sensing pleasure in suffering, Assuming "self" where there's no self, Sensing the un-lovely as lovely — Gone astray with wrong views, beings Mis-perceive with distorted minds. Bound in the bondage of Mara, Those people are far from safety. They're beings that go on flowing: Going again from death to birth. But when in the world of darkness Buddhas arise to make things bright, They present this profound teaching Which brings suffering to an end. When those with wisdom have heard this, They recuperate their right mind: They see change in what is changing, Suffering where there's suffering, "Non-self" in what is without self, They see the un-lovely as such. By this acceptance of right view, They overcome all suffering. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.049.olen.html I would like to hear more on vipallasas. What they are? How many? What they take wrongly? Best wishes Lukas #129443 From: Tambach Date: Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:06 am Subject: Re: On Siila 10. tambach Dear Alberto & Sarah, Tks for sharing this reminder, very helpful! Anumodana Tam B #129444 From: sprlrt@... Date: Tue Mar 12, 2013 2:41 am Subject: Re: On Siila 10. sprlrt Dear Lukas (Sarah, Tam), Just a correction to one of my posts in this thread; as the Vsm (in the passage following the one I've forwarded) explains virati cetasikas can arise in any of the eight mahakusala cittas, not only in the four ~nanasampayutta (with pa~n~na) as I said. Alberto #129445 From: Kanyarat Duang ngern Date: Tue Mar 12, 2013 4:57 am Subject: new member kanyaratduan... Hello everybody I'm a new membership. #129446 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Tue Mar 12, 2013 11:35 am Subject: Re: Vipallasas glenjohnann Lukas, Sarah and Pt Lukas, thanks so much for posting this - it is a lovely short reminder about our distorted world and and what the Buddha gave us with his teachings. Pt and Sarah - here's hoping that this message is posted! I have followed Pt's very clear instructions and hopefully mission accomplished. The Yahoo address had been clicked on as the one through which the messages travelled. I now have it set on the Telus address. If you see this message, it has worked. If not, then you (PT) will be hearing from me directly. Thanks very much for your help. Greatly appreciated. Ann --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear friends, > I found that Sutta on Vipallasa: > > These four, O Monks, are distortions of perception, distortions of thought distortions of view... > > > Sensing no change in the changing, > Sensing pleasure in suffering, > Assuming "self" where there's no self, > Sensing the un-lovely as lovely — > > Gone astray with wrong views, beings > Mis-perceive with distorted minds. > > Bound in the bondage of Mara, > Those people are far from safety. > They're beings that go on flowing: > Going again from death to birth. > > But when in the world of darkness > Buddhas arise to make things bright, > They present this profound teaching > Which brings suffering to an end. > > When those with wisdom have heard this, > They recuperate their right mind: > > They see change in what is changing, > Suffering where there's suffering, > "Non-self" in what is without self, > They see the un-lovely as such. > > By this acceptance of right view, > They overcome all suffering. > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.049.olen.html > > I would like to hear more on vipallasas. What they are? How many? What they take wrongly? > > Best wishes > Lukas > #129447 From: Tam Bach Date: Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:25 pm Subject: Meeting in Bangkok- May or July? From Lan- Sala flower tambach Dear all, Lan has asked me to post this, as she is having some technical difficulties with posting on DSG. But she can still read... Dear Sarah, Azita, Tam and all, How long do you intend or willing to meet? I will be in Thailand, together with my father, from May 14-31. Is that the beginning or end of that period convenient for you two and also Annie, Phil, Jessica...? Or the 2nd time in July, I will take flight from Bangkok to Yangon on 16 July, also can meet before that date. It will be interesting if you all can arrange in those time to be together in Thai. Almost no chance for me to join the Dhamma trip in Hochiminh city area in September 'cos my flight back from Yangon is on 10 Sep. Then, Sarah, can you help to contact with Achan Sujin? Thanks. Yours in the Dhamma, Lan. #129448 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Mar 12, 2013 5:35 pm Subject: Re: new member jonoabb Dear Kanyarat --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kanyarat Duang ngern wrote: > > Hello everybody I'm a new membership. > =============== J: Hello and welcome to the list. Please feel free to join in any of the discussion threads, or to ask a question of your own. Looking forward to talking with you, Jon #129449 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 13, 2013 7:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] new member nilovg Dear Kanyarat, welcome here. Are you from Thailand? It would be nice if you tell us about your interests, Nina. Op 11-mrt-2013, om 18:57 heeft Kanyarat Duang ngern het volgende geschreven: > Hello everybody I'm a new membership. > > #129450 From: "azita" Date: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:40 am Subject: Re: Meeting in Bangkok- May or July? From Lan- Sala flower gazita2002 Hallo Tam, Lan, all I won't be in Thailand until late July/ early August so guess I won't be able to meet with you, Lan. Don't know what anyone else is doing. Hope all is well. where are you Tam? have been thinking about you and looking forward to seeing you again later this year. Regards to all. Live for understanding, azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Tam Bach wrote: > > Dear all, Lan has asked me to post this, as she is having some technical difficulties with posting on DSG. But she can still read... > > Dear Sarah, Azita, Tam and all, > > How long do you intend or willing to meet? > > I will be in Thailand, together with my father, from May 14-31. Is that the beginning or end of that period convenient for you two and also Annie, Phil, Jessica...? > > Or the 2nd time in July, I will take flight from Bangkok to Yangon on 16 July, also can meet before that date. > It will be interesting if you all can arrange in those time to be together in Thai. Almost no chance for me to join the Dhamma trip in Hochiminh city area in September 'cos my flight back from Yangon is on 10 Sep. > Then, Sarah, can you help to contact with Achan Sujin? Thanks. > > Yours in the Dhamma, > > Lan. > > > #129451 From: Tam Bach Date: Wed Mar 13, 2013 1:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meeting in Bangkok- May or July? From Lan- Sala flower tambach Dear Azita,  A: Where are you Tam? have been thinking about you and looking forward to seeing you again later this year. Regards to all. Tam B: I am in Hanoi, as well as all your other kids :-). I was in Saigon lately, it seems there will be many people interested in the discussions on Sept. We look forward to seeing you all there.... We miss our mother hen :-) A: Live for understanding, Tam B: Indeed, although most often we don't :-) Tam azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Tam Bach wrote: > > Dear all, Lan has asked me to post this, as she is having some technical difficulties with posting on DSG. But she can still read... > > Dear Sarah, Azita, Tam and all, > > How long do you intend or willing to meet? > > I will be in Thailand, together with my father, from May 14-31. Is that the beginning or end of that period convenient for you two and also Annie, Phil, Jessica...? > > Or the 2nd time in July, I will take flight from Bangkok to Yangon on 16 July, also can meet before that date. > It will be interesting if you all can arrange in those time to be together in Thai. Almost no chance for me to join the Dhamma trip in Hochiminh city area in September 'cos my flight back from Yangon is on 10 Sep. > Then, Sarah, can you help to contact with Achan Sujin? Thanks. > > Yours in the Dhamma, > > Lan. > > > #129452 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Mar 13, 2013 6:17 pm Subject: Re: On Siila 20. sarahprocter... Dear Lukas & all, http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books/Acariya_Dhammapala_A_Treatise_on_the_Paramis.ht\ m "He associates with beings whom it is proper to associate with at the appropriate time and place. He does not criticize those who are dear to others in front of them, nor praise those who are resented by them. He is not intimate with those who are not trustworthy. He does not refuse a proper invitation, or engage in persuasion, or accept excessively. He encourages those endowed with faith with a discourse on the benefits of faith; and he encourages as well those endowed with virtue, learning, generosity, and wisdom with a discourse on the benefits of those qualities. "If the bodhisattva has attained to the direct knowledges, he may inspire a sense of spiritual urgency (samvega) in the negligent by showing them the fate of those in hell, etc., as is fit. Thereby he establishes the faithless (immoral, ignorant, stingy, and dull-witted) in faith (virtue, learning, generosity, and wisdom). He makes them enter the Buddha's Dispensation and brings to maturity those already endowed with these qualities. In this way, through his virtuous conduct, the Great Man's immeasurable flood of merit and goodness ascends to ever increasing heights." *** to be contd Metta Sarah ===== > #129453 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Mar 13, 2013 6:23 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > I think I might have suggested on DSG many years ago that the five khandhas were kind of a momentary self. That didn't go over well. I won't suggest it again. :-) > > The main reason I won't suggest it again is I now believe the definition of self (atta) includes anything that is alleged to exist but is not a paramattha dhamma (not a citta, cetasika, rupa or nibbana). So it would be silly to call the five khandhas a momentary self. .. S: Yes, but if there is an idea of any of the five khandhas as some thing, some conglomeration or group, such as when a visible object or sound is taken for a thing or mine or belonging to me etc, it is attha-ditthi. No understanding of the reality - a dhamma, not atta. Metta Sarah ==== #129454 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Mar 13, 2013 6:48 pm Subject: Re: 3 gocaras sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > >S: Yes, upanibhandha gocara refers to the direct understanding of realities. > > Without upanissaya gocara, the firm understanding of realities that can be understood, there cannot be upanibhandha gocara. > > L: Isnt it that upanissaya gocara leads first to arakkha gocara, like people that follow to know each realities they start to do more kusala and after that it leads to upanibandha gocara, that is awareness? Or upanissaya leads directly to upanibandha gocara? .... S: With more understanding about realities, the objects of right understanding of the path, it will lead to more kusala (as Nina explained recently in a post on the different kinds of sila.) However, as I understand, arakkha gocara refers to all kinds of kusala, there is 'protection' of the object whenever kusala arises, whenever sati arises - no opportunity for akusala at such times. This is why any sati 'guards' the door-ways at such times. it is upanissaya gocara, the accumulation of the right (theoretical) understanding of the right objects (i.e the reality that appears now), that leads to the direct understanding or upanibhandha gocara. All kinds of kusala can be a support and as we know with our study of the Perfections, for example, without the development of these factors with understanding, the path cannot be developed. Metta Sarah p.s I've not been able to find the reference I came across before. I thought it was in the Psm. Perhaps others like Han or Htoo or Connie can look for references. ===== #129455 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Mar 13, 2013 6:53 pm Subject: Re: Dhamma reminders from Poland sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, Thank you for sharing the extract. I appreciated Adam's (your 'brother') keen interest and willingnes to listen and ask questions. I know it may be difficult or impossible to have any contact with him at this time, but perhaps when you do you can have further discussion with him on these points and send him all our very best wishes. Metta Sarah --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > Here comes some extracts from Poland, September 13. In between Sarah and Polish friends. > > Adam: Yeah..It's more like..I see, maybe not me, but Adam get's flustrated..like..it's just my body, and not me. > Sarah: Actually, no Adam at all. But it's not a matter of observing or reacting or not reacting, but just understanding that, it's just dhammas arising and falling away. <....> #129456 From: "Lukas" Date: Wed Mar 13, 2013 6:55 pm Subject: Re: 3 gocaras szmicio Dear Sarah and all, > p.s I've not been able to find the reference I came across before. I thought it was in the Psm. Perhaps others like Han or Htoo or Connie can look for references. L: Actually I would like to hear more on gocaras. Is this in Psm.? Can anyone give a source? Best wishes Lukas #129457 From: "Tony H" Date: Wed Mar 13, 2013 11:26 pm Subject: Back on the Horse... tony.humphreys Hello all, I seem to have managed to rid myself of a particularly bad bout of bronchitis - been of work for three weeks - so apologies for not replying (I see a few posts that have asked me questions that I have not replied to). Tony... #129458 From: "Tony H" Date: Wed Mar 13, 2013 11:27 pm Subject: Hua Hin 2013 Talks... tony.humphreys Hi, Are there any plans to upload these talks? Apologies if this has already been answered. Tony... #129459 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Thu Mar 14, 2013 12:16 am Subject: Re: Meeting in Bangkok- May or July? From Lan- Sala flower jagkrit2012 Dear Tam, Azita and friends Last week (March 4-8) Than Acharn Sujin and 106 Thai friends (including me,) went on dhamma trip to Burma. We visited Mandalay, Bagan and Yangon. In Bagan, we met a Burmese friend who work for Unicef in Burma. He is a friend of one of our Thai friend since they were studying in US almost 30 years ago. He is also interested in dhamma discussion of Than Acharn since then. Than Acharn discussed dhamma with him for almost 3 hours. Foundation of understanding was said again and again by Than Acharn because in Burma according to his comment people still accustomed to praying and meditating. And many of them recite Abhidhamma without genuine intention to understand them. He also asked question about Aanaapaanasaati Khammathana. And Than Acharn just reminded him that one should understand what is aanaapaanasaati before doing something. Do we really understand what is breath? He said he will reach his retirement age in few years. He said he was getting old so he had few years left to study dhamma. Than Acharn said few years for everyone who knew when? Than Acharn asked a question: what is the best moment in life? What is the precious moment in one's life? Answer: the moment of understanding. (I think of Azita's favorite quote of Than Acharn "right now, like now") When speaking about international organisations like Unicef, they try to solve various problem of people's living condition from country to country. But what really is the problem of the world? And who is the first person who solve the problem? Interesting Q and A for dhamma friends. During the trip Than Acharn kindly gave dhamma reminder while traveling along Iravadee river. One reminder which was very interesting was "how instant of dhamma". Dhamma arises and falls away in split second. It is so instant and we experience them as readymade. And during visiting Shwesdagon Pagoda in Yagon, we had another dhamma discussion besides the pagoda. Than Acharn provided some good reminders such as: What's valuable (kusala) is still valuable even in small amount. What's not valualbe (akusal) is still not valuable even in large amount (lobha). "Uppaati is arising of vipaaka citta: seeing, hearing, smelling, testing and touching." "Nippaati is arising of citta following vipaaka citta" Seeing is just seeing? Uppaait. People, pets, animals and things is thinking? Nippaati. Those are some reminders I can capture during the trip. Than Acharn will be in Lao in the end of this month. There will be a discussion with Laos friends in Suwanaket. But I do not join Than Acharn and the group but I'm not sure that Kanchana (Pi Deang) will join. When Azita, Tam and Lan talked about Sigon Trip, I'm really looking forward to it. However it should be nice to have early session in June or July in Thailand before. By the way, Tam do you find the place to stay and discuss in Sigon? Thank you and anumothana Jagkrit #129460 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Mar 14, 2013 12:38 am Subject: Re: Meeting in Bangkok- May or July? From Lan- Sala flower szmicio Dear Jagkrit, I am happy you are with Tahn Ajahn. But foreget what people say. Forget this. What matters is really understanding of each dhamma. Best wishes Lukas #129461 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Thu Mar 14, 2013 1:39 am Subject: Re: Meeting in Bangkok- May or July? From Lan- Sala flower jagkrit2012 Dear Lukas L: What matters is really understanding of each dhamma. JJ: Yes, it is the most important matter. Understanding reallity as it each is. And when you said forget, it reminds me of Than Acharn said during Burma trip: "Seeing for forgetting". It's all gone right after. Thank you and anumodhana. Jagkrit #129462 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meeting in Bangkok- May or July? From Lan- Sala flower nilovg Dear Jagkrit, Thank you very much for the extracts. Op 13-mrt-2013, om 14:16 heeft jagkrit2012 het volgende geschreven: > Foundation of understanding was said again and again by Than > Acharn because in Burma according to his comment people still > accustomed to praying and meditating. And many of them recite > Abhidhamma without genuine intention to understand them. > ------ N: It is good that the foundation of understanding is stressed. But, it is not so that the Burmese have no genuine intention to understand the Abhidhamma. See our friend Han here! There are many associations also of laypeople who discuss Dhamma there. They have a great interest. Ask Han. But it is good for all of us that Acharn brings us to the present moment again and again. She is unique in that matter. ------- > > J:When speaking about international organisations like Unicef, they > try to solve various problem of people's living condition from > country to country. > > But what really is the problem of the world? > > And who is the first person who solve the problem? > > Interesting Q and A for dhamma friends. > ------- N: As we read in the sutta: lobha, dosa and moha cause all the problems and only by right understanding problems can be solved. However, at the same time we can do our best when we work with worldly organisations. We do not have to retire from our obligations. I am thinking of my late husband, working with kusala in his diplomatic career and also for the United Nations. And for you, as a judge, and for your spouse as a lawyer. How do you see your work? One can be inspired by the Dhamma while doing one's job. Having mettaa and compassion for others. Tam is organizing for Saigon, Sarah is helping, and I am really delighted to meet you there again. Nina. #129463 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:06 am Subject: Re: Meeting in Bangkok- May or July? From Lan- Sala flower jagkrit2012 Dear Nina > N: It is good that the foundation of understanding is stressed. But, > it is not so that the Burmese have no genuine intention to understand > the Abhidhamma. See our friend Han here! There are many associations > also of laypeople who discuss Dhamma there. They have a great > interest. Ask Han. But it is good for all of us that Acharn brings us > to the present moment again and again. She is unique in that matter. > ------- JJ: sorry for my misinterpretation. I do not really know how people in Burma study dhamma. I just got this message from his comment. And I totally agree that our friends here especially Khun Han are very noble in dhamma. I think when some one ask me how people in Thailand study Dhamma. I have to say that more than 80% of them interest in danna and praying. Many of them accustom to only meditation. But few has genuine intention to study and understand what Buddha tough. However understand dhamma is very difficult. People trend to look for easy or short cut way to reach his wish of understanding dhamma. ================ > N: As we read in the sutta: lobha, dosa and moha cause all the > problems and only by right understanding problems can be solved. > However, at the same time we can do our best when we work with > worldly organisations. We do not have to retire from our obligations. One can be inspired by the Dhamma while doing one's job. Having mettaa > and compassion for others. JJ: It is so true when you say that right understanding can solve the problem. Our work in daily life with mettaa seem to be clear of the problem and more productive. ================== > Tam is organizing for Saigon, Sarah is helping, and I am really > delighted to meet you there again. JJ: me too. See you soon. Thank you and anumodhana Jagkrit #129464 From: sprlrt@... Date: Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:10 am Subject: Re: 3 gocaras sprlrt Dear Lukas, L: Actually I would like to hear more on gocaras. As Ajahn and Sarah explain at the end of the last tape on the 11th in Poland, gocara is just another word for arammana, one of the conditions needed by citta and cetasikas to arise, what they experience (no citta and cetasikas can arise without it). Patthana, Niddesa, also explains arammana paccaya: Whatever dhamma about which citta and cetasikas dhammas arising now are concerned, it's their condition as object condition. (Ya.m ya.m dhamma.m aarabbha ye ye dhammaa uppajanti cittacetasikaa dhammaa te te dhammaa tesam tesam dhammaana.m aaramma.napaccayena paccayo) So when there are conditions for pa~n~na at pariyatti level to arise, its object (the Blessed One's Dhamma) is upanissayagocara, strong support; when there are conditions for any kusala citta and cetasikas to arise, their object (dana, or sila, or metta etc.) is aarakkhagocara, a protection; when there are conditions for pa~n~na at satipatthana level to arise, its object (the characteristic of any reality) is upanibandhagocara, a strong link. Alberto #129465 From: "pakawa.thorn" Date: Thu Mar 14, 2013 4:05 pm Subject: ask for trying to use Hangouts On Air from DSSF Bangkok pakawa.thorn On Saturday and Sunday(around 10.30 am- 12.00 & 13.00-16.00) we try online vdo streaming about dhamma discussion from DSSF Bangkok . We use google+ Hangout by vdo chatting but when we want to enable hangout on air it display that ..... "Hangouts On Air is not available in your country. Unfortunately at this time you are unable to use Hangouts On Air in your country. Please check back again soon." So I wonder if asking someone in the country that can use Hangout On Air and try to tranfer from DSSF Bangkok , we can do or not. It just trying don't mention it so much. Thank you very much. Thorn Pakawa DSSF Bangkok #129466 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 14, 2013 8:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meeting in Bangkok- nilovg Dear Jagkrit and Lukas, Op 13-mrt-2013, om 15:39 heeft jagkrit2012 het volgende geschreven: > Dear Lukas > > L: What matters is really understanding of each dhamma. > > JJ: Yes, it is the most important matter. Understanding reallity as > it each is. And when you said forget, it reminds me of Than Acharn > said during Burma trip: "Seeing for forgetting". It's all gone > right after. > -------- > N: After reading this I considered it somewhat more. It really reminds us of the inimaginable shortness of one moment of seeing. It is so short that it is immediately forgotten. It becomes yesterday so fast! And still we cling and it seems to stay. Nina. #129467 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Mar 14, 2013 10:23 pm Subject: Re: Meeting in Bangkok- szmicio Dear Nina, > N: After reading this I considered it somewhat more. It really > reminds us of the inimaginable shortness of one moment of seeing. It > is so short that it is immediately forgotten. It becomes yesterday so > fast! And still we cling and it seems to stay. L: This sounds helpful. I add what I've heard on recordings. Ajahn told that the purpose is not to know meaning of different words, but to understand, have better understanding of realities right now. Best wishes Lukas #129468 From: "azita" Date: Fri Mar 15, 2013 12:07 pm Subject: Re: Meeting in Bangkok- gazita2002 Hallo Lucas, Nina --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear Nina, > > > N: After reading this I considered it somewhat more. It really > > reminds us of the inimaginable shortness of one moment of seeing. It > > is so short that it is immediately forgotten. It becomes yesterday so > > fast! And still we cling and it seems to stay. > > L: This sounds helpful. I add what I've heard on recordings. Ajahn told that the purpose is not to know meaning of different words, but to understand, have better understanding of realities right now. Azita: at first I thought "not helpful, makes me feel despondent" and then quickly I realized that is attachment; attachment to a self who worries about how much ignorance there is! In fact it is very helpful to know just how quickly dhammas arise and disappear, never to arise again and yet still, we cling. Who will tell us this, in this mad, mad world that encourages attachment; only our good friends in dhamma. Patience, courage and good cheer azita ps. courage to face the frustrations, fear, confusion and loneliness and the good cheer to realize I'm just a drama queen :) #129469 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Mar 15, 2013 5:01 pm Subject: Re: Hua Hin 2013 Talks... sarahprocter... Hi Tony, Sorry to hear you've been so poorly and hope you make a good recovery now. Glad to have you "back on the horse"! ... > Are there any plans to upload these talks? Apologies if this has already been answered. .... S: It's always a slow work, even to minimally edit and upload. We have started editing and uploading this series. If you go to: http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ - recorded dhamma discussions - editing in progress - thailand - Hua Hin you can get started. We're up to breakfast on 8th Jan and you make your appearance on the morning of the 11th Jan, so we're not quite there yet. Why not listen to the ones we've uploaded so far and follow them into the lead up to your excellent discussion? Will send another note as soon as the morning of the 11th is uploaded. Metta Sarah ===== #129470 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 15, 2013 5:20 pm Subject: Discussion with Annie & Pt sarahprocter... Dear Friends, We had a really excellent discussion at our flat in Manly yesterday with Annie & Pt. As Annie is new to the Teachings, we avoided Pali terms for the first hour or two and talked about life and realities at the present moment in our own simple language whilst still getting at the very heart of the Teachings - seeing, visible object, realities as not-self, no control over what arises at this moment, the development of what is wholesome or worthwhile in life, the aims of study and understanding for the sake of understanding. We had a lot of discussion about how we're always seeking pleasant feelings and trying to avoid unpleasant feelings, attachment as cause of grief - really we touched on all the core issues, often discussed here on DSG and in Thailand. Annie is off on her big trip to Asia, but hope she and Pt may comment some more and add any details or topics of interest. It really was a delightful and valuable afternoon for Jon & I. Thanks to Annie & Pt for coming! Also thanks to Pt's help with some techi problems. Metta Sarah p.s Jon will be shortly loading a pic of Annie in the member album:-) ===== #129471 From: "Tony H" Date: Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:02 pm Subject: Re: Hua Hin 2013 Talks... tony.humphreys Hi Sarah, S: Why not listen to the ones we've uploaded so far and follow them into the lead up to your excellent discussion? ...not sure about excellent - confused waffling maybe! It was the previous days I was interested in. I'll have a look thanks. Tony... #129472 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Mar 15, 2013 8:02 pm Subject: Dukkha szmicio Dear friends, I am looking for the references in the Text to 3 kinds of dukkha and any exmplanation of this. Dukkhadukkha viparinamadukkha and sankharadukkha. Best wishes Lukas #129473 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Mar 15, 2013 9:00 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > I am looking for the references in the Text to 3 kinds of dukkha and any exmplanation of this. Dukkhadukkha viparinamadukkha and sankharadukkha. ... S: "Bhikkhus, there are these three kinds of suffering. What three? Suffering due to pain, suffering due to formations, suffering due to change. These are the three kinds of suffering. The Noble Eightfold Path is to be developed for direct knowledge of these three kinds of suffering, for the full understanding of them, for their utter destruction, for their abandoning." SN:45:165(5)'Suffering' (Bodhi transl) "Herein, bodily and mental painful feeling are called 'intrinsic suffering' [dukkha-dukkha] because of their individual essence, their name, and their painfulness. [Bodily and mental] pleasant feeling are called 'suffering in change' [vipari.naama-dukkha] because they are the cause for the arising of pain when they change (M.i,303). Equanimous feeling and the remaining formations of the three planes are called 'suffering due to formations' [sa.nkhaara-dukkha] because they are oppressed by rise and fall." Vism.XVI, 35 (Nanamoli transl) **** S: More detail and explanation in "useful posts" under "dukkha - 3 kinds". Metta Sarah ====== #129474 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Mar 15, 2013 9:05 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha szmicio Dear Sarah, Thanks. This 3 planes, refers to kamavacara, ruupa and aruupa bhumi? or lokuttara also, and than kamavacarabhumi not included? Best wishes Lukas > Equanimous feeling and the remaining formations of the three planes are > called 'suffering due to formations' [sa.nkhaara-dukkha] because they > are oppressed by rise and fall." > Vism.XVI, 35 (Nanamoli transl) > **** #129475 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Discussion with Annie & Pt nilovg Dear Sarah, Azita and Annie, Wonderful you had a good discussion about the core issues. I do try to avoid unpleasant feeling, sadness instead of having more understanding. This is certaily a core issue. Azita said this so well: "In fact it is very helpful to know just how quickly dhammas arise and disappear, never to arise again and yet still, we cling. Who will tell us this, in this mad, mad world that encourages attachment; only our good friends in dhamma. " ----- Nina. Op 15-mrt-2013, om 7:20 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > We had a lot of discussion about how we're always seeking pleasant > feelings and trying to avoid unpleasant feelings, attachment as > cause of grief - really we touched on all the core issues, often > discussed here on DSG and in Thailand. #129476 From: "philip" Date: Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:36 pm Subject: Re: Being non-forgetful. philofillet Hi Lukas > > Kanchana: To have more understanding that every reality which you experience is already appeared and completely falled away. No one can change anything which alerady happened. So just listen more and investigate more. That' s it. Yes, that's it. Of course we can struggle and find ways to be "better people" and on a certain level it is very helpful to do fewer bad deeds etc. But the Buddha didn't teach for us to learn how to do fewer bad things, he taught for the development of understanding, liberating understanding. And we know from Abhidhamma that understanding (as all kusala) must be accompanied by alobha. That is a black and white truth, but it makes meditation as practiced by modern Buddhists akusala.And of course it makes trying to be a better person akusala. And when we think with satisfaction about deep teachings there is attachment too. There can't be much kusala in a day, but just a few moments of it is valuable, and conditions more, without expectations. (Which are akusala as well.) Hope all is well with you, and your cousin/brother. Phil #129477 From: "philip" Date: Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:42 pm Subject: Re: Being non-forgetful. philofillet Hi again Lukas p.s I continue to believe that "meditation" is very good for the health, a form of attachment to pleasant feelings/mind states that is less harmful than alcohol and drugs. As you know, I drank alcohol for 30 years, and although now I don't have a strong interest in the precept against alcohol (drinking isn't akuasala kamma patha) the main reason I don't drink is that the pleasant sensations that I can achieve through "breath meditation" are superior to those that I got through drinking. If I were still deceived, I would talk about "developing jhanas", but I know it is just greed for pleasant sensations. ANyways, I strongly recommend looking into yoga, which I also do. It's so good to be in tune with plesaant energies in the body, a good substitute for the drugs and alcohol you and I and so many others enjoy/have enjoyed. Phil p.s And Sarah is helping you develop your understanding of sila. I suppose I will be interested in that again someday, in line with conditions. I expect I will. #129478 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Mar 17, 2013 4:02 pm Subject: Re: Discussion with Annie & Pt ptaus1 Hi Sarah and all, > We had a really excellent discussion at our flat in Manly yesterday with Annie & Pt. As Annie is new to the Teachings, we avoided Pali terms for the first hour or two and talked about life and realities at the present moment in our own simple language whilst still getting at the very heart of the Teachings - seeing, visible object, realities as not-self, no control over what arises at this moment, the development of what is wholesome or worthwhile in life, the aims of study and understanding for the sake of understanding. Yes, it was a very useful discussion, good to discuss without all the terminology. Thanks to Sarah and Jon for answering our questions. Also thanks to Annie for asking excellent questions. And thanks to Sarah for the cake, which turned out an object of many discussion points - visible object, object of attachment, etc - a really sweet Dhamma discussion. It also occurred to me later that I haven't asked a single questions about samatha bhavana like I usually do, so not to disappoint, here's one: Technically speaking, samatha bhavana could arise in moments of cooking for example, with objects of citta being ideas of actual cooking and so unrelated to ideas of cooking for someone (so nothing to do with dana and sila directly)? I'm coming from the assumption that it's not the action (cooking) nor ideas about it (ideas about cooking) that make the citta kusala but the manner in which these ideas are experienced - with wisdom of samatha kind. Are there any problems with the above assumption? Best wishes pt #129479 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Mar 17, 2013 5:49 pm Subject: Re: On Siila 21. sarahprocter... Dear Lukas & all, http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books/Acariya_Dhammapala_A_Treatise_on_the_Paramis.ht\ m "The detailed explanation of virtue is given in diverse ways in the Visuddhimagga (Chapter I), in the passage beginning: "Virtue is the states beginning with volition present in one who abstains from the destruction of life, etc., or in one who fulfils the practice of the duties." All that should he brought in here. Only there is this distinction: in that work the discussion of virtue has come down for beings who seek the enlightenment of disciples; but here, because the discussion is intended for great bodhisattvas, it should be explained making compassion and skilful means the forerunners. "Just as the Great Man does not dedicate the merits from his practice of virtue to his own release from affliction in the unfortunate destinations, or to his own achievement of kingship in the fortunate destinations, or to becoming a world-ruling monarch, a god, Sakka, Mara, or Brahma, so too he does not dedicate it to his own attainment of the threefold knowledge, the six direct knowledges, the four discriminations, the enlightenment of a disciple, or the enlightenment of a paccekabuddha. But rather he dedicates it only for the purpose of becoming an omniscient Buddha in order to enable all beings to acquire the incomparable adornment of virtue. "This is the method of practising the perfection of virtue." *** Metta Sarah ===== > > > #129480 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Mar 17, 2013 6:02 pm Subject: Re: Meeting in Bangkok- May or July? From Lan- Sala flower sarahprocter... Dear Jagkrit, I'm delighted to read your summary of the trip and discussions in Burma. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jagkrit2012" wrote: > In Bagan, we met a Burmese friend who work for Unicef in Burma. He is a friend of one of our Thai friend since they were studying in US almost 30 years ago. He is also interested in dhamma discussion of Than Acharn since then. > > Than Acharn discussed dhamma with him for almost 3 hours. Foundation of understanding was said again and again by Than Acharn ... .... S: I'm wondering if it was the same Burmese friend who joined us for discussions in Yangon when we went with Ajahn quite a few years ago? As I recall, he worked for Unicef and was very keen to listen. He brought some family members with him at that time, even though there was some serious family illness. If it was the same person, I remember he was asking Ajahn how to help a family member who was dying and her response was simply to understand now, we know what is best to do. It's a shame we didn't arrange for Htoo to join you. ... > He also asked question about Aanaapaanasaati Khammathana. And Than Acharn just reminded him that one should understand what is aanaapaanasaati before doing something. Do we really understand what is breath? ... S: This is always difficult - same questions wherever we go. People think they know what breath is... ... > Than Acharn asked a question: what is the best moment in life? What is the precious moment in one's life? > > Answer: the moment of understanding. ... S: I appreciate this so much and it's what we were stressing with Annie the other day and even as I said farewell to her as she left on her trip. Just this moment, just reality now - just understanding now. > When Azita, Tam and Lan talked about Sigon Trip, I'm really looking forward to it. However it should be nice to have early session in June or July in Thailand before. ... S: I hope you will have a chance to join the discussions in Kaeng Krachan with us like you did last time in the first week of June. Also at the Foundation on the Sats before and afterwards. Thank you again for your excellent summary and comments. We're uploading Hua Hin discussions a little at a time as we edit. http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ Metta Sarah ===== #129481 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Mar 17, 2013 6:24 pm Subject: Re: Vipallasas sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, >L: I would like to hear more on vipallasas. What they are? How many? What they take wrongly? ..... S: There are 4 vipallasas (perversions or distortions) of: a. perception (sa~n~naa vipallaasa), b. consciousness (citta vipallaasa) c. views (di.tt.hi vipallaasa). **** For each of these, the 4 perversions are the taking of: 1. what is impermanent (anicca) as permanent (nicca) 2. what is painful (dukkha) as pleasant (sukha) 3. what is without a self (anattaa) as self (atta) 4. what is impure (asubha) as pure or beautiful (subha) *** The sotapanna has eradicated: - the taking of what is impermanent for permanent (i.e 1a, 1b, 1c), - also the taking of what is not self for self (i.e. 3a 3b, 3c). - also all perversion of views, therefore the perversion of view that what is painful is pleasant and what is impure is pure (i.e. 2c, 4c) The anagami has further eradicated: - all perversions of perception and consciousness of what is impure as pure (i.e 4a, 4b) The arahat has further eradicated: - all perversions of perception and consciousness of what is painful is pleasant (i.e. 2a, 2b) See also: Vism. Ch XXII You gave a good summary in the sutta below. Metta Sarah >L: These four, O Monks, are distortions of perception, distortions of thought distortions of view... > Sensing no change in the changing, > Sensing pleasure in suffering, > Assuming "self" where there's no self, > Sensing the un-lovely as lovely; > > Gone astray with wrong views, beings > Mis-perceive with distorted minds. > > Bound in the bondage of Mara, > Those people are far from safety. > They're beings that go on flowing: > Going again from death to birth. > > But when in the world of darkness > Buddhas arise to make things bright, > They present this profound teaching > Which brings suffering to an end. > > When those with wisdom have heard this, > They recuperate their right mind: > > They see change in what is changing, > Suffering where there's suffering, > "Non-self" in what is without self, > They see the un-lovely as such. > > By this acceptance of right view, > They overcome all suffering. > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.049.olen.html ===== #129482 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Mar 17, 2013 6:40 pm Subject: Re: 3 gocaras sarahprocter... Dear Alberto & Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sprlrt@... wrote: > So when there are conditions for pa~n~na at pariyatti level to arise, its object (the Blessed One's Dhamma) is upanissayagocara, strong support; > when there are conditions for any kusala citta and cetasikas to arise, their object (dana, or sila, or metta etc.) is aarakkhagocara, a protection; > when there are conditions for pa~n~na at satipatthana level to arise, its object (the characteristic of any reality) is upanibandhagocara, a strong link. ... S: I like this summary. As you say, gocara means arammana and there must be an arammana for citta and cetasikas to experience at each moment. What is the object of the citta now? Is there any understanding? When Pt was visiting, we checked on Tipitaka.org and another site, but couldn't find these phrases such as 'upanibhandhagocara' in any of the texts. Yet I'm sure I've read reference to them and thought it was in the Psm:-/ Metta Sarah ==== #129483 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 17, 2013 7:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Discussion with Annie & Pt nilovg Dear pt, Op 17-mrt-2013, om 6:02 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > Technically speaking, samatha bhavana could arise in moments of > cooking for example, with objects of citta being ideas of actual > cooking and so unrelated to ideas of cooking for someone (so > nothing to do with dana and sila directly)? I'm coming from the > assumption that it's not the action (cooking) nor ideas about it > (ideas about cooking) that make the citta kusala but the manner in > which these ideas are experienced - with wisdom of samatha kind. > Are there any problems with the above assumption? > > ------- N: Yes, there are problems here. For samatha a subject that helps calm is needed, like the Triple Gem, Mindfulness of death, the Dhamma and this includes studying the teachings. These can be subjects of samatha in daily life. When you speak about cooking and wisdom, is this not vipassanaa? It has to relate to this moment, no need to think of ideas or the way these are expressed, that sounds complicated. ----- Nina. #129484 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Mar 17, 2013 8:22 pm Subject: Re: 3 gocaras ptaus1 Hi Sarah, Alex, > When Pt was visiting, we checked on Tipitaka.org and another site, but couldn't find these phrases such as 'upanibhandhagocara' in any of the texts. Yet I'm sure I've read reference to them and thought it was in the Psm:-/ It just occurred to me to search for "upanissayagocara" rather than "upanissaya gocara" as some search engines are a bit touchy, and DPR gave two references (DPR is the add on in Firefox - the little wheel icon in the bottom right corner): AN-t 9, 1. Sambodhivaggo, 3. Meghiyasuttava??ana, para. 27. KN-a Ud, 4. meghiyavaggo, 1. meghiyasuttava??ana, para. 40. It then seemed logical to search for "upanissayagocar", so without the last "a" to account for changes in case, and sure enough it gave a lot more results when the word is inflected in other cases. Same for "upanibhandhagocara" - search for it in DPR as one word and without the "a" in the end, DPR gives even more references. Still nothing on tipitaka.org new online search engine though. Perhaps Alex can look into explaining us how to optimise search on tipitaka.org? Best wishes pt #129485 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Sun Mar 17, 2013 10:40 pm Subject: Re: Meeting in Bangkok- May or July? From Lan- Sala flower jagkrit2012 Dear Sarah and friends > S: I'm wondering if it was the same Burmese friend who joined us for discussions in Yangon when we went with Ajahn quite a few years ago? As I recall, he worked for Unicef and was very keen to listen. He brought some family members with him at that time, even though there was some serious family illness. If it was the same person, I remember he was asking Ajahn how to help a family member who was dying and her response was simply to understand now, we know what is best to do. jj: I can't tell that he was the same friend who met you and Than Acharn few years ago. He seems very busy with Unicef because of his high ranging for now. I just know that his has few years left to his retirement. However, he asked for DSG website. Hopefully, he has time to join us here. In fact, I joined this tip with Than Acharn and friends by luck because I didn't sign in to join this trip but my daughter's boy friend who prepared to go could not make it. He was called to work in Japan few days before the trip. I, therefore, was just replaced him. I didn't realise much about the schedule including the discussion with this Burmese friend in Began. If I have known before hand, I would have let you know and we could arrange some discussion with Khun Htoo in Burma. Too bad that was not happen. Blame it to condition ok. Today at Thai discussion, there was the question raised for open discussion: What is the closest? Sarah or friends would like to try? Looking forward to Keang Kacharn soon. Thank you and anumodhana Jagkrit #129486 From: sprlrt@... Date: Sun Mar 17, 2013 11:38 pm Subject: Re: 3 gocaras sprlrt Dear Sarah, Lukas, Pt, In the Udana commentary, PTS hardback, they are on page 579 (vol. 2). In Visuddhimagga, pdf file, they are on page 21. Both translators use anchor for upanibandha, which is much better than the one I used (strong link). Alberto #129487 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:18 am Subject: Re: 3 gocaras truth_aerator Hello Pt1, I use Chattha Sangayana Tipitaka 4.0 program to search pali. I don't know specifics about other programs. What you can try is to search using * . example: upanibhandhagocar* or separate them into two compounds upanibhand* gocar* (2-3 words separation) Same principle with other words. Make sure to have correct diacritic marks. With best wishes, Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi Sarah, Alex, > > > When Pt was visiting, we checked on Tipitaka.org and another site, but couldn't find these phrases such as 'upanibhandhagocara' in any of the texts. Yet I'm sure I've read reference to them and thought it was in the Psm:-/ > > > It just occurred to me to search for "upanissayagocara" rather than "upanissaya gocara" as some search engines are a bit touchy, and DPR gave two references (DPR is the add on in Firefox - the little wheel icon in the bottom right corner): > > AN-t 9, 1. Sambodhivaggo, 3. Meghiyasuttava??ana, para. 27. > KN-a Ud, 4. meghiyavaggo, 1. meghiyasuttava??ana, para. 40. > > It then seemed logical to search for "upanissayagocar", so without the last "a" to account for changes in case, and sure enough it gave a lot more results when the word is inflected in other cases. > > Same for "upanibhandhagocara" - search for it in DPR as one word and without the "a" in the end, DPR gives even more references. > > Still nothing on tipitaka.org new online search engine though. Perhaps Alex can look into explaining us how to optimise search on tipitaka.org? > > Best wishes > pt > #129488 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meeting in Bangkok- nilovg Dear Jagkrit, Op 17-mrt-2013, om 12:40 heeft jagkrit2012 het volgende geschreven: > Today at Thai discussion, there was the question raised for open > discussion: > > What is the closest? ----- N: One's 'own' citta. Not the outward circumstances or what others do is important, but what our citta is like: kusala or akusala with pa~n~naa or without it. Favorable conditions for you that you could join the trip to Birma. Interesting how conditions work! Nina. #129489 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:02 am Subject: What I heard, In India (with Christine). nilovg Dear friends, Acharn: Each moment is like a dream, it is gone completely and there is only memory of people and things; it is not known as just a reality. When sati is well founded and it is aware one realizes that it is just a reality. One realizes that it is not 'I' who sees. The beginning of understanding is knowing what is real. Seeing is real. When we only consider what we hear about seeing and we think that it is so real that cannot take away the idea of self. The Buddha showed the Way to have no clinging and wrong view which thinks about 'I' all the time, about seeing and hearing as 'I'. There are many levels of sati: sati of the level of listening and considering is different from sati which is aware of the characteristic of the reality that can see, and that is different from visible object. The best in life the Buddha gave us is showing the way to develop our own understanding of his teaching. **** Nina. #129490 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:23 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Azita. Sorry for the long delay in answering. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "azita" wrote: > > Hallo RobE, > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder wrote: > > > > What do you mean by substantial entities? Must one always tie real with > > > substantial? Can something not be conditioned and real at the same time? > > > > I think that's an excellent question, but the answer might not be quite so pat as one would hope. I really think it would be worthwhile to discuss what "real" means. What I have in mind is that dhammas are "real" in the sense that they really do arise and fall away, but whether there is a "dhamma per se" that exists as a frozen entity in a moment of time, I would say 'no,' and I think the Abhidhamma -- as far as I have seen -- bears this out. The dhamma is an activity in a sense, not an object. It is never an x or a y per se, because it is always in a process of change. When it is arising, it is forming up, when it is functioning, it is doing what it was conditioned to do, and when it is falling away, it is dissolving until it no longer exists. Therefore there is never a moment that it is definable as an absolute this or that, it is changing continuously. It is this understanding of anicca on the most microscopic level that would lead one to say that there is never a moment when you can put your finger on a dhamma and say "it is exactly that." > > Azita: I think its jus the opposite when its panna that understands on this so-called microscopic level, panna knows exactly what the dhamma is. We ordinary people with little developed wisdom can never know a dhamma exactly as it is; sure we can think about it, endlessly, but that's never going to reveal a moment of arising, existing, or falling away. > Who cares what its called, because that's just a whole lot of thinking. > Isn't it better to develop the wisdom that understands exactly how things really are? Yes, one has to say yes to the wisdom that understands - but I think it misses the point as to whether there is any definite dhamma to know, even for panna. Maybe what panna knows is that there is no dhamma per se, just a constant changing of conditions and actions, which is what I think is the only possible way of understanding arising, functioning and falling away - none of those phases is static and so there is never a definitve dhamma that stands still to be "known" as one single "thing." > RobE: Therefore I would say it is not "real as a definable object," it is real "as an active formation and dissolution in process" that never stops to be defined. We can talk about the cetasikas that are involved and the processes involved - contact, or vitakkha, et al, but not at any moment say that the dhamma is frozen as "this." So I think we mistakenly think of dhammas as static objects like a table or chair that we can stop and look at, and it is not that. > > Azita: Not sure who this 'we' is because I don't think of dhammas as static objects as you suggest, altho you do also say 'it is not that'. Well if we both say that then there is a 'we.' But if you don't think of a dhamma as static then you must admit that it is never a particular thing, since it is in a constant process of change. > RobE: In that sense, "own-being" does not make sense to me, because the dhamma is not just one thing, but a changing process. Of what could its "being" consist of, other than constant transformation? > > Azita: Only panna can know, really know, what a characteristic of an appearing dhamma is. > I think in the early stages of understanding, there is weak knowledge of passing dhammas but not until well developed panna begins to arise and experience again and again, a reality will there be less doubt about how things really are. Why not begin to develop panna now and then maybe there will be less wondering how dhammas 'work' Although I do wonder about the particular knowledges that come with wisdom, in this case I am not wondering, but making a statement of an observation. Your answers above do not really address those observations. Instead they dismiss those observations. I think it's important to have an open mind in order to gain further knowledge about the way things are. If there is to be true pariyatti, it cannot deny the nature of things. I am asking about this observation in the following way: if there is constant change in every stage of the existence of a dhamma, which there is, how can there be a single clear state of being or characteristic that can be pinned down and defined? It is logically impossible. One can talk about the exact nature of the process, but the dhamma itself is nothing but a constant series of changes in that process, not an object that is ever this or that. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #129491 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:17 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > Thanks. This 3 planes, refers to kamavacara, ruupa and aruupa bhumi? or lokuttara also, and than kamavacarabhumi not included? > >S: Equanimous feeling and the remaining formations of the three planes are > > called 'suffering due to formations' [sa.nkhaara-dukkha] because they > > are oppressed by rise and fall." > > Vism.XVI, 35 (Nanamoli transl) > > **** .... S: As you know, there are four planes (bhuumi) of consciousness. The sense sphere (kamavacara), the fine-material sphere (rupavacara) and the immaterial sphere (arupavacara) are mundane (lokiya). The fourth plane is the supramundane (lokuttara) sphere. As for the planes of existence (also called bhuumi), there are three spheres - the kamavacara, the rupavacara and arupavacara. These are realms or worlds in which rebirth takes place. Although a particular sphere of consciousness may arise is other planes of existence, the sphere of consciousness is typical in the plane which has the same name. For example, rupa and arupavacara cittas may arise in the kamavacara plane, but are not typical. Likewise, kamavacara cittas may arise in the rupa and arupavacara planes, but again are not typical. So, in answer to your question, I read the quote as referring to all the remaining conditioned dhammas apart from upekkha vedana which arise in any of these planes. Each one is sankhara dhamma (conditioned dhamma), arises and falls away and is therefore dukkha. These include lokuttara dhammas (apart from nibbana which is not conditioned), because they too arise and fall away. Metta Sarah ===== #129492 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:24 pm Subject: Re: Meeting in Bangkok- May or July? From Lan- Sala flower sarahprocter... Dear jagkrit, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jagkrit2012" wrote: >However, he asked for DSG website. Hopefully, he has time to join us here. ... S: Let's hope so! ... > Today at Thai discussion, there was the question raised for open discussion: > > What is the closest? > > Sarah or friends would like to try? ... S: Seeing now! Hearing....the present citta! ... > > Looking forward to Keang Kacharn soon. ... S: Good! You'll meet Lan from Vietnam and Annie from Sydney. Both have a very keen interest and excellent qus. Metta Sarah ==== #129493 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:01 pm Subject: Re: 3 gocaras sarahprocter... Dear Pt, Alberto & Lukas, The 3 gocaras as discussed.... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sprlrt@... wrote: > In the Udana commentary, PTS hardback, they are on page 579 (vol. 2). .... S: A little earlier in this section in the commentary to the Meghiya Udana, it says: " 'Being one possessed of proper conduct and pasturage'(aacaaragocarasampanno): being one possessed of proper conduct and pasturage on account of his successful attainment of proper conduct that constitutes good form where a monk is concerned - thus spoken of as 'Bodily non-transgression, verbal non-transgression, bodily and verbal non-transgression (Vibh 246)......" It says a little later, as referenced by you: "Pasturage (gocara) is, moreover, threefold, viz. pasturage in terms of support (upanissayagocara), pasturage in terms of guarding, pasturage in terms of anchoring. "Herein: whatever lovely friend there be of the aforementioned characteristics, endowed with the good qualities (that feature in) the ten occasions for talk, dependent on (nissaya) whom one hears that (hitherto) not heard, thoroughly cleanses that (already) heard, crosses over doubt, straightens out one's view, makes one's heart serence, and, whilst training under whom, one grows in faith, one grows in morality, in hearing, in liberality, in insight, such a one is spoken of as 'one with pasturage in terms of support'. "Whatever monk there be who, upon being entered between the houses (or) upon being embarked along a street, goes along with downcast eye, seeing but a mere plough-yoke (ahead), being quite restrained as to eye-faculty, goes along not looking at elephant, not looking at horse nor chariot nor one on foot nor woman nor man, not looking upwards, not looking downwards, not gazing (horizontally) at the (four) quarters and the intermediate points, such a one is 'one with pasturage in terms of guarding'. "Pasturage in terms of anchoring, moreover, is the four foundations of mindfulness, wherein a monk anchors his own heart. For this was said by the Lord: 'And what, monks, is a monk's pasturage, his own ancestral haunt? It is the four foundations of mindfulness (S v 148). "Herein, on account of the fact that pasturage in terms of support was spoken of previously, gocaro (pasturage) is, in this connection, to be understood in terms of the other two (types). "Hence, on account of his being endowed with the aforementioned successful attainment of proper conduct and with the successful attainment of this (latter) pasturage, he is 'one possessed of proper conduct and pasturage'. Metta Sarah > In Visuddhimagga, pdf file, they are on page 21. > Both translators use anchor for upanibandha, which is much better than the one I used (strong link). ======= #129494 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:32 pm Subject: Re: 3 gocaras szmicio Dear Sarah, Thanks for that. I was thinking if this three gocaras were mentioned in Patisambidhamagga(if they ar there?) than this 3 could function in that way they would be mentioned in a context of panna only. Since Patisambidhamagga is a deep praise for panna. Here I am thinking now on goracas(pasturage- what are the other synonymous in english?) and cariya??? (conduct?) Do I think corectly? How they are both conected? This passages are to be ponder over again and again. Paali for that would be welcome. That's good you posted this since i dont have every tipitaka and commentary. Also this is nice search. I crave for have a drink. Best wishes Lukas > " 'Being one possessed of proper conduct and pasturage'(aacaaragocarasampanno): being one possessed of proper conduct and pasturage on account of his successful attainment of proper conduct that constitutes good form where a monk is concerned - thus spoken of as 'Bodily non-transgression, verbal non-transgression, bodily and verbal non-transgression (Vibh 246)......" > > It says a little later, as referenced by you: > "Pasturage (gocara) is, moreover, threefold, viz. pasturage in terms of support (upanissayagocara), pasturage in terms of guarding, pasturage in terms of anchoring. > > "Herein: whatever lovely friend there be of the aforementioned characteristics, endowed with the good qualities (that feature in) the ten occasions for talk, dependent on (nissaya) whom one hears that (hitherto) not heard, thoroughly cleanses that (already) heard, crosses over doubt, straightens out one's view, makes one's heart serence, and, whilst training under whom, one grows in faith, one grows in morality, in hearing, in liberality, in insight, such a one is spoken of as 'one with pasturage in terms of support'. > > "Whatever monk there be who, upon being entered between the houses (or) upon being embarked along a street, goes along with downcast eye, seeing but a mere plough-yoke (ahead), being quite restrained as to eye-faculty, goes along not looking at elephant, not looking at horse nor chariot nor one on foot nor woman nor man, not looking upwards, not looking downwards, not gazing (horizontally) at the (four) quarters and the intermediate points, such a one is 'one with pasturage in terms of guarding'. > > "Pasturage in terms of anchoring, moreover, is the four foundations of mindfulness, wherein a monk anchors his own heart. For this was said by the Lord: 'And what, monks, is a monk's pasturage, his own ancestral haunt? It is the four foundations of mindfulness (S v 148). > > "Herein, on account of the fact that pasturage in terms of support was spoken of previously, gocaro (pasturage) is, in this connection, to be understood in terms of the other two (types). > > "Hence, on account of his being endowed with the aforementioned successful attainment of proper conduct and with the successful attainment of this (latter) pasturage, he is 'one possessed of proper conduct and pasturage'. #129495 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:54 pm Subject: Re: 3 gocaras szmicio Dear friends, Now I see there are this two in Vibhanga on Jhana Section. Gocara and Agocara. In my translation proper/ not proper alms resort. I think upanissayagocara. May be the place of public were alcohol is sold. This for me my agocara. By way of support this supports not good behaviour, like drinking breaking precept and geting a bad conduct through bodily acts and speech. But the monastery with wise bhikkhus is a good gocara for me. It supports all kinds of siila and good conduct for me. Carittasiila and varitta siila. Just a couple of thougts on that. Best wishes Lukas #129496 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:09 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. szmicio Hi Rob E, > Although I do wonder about the particular knowledges that come with wisdom, in this case I am not wondering, but making a statement of an observation. Your answers above do not really address those observations. Instead they dismiss those observations. I think it's important to have an open mind in order to gain further knowledge about the way things are. If there is to be true pariyatti, it cannot deny the nature of things. I am asking about this observation in the following way: if there is constant change in every stage of the existence of a dhamma, which there is, how can there be a single clear state of being or characteristic that can be pinned down and defined? It is logically impossible. One can talk about the exact nature of the process, but the dhamma itself is nothing but a constant series of changes in that process, not an object that is ever this or that. L: This a view. But the right view,is only when there is no attachement to any view. Whatever something sounds as correct idea or correct view, this is merely attachement to the view. Seeing that sutva ariyasavako(well instructed Noble disciple) sees how the views comes to be and how they fall away. This is a rest with dhamma, have no view, is the beginning of the right path(samma-patipada). This is very Noble. Best wishes Lukas #129497 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:22 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. szmicio Dear friends, I would like you to help me to find one Sutta. That was a time while Venerable Ananda went to wash his limbs. Then he met some wanderer of other sects. This wanderer where examining Ven. Ananda without asking his name. Then he examining whether world is like this and like that. Ven. Ananda says he doesnt know whether this is like this or like that. Than Wanderer told 'you dont see, you dont know'. After this Ven. Ananda told: 'This is not I do not know or I do not see. I only now what is the extent of this views, how they arise and how they fall away'. Than wanderer asked for his name and hering that he talked with Ven. Ananda he asked for forgiveness. Best wishes Lukas > L: This a view. But the right view,is only when there is no attachement to any view. Whatever something sounds as correct idea or correct view, this is merely attachement to the view. Seeing that sutva ariyasavako(well instructed Noble disciple) sees how the views comes to be and how they fall away. This is a rest with dhamma, have no view, is the beginning of the right path(samma-patipada). This is very Noble. #129498 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:11 pm Subject: Re: Meeting in Bangkok- May or July? From Lan- Sala flower jagkrit2012 Dear Nina, Sarah and friends What is the closest? Than Archarn said when citta arises, it arises to know something. No citta arises without experiencing an object or an arammana. Anything which citta knows at that moment is the closest. Because at that moment, nothing else is an arammana of that particular citta. Any object which is not arammana, therefore, is far away. I recall one passage in one sutta which says "citta is the innermost". Nothing other than citta is inside. When each citta arises to know arammana, that arammana contacts citta to experience it. This should be the reason why nothing else is closer than arammana arising at that moment for citta to experience. Than Archarn, moreover, said that when kusala citta arises, kusala elements are the closest and all akusala elements are far away. When akusala citta arises, akusala elements are the closest and all kusala elements are far. Moment by moment. Anumodhana Jagkrit #129499 From: "Lukas" Date: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:49 am Subject: Re: Dhamma reminders from Poland szmicio Dear Sarah, I think Adam would like to hear especially, how the meetings with Acharn Sujin in Thailand were. I dont have any contact with him, since he is very well isolated there. I cant wait to tell him about Acharn. I know he would like to know that. He himself is very interested in Acharn Sujin. He's said very well of her and her techings. He's also interested to listen to Dhamma. When I left rehabilitation facility, he took a book Survey from me, glad to read it in his free time. He would be happy to get any parcel with books, I am sure. He would like I think Abhidhamma in Daily life, since conditions are very hard to him as he told. Unfortunatelly I cannot provide him with that since I dont have any. Best wishes Lukas > Thank you for sharing the extract. I appreciated Adam's (your 'brother') keen interest and willingnes to listen and ask questions. > > I know it may be difficult or impossible to have any contact with him at this time, but perhaps when you do you can have further discussion with him on these points and send him all our very best wishes. #129500 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meeting in Bangkok- May or July? From Lan- Sala flower nilovg Dear Jagkrit, Thank you for your detailed answer. I also thought of innermost. And as to the object, this brings us also to the present moment: the object now. Nina. Op 18-mrt-2013, om 11:11 heeft jagkrit2012 het volgende geschreven: > Than Archarn said when citta arises, it arises to know something. > No citta arises without experiencing an object or an arammana. > Anything which citta knows at that moment is the closest. Because > at that moment, nothing else is an arammana of that particular > citta. Any object which is not arammana, therefore, is far away. > > I recall one passage in one sutta which says "citta is the innermost". #129501 From: sprlrt@... Date: Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:49 am Subject: Re: 3 gocaras sprlrt Dear Sarah, I think this sutta, Meghiya, is particularly interesting, since here the Buddha tries to discourage a bhikkhu, not yet aacaragocarasampanno, from going to a secluded place to develop jhana (cetovimutti). It reminds me of Ajahn, when asked if the Buddha didn't encourage monks to go to a secluded place to develop jhana, and replying by asking 'with or without understanding'? Alberto PS Thank you and Jon very much for uploading the audio files from Hua Hin. #129502 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:10 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. kenhowardau Hi Sarah, --- <. . .> >> KH: <. . .> I now believe the definition of self (atta) includes anything that is alleged to exist but is not a paramattha dhamma (not a citta, cetasika, rupa or nibbana). So it would be silly to call the five khandhas a momentary self. >> > S: Yes, but if there is an idea of any of the five khandhas as some thing, some conglomeration or group, such as when a visible object or sound is taken for a thing or mine or belonging to me etc, it is attha-ditthi. No understanding of the reality - a dhamma, not atta. --- KH: Thanks for your comment, but I am still trying to figure it out. :-) I think you are saying atta view can occur, not only when concepts are believed to be realities, but also when realities are believed to be atta. I wonder how that second type of wrong understanding would be expressed at a theoretical level. I suppose it could be when someone admits theoretically that there are only dhammas, but still maintains dhammas can be controlled. In other words, when someone maintains that the Buddha's teaching was prescriptive, not descriptive. Ken H #129503 From: "philip" Date: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:24 pm Subject: Sakkaya ditthi philofillet Dear Nina Today I saw in a notebook "sakkaya ditthi equals khandas as as integral unit." Is this correct? Is there also sakkaya ditthi when we take seeing for self, sanna for self etc, or only when we take all khandas together as unit for self? I guess I should know the answer clearly enough from all those sutras in SN, but I will ask you to write a few words on that when you have time. Phil P.s I hate the automatic spell check function on my new iphone, it didn't accept sanna so I almost sent "samba as self" #129504 From: "philip" Date: Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:10 pm Subject: Re: Sakkaya ditthi philofillet I see my spell check also put in "sutra" instead of "sutta." Another example of how the Dhamma goes against the ways of the world (Mahayana - at least in Japan - is rooted in pleasant eternalism) and why the Buddha thought not to teach. He knew in his infinite wisdom that the iphone 5 would do that. Phil #129505 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:48 pm Subject: Re: 3 gocaras sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > Thanks for that. I was thinking if this three gocaras were mentioned in Patisambidhamagga(if they ar there?) than this 3 could function in that way they would be mentioned in a context of panna only. Since Patisambidhamagga is a deep praise for panna. ... S: I just checked the Vism source and it is almost identical with that in the Udana commentary. I'm pretty sure now it was in these sources I'd read about them before as I'd marked the passages in our texts and quoted from the Meghiya commentary before in some detail. It is panna that understands all kinds of dhamma, including all kinds of sila. When the second gocara, aarakkhagocara, is mentioned, all kinds of guarding, all kinds of sati are included, with or without panna. For the first and last kinds (upanissaya gocara and upanibhandha gocara) there must be panna. ... > Here I am thinking now on goracas(pasturage- what are the other synonymous in english?) - In the Nanamoli Vism transl, he uses 'resort'. Also, 'domain', 'scope', 'object'. .... and cariya??? (conduct?) .... S: Conduct, behaviour of citta is what you're thinking of, I believe... ... >Do I think corectly? How they are both conected? .... S: Now there is cariya of the citta - it's way of vipaka or kusala or akusala behaviour. When it's kusala, with or without panna. When it's kusala citta with panna, the object may be a concept (as in upanissaya gocara) or a reality (as in upanibhandha gocara). All kusala cariya is aarakkhagocara. In the Psm, it refers to: a) vi~n~naana cariya (here referring to ahetuka vipaka cittas), b) a~naana cariya (akusala) c) ~naana cariya (moments of understanding reality only) So ~naana cariya refers to upanibhandha gocara, moments of satipatthana. As Ajahn Sujin would ask, what about the reality now? Never mind the names or labels. ... >This passages are to be ponder over again and again. Paali for that would be welcome. That's good you posted this since i dont have every tipitaka and commentary. Also this is nice search. I crave for have a drink. .... S: Craving for anything, a~naana cariya again. Just a brief, momentary citta which arises, falls away and is forgotten. It'll soon be yesterday's citta. There can be understanding of the reality now at the moment of craving, the moment of seeing - any moment at all. Life exists just at this very moment. "Katamo upanibhandhagocaro? Cattaaro satipa.t.thaanaa, yattha citta.m upanibandhati. Vutta.m h'eta.m Bhagavataa: 'Ko ca, bhikkave, bhikkhuno gocaro, sako pettiko visayo? Yad ida.m cattaaro satipa.t.thaanaa' ti [S v 148]; aya.m vuccati upaibhandhagocaro. iti iminaa ca aacaarena iminaa ca gocarena upeto....pe....sammannaagato, tena pi vuccati aacaaragocarasampanno ti." "What is (proper) resort as anchoring? It is the four foundations of mindfulness on which the mind is anchored; and for this is said by the Blessed One: 'Bhikkhus, what is a bhikkhu's resort, his own native place? It is these four foundations of mindfulness' (S v 148). This is called (proper) resort as anchoring." (Vism 1, 51, Nanamoli transl.) Metta Sarah ===== #129506 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:57 pm Subject: Re: Discussion with Annie & Pt sarahprocter... Hi Pt, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > It also occurred to me later that I haven't asked a single questions about samatha bhavana like I usually do, so not to disappoint, here's one: > > Technically speaking, samatha bhavana could arise in moments of cooking for example, with objects of citta being ideas of actual cooking and so unrelated to ideas of cooking for someone (so nothing to do with dana and sila directly)? .... S: A.Sujin would start by asking you what samatha is. What does it mean? Of course, the correct answer is calmness, the pasaddhi cetasika (calm) which arises with all kusala cittas. As Nina suggested, at moments of cooking when ideas of food are the object of the cittas, sati and panna can dart in anytime to be aware and understand the reality appearing. At moments of understanding, calm, samatha, is there already. No need to do anything special or think of a different object. So when there is the understanding of realities, there is the growth of samatha too. This is the higher kind of calm, leading to the higher kind of concentration (adhi citta), as only taught by a Buddha and developing with an understanding of realities as anatta. ... >I'm coming from the assumption that it's not the action (cooking) nor ideas about it (ideas about cooking) that make the citta kusala but the manner in which these ideas are experienced - with wisdom of samatha kind. Are there any problems with the above assumption? ... S: Again, as Nina said, if you're talking about samatha bhavana, then the object has to be the specific one which conditions calmness when reflected on wisely. Instead of trying to think in a particular way, which is bound to be akusala, better to understand the reality appering right now! Metta Sarah ===== #129507 From: "ptaus1" Date: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:43 pm Subject: Re: Discussion with Annie & Pt ptaus1 Hi Sarah and Nina, Thanks for your replies. I'd like to make sense of samatha only, so perhaps we could examine how samatha development would happen outside of sasana when there's no teachings about insight, realities, nor kusala samatha bhavana objects such as attributes of the Buddha, etc. To narrow it down further, I'd like to examine moments of samatha bhavana only, so not sila, nor dana. 1. Since, we're outside a sasana, the only objects for samatha bhavana remaining are breath, kasinas, none of which are inherently kusala. So, samatha bhavana must rely on understanding of samatha kind rather than the object of citta? 2. Even in daily life, it must be possible for moments of samatha bhavana to arise *irrespective* of the object of citta (since there are no inherently kusala objects outside a sasana), e.g. ideas about cooking, sounds, thinking, etc. Again, I'm assuming it's the understanding of samatha kind that arises at the time, no matter what the object (idea) of the citta is at the time. And in these brief instances samatha bhavana would develop, which would eventually lead to the actual samatha bhavana with objects such as breath, kasinas, etc? Best wishes pt #129508 From: "ptaus1" Date: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:25 pm Subject: Re: 3 gocaras ptaus1 Hi Alex, Sarah, > I use Chattha Sangayana Tipitaka 4.0 program to search pali. Ah, ok, for those unaware, that's the software that tipitaka.org offers - you can install it on you computer and have a searchable tipitaka edition not dependent on internet connection. Similar to DPR I presume, only the pali edition is in full. > I don't know specifics about other programs. What you can try is to search using * . > > example: > upanibhandhagocar* Yes, thanks, this worked well on the tipitaka.org new online search, searching for upanissayagocar* actually gives some results. I've also noticed for the first time that tipitaka.org offers PDF files of all the pali texts it has. Downloading one then allows search in the PDF file itself, though it seems somewhat limited to sequential find function only. Best wishes pt #129509 From: "thomaslaw03" Date: Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:58 am Subject: Re: The site of ancient Kapilavastu thomaslaw03 Hi Dhamma friends, Recently I visited the site of Kapilavastu in Tilaurakot (Nepal). In the site there are many elephant images next to a very old Hindu shrine (which worshiping three standing stones). The elephant images are not Ganesha deity; they are just elephants as such, big and small. I presume they must be relevant to the Kapilavastu site and to the Hindu shrine, but don't really understand why so many elephant images being worshiped there. Any thought? Thomas Law #129510 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Mar 20, 2013 4:30 pm Subject: Re: The Twin Miracle (Yamaka Patihara) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Rob E, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > ....While understanding may be the leader, does it always come first? Is panna the only source of panna? Isn't it possible that if right concentration and mindfulness are developed that this helps create conditions for panna to arise? It seems to me that it would. > .... > S: Without panna, right understanding, how will there be any knowing whether it is right or wrong concentration, right or wrong mindfulness that is being developed? So you are saying that none of the other factors arise without right understanding being present? If there are conditions for right concentration to arise, it can arise and lead to the results of right concentration, even if it is not known that it is correct. Does knowing have to accompany a factor in order for it to be "right?" > > > >I may misunderstand how this works [I'm almost sure that I do] but what I often see is the idea that other aspects of the path [such as the sometime-debated arising of right understanding while working as a butcher and killing chickens] are not important to observe and that panna will wipe out all faults and trump all other akusala regardless of what one does or says. > .... > S: Without right understanding of dhammas, there is no path, there is no knowing about any reality, any truth. > ... What I was asking was whether panna will remove the defilements caused by other transgressions. I would say that it cannot, unless it of course puts an end to those wrong actions. If one experienced right understanding and continued to kill chickens at the butcher shop, what would that situation represent? Or perhaps that is impossible - to have right understanding while continuing transgressions in such a definite way? > >R: While panna arises in a moment, isn't it true that for panna to develop and for enlightenment to arise there has to be many many moments of development of the path factors that make it possible? While enlightenment may arise in a strange situation - even in the midst of a defilement as you illustrate above - the prior conditioning and accumulation for it must have taken place, awaiting the conditions that would allow them to lead to enlightenment in that moment? > ... > S: Yes - over aeons and aeons..... > ... That is why I have an equal interest in how accumulation and development take place, which involves the progression across many moments, in addition to the structure of the single citta in the moment. > > > S: Yes, they develop together. Understanding is still the leader. > > > >R: I find that a little confusing - they develop together but understanding is the leader. Does that mean that no other path factors develop the path unless panna comes first? In what sense then do they arise together, or develop with mutual support? > .... > S: No other path factors develop without panna. Yes, they arise together and mutually support each other. Panna is the predominant factor and the one responsible for the eradication of defilements. > ... > > >R: So would you think that one would have reached the point where they would have quit the "chicken-killing job" well before enlightenment might arise? > ... > S: One would assume that sila, morality and good behaviour, would be so firm that this would be so. However, we also know that cittas arise and fall away very quickly and accumulations are such that we can never make rules about situations. Think of Angulimala, killing until just before enlightenment. Always exceptions that only a Buddha could thoroughly comprehend the possibilities. Better to think in terms of dhammas - cittas, cetasikas and rupas - rather than in terms of "chicken-killing jobs". > ... The reason the chicken-killing issue arises is because some folks seem convinced that completely dismissing the "ordinary" dictates of Buddhism is just fine; that negative conventional behavior has nothing to do with Buddhism. I just find that to be a kind of disconnect. To me that makes the idea of panna kind of intellectual and detached from reality, not closer to it. If your life is as full of defilements as anyone else, are you really following the path? To me that doesn't make sense. I don't speak from any position of judgment, I have little discipline in these areas, but I still think it should be taken into account. > > > S: I would say that it is understanding that realises the harm of such a lifestyle, no matter what level or kind of understanding this is. If it is restraint because one has been ordered to follow rules at school or at home, for example, it's a very temporary restraint. > > > >R: I agree with this, but if one is living a peaceful life, guarding the senses, and many more moments of samatha are arising, does this have no effect on the development of the path? If the other path factors have no effect on the path without panna, > ... > S: The point is that without panna which understands realities, there are no other path factors. Other path factors cannot arise without such panna. > > There is sati arising with every wholesome citta (actually with all sobhana cittas, even broader), there is samatha also arising with each of these. However, without samma ditthi (panna) of the path, they are not path factors and don't lead to the path. > > Before the Buddha's time, many people had attained jhanas and led very peaceful, good lives, but it never took them any closer to the path, because there was no understanding of the Noble Truths - no understanding of realities as anicca, dukkha and anatta. > ... > >R: ....in what sense are the path factors, and why are they important at all, if only panna creates the path and everything else falls into place automatically behind panna? > ... > S: It needs the support of the other factors. For example, samma ditthi (or panna) cannot understand any reality without the assistance of samma sankhappa which 'touches' or leads it to that object. > ... > >R: Why would panna even value sila if it has no real effect on the path. Why not just go "panna" all the way, and forget about everything else? > ... > S: Panna understands the value of all kinds of kusala and the importance of sila. With regard to the path, these are the 3 viratis (abstentions). If there is no abstaining from akusala, there is no development of right effort and other path factors. It is only panna which understands what is right and what is wrong at such moments, like now. Okay, well thanks for the good explanation. I will read through this a few more times. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #129511 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Mar 20, 2013 4:36 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Sukin. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder wrote: > > Hi Rob E, > > > > I think that's an excellent question, but the answer might not be > > quite so pat as one would hope. I really think it would be worthwhile > > to discuss what "real" means. What I have in mind is that dhammas are > > "real" in the sense that they really do arise and fall away, but > > whether there is a "dhamma per se" that exists as a frozen entity in a > > moment of time, I would say 'no,' and I think the Abhidhamma -- as far > > as I have seen -- bears this out. The dhamma is an activity in a > > sense, not an object. It is never an x or a y per se, because it is > > always in a process of change. When it is arising, it is forming up, > > when it is functioning, it is doing what it was conditioned to do, and > > when it is falling away, it is dissolving until it no longer exists. > > Therefore there is never a moment that it is definable as an absolute > > this or that, it is changing continuously. It is this understanding of > > anicca on the most microscopic level that would lead one to say that > > there is never a moment when you can put your finger on a dhamma and > > say "it is exactly that." Therefore I would say it is not "real as a > > definable object," it is real "as an active formation and dissolution > > in process" that never stops to be defined. We can talk about the > > cetasikas that are involved and the processes involved - contact, or > > vitakkha, et al, but not at any moment say that the dhamma is frozen > > as "this." So I think we mistakenly think of dhammas as static objects > > like a table or chair that we can stop and look at, and it is not > > that. In that sense, "own-being" does not make sense to me, because > > the dhamma is not just one thing, but a changing process. Of what > > could its "being" consist of, other than constant transformation? > > > > Do you agree that for example, feeling has a characteristic, function, > manifestation and proximate cause different from say, perception? > > Sukin Oh, of course I have no problem acknowledging that each dhamma has its own function and that it performs this function in a particular way, assisted by accompanying cetasikas and caused by conditions. When we use the word "characteristic" however that tends to suggest a static object that contains a specific "thing" that is a characteristic, and this interpretation of characteristic I would not agree with. I would see the characteristic way that feeling takes place to indeed be a unique process, a dynamic process, that performs its function, but there is no "characteristic" riding along as a part of a dhamma apart from what it is doing and the actions of itself and the cetasikas that work with it. That image of a "characteristic" that is observed like an actual mark on a dhamma is very similar to the presumption we have about a person that they have a thing called a self somewhere inside them and it is performing some sort of coordinating function. I think we have to be very careful of forming such ideas about dhammas. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #129512 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Mar 20, 2013 4:39 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > J: Your point is that conditioned arising is not consistent with the idea of dhammas as 'discrete entities' that arise and fall away completely. I'm afraid I don't see any necessary inconsistency. I have no difficulty with the (hypothetical) possibility that that's just the way things are. > > For example, when sound arises it appears to come out of nowhere. What's the problem with that? The problem with it is that it actually does not come out of nowhere, it is created by the conditions that cause the vibration, and that is true of dhammas as well. They don't come out of nothing, they come out of conditions. To say they arise out of nothing is to mystify the concrete process of dependent origination. It's all mechanical, not ex nihilo magic. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #129513 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:17 pm Subject: Re: The Twin Miracle (Yamaka Patihara) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > S: Without panna, right understanding, how will there be any knowing whether it is right or wrong concentration, right or wrong mindfulness that is being developed? > >R: So you are saying that none of the other factors arise without right understanding being present? If there are conditions for right concentration to arise, it can arise and lead to the results of right concentration, even if it is not known that it is correct. Does knowing have to accompany a factor in order for it to be "right?" ... S: For it to be a factor of the eightfold path, it has to arise with right understanding. At any moment of path development, five factors always have to arise together - samma ditthi, samma sankappa, samma vayama, samma sati and samma samadhi. ... > > S: Without right understanding of dhammas, there is no path, there is no knowing about any reality, any truth. > > ... > >R: What I was asking was whether panna will remove the defilements caused by other transgressions. I would say that it cannot, unless it of course puts an end to those wrong actions. If one experienced right understanding and continued to kill chickens at the butcher shop, what would that situation represent? Or perhaps that is impossible - to have right understanding while continuing transgressions in such a definite way? ... S: Remember that the path factors including panna, right understanding, arise for a moment and fall away. Afterwards there can be the arising of any defilements not yet eradicated. At the stage of becoming a sotapanna, the tendency to kill is eradicated completely, so after this, there'd never be an inclination to kill chickens again. So it depends on the strength of the panna and other factors that have been accumulated. ... > > S: Yes - over aeons and aeons..... > > ... > >R: That is why I have an equal interest in how accumulation and development take place, which involves the progression across many moments, in addition to the structure of the single citta in the moment. .... S: It is the understanding of the reality now, such as the citta now, which leads to the understanding of how accumulations and development take place. Just as understanding which may arise now doesn't last for an instant, so too with other tendencies and accumulations. ... > > S: One would assume that sila, morality and good behaviour, would be so firm that this would be so. However, we also know that cittas arise and fall away very quickly and accumulations are such that we can never make rules about situations. Think of Angulimala, killing until just before enlightenment. Always exceptions that only a Buddha could thoroughly comprehend the possibilities. Better to think in terms of dhammas - cittas, cetasikas and rupas - rather than in terms of "chicken-killing jobs". > > ... > >R: The reason the chicken-killing issue arises is because some folks seem convinced that completely dismissing the "ordinary" dictates of Buddhism is just fine; that negative conventional behavior has nothing to do with Buddhism. I just find that to be a kind of disconnect. ... S: I think that what the Buddha taught us to understand is about realities. When we talk about a situation, such as chicken-killing, there are many different cittas involved. So, it's not that it has nothing to do with Buddhism, but we can learn to be more and more precise. For example, someone makes a donation to a charity. Is it always kusala? Which moments are kusala? Doesn't it depend on the cittas at the time? ..... >R: To me that makes the idea of panna kind of intellectual and detached from reality, not closer to it. If your life is as full of defilements as anyone else, are you really following the path? To me that doesn't make sense. I don't speak from any position of judgment, I have little discipline in these areas, but I still think it should be taken into account. .... S: What I think is more interesting is not the comparing of defilements in various lives, but the understanding of these and all other dhammas as anatta - not belonging to anyone. These dhammas (realities) are all conditioned to arise and fall away instantly. I think that understanding definitely leads to being less judgmental, more understanding of tendencies. .... > > S: Panna understands the value of all kinds of kusala and the importance of sila. With regard to the path, these are the 3 viratis (abstentions). If there is no abstaining from akusala, there is no development of right effort and other path factors. It is only panna which understands what is right and what is wrong at such moments, like now. > > Okay, well thanks for the good explanation. I will read through this a few more times. ... S: Good to chat again! Hope you and your family are all well, Rob. Metta Sarah ===== #129514 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:28 pm Subject: Re: 3 gocaras sarahprocter... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear friends, > Now I see there are this two in Vibhanga on Jhana Section. Gocara and Agocara. In my translation proper/ not proper alms resort. > > I think upanissayagocara. May be the place of public were alcohol is sold. This for me my agocara. By way of support this supports not good behaviour, like drinking breaking precept and geting a bad conduct through bodily acts and speech. .... S: If someone is in a bar but reflecting on visible object, sound or other realities, they are the gocara, upanissayagocara. If on the other hand one is in the monastery thinking of drink or other bad conduct, then at that time the objects of thought are the agocara - not the proper resort of thinking. ... > > But the monastery with wise bhikkhus is a good gocara for me. It supports all kinds of siila and good conduct for me. Carittasiila and varitta siila. .... S: It depends whether one is hearing and reflecting of the truths, on present paramattha dhammas or hearing and reflecting on wrong views about self, practice and bad habits. The right and wrong resort as object of thinking is experienced just for a moment of thinking only. Metta Sarah ===== #129515 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:56 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > S: Yes, but if there is an idea of any of the five khandhas as some thing, some conglomeration or group, such as when a visible object or sound is taken for a thing or mine or belonging to me etc, it is attha-ditthi. No understanding of the reality - a dhamma, not atta. > --- > > KH: Thanks for your comment, but I am still trying to figure it out. :-) > > I think you are saying atta view can occur, not only when concepts are believed to be realities, but also when realities are believed to be atta. .... S: Yes, actually, there are only realities - so it is when sound or visible object or another reality is taken to be some thing or atta, that it is atta belief. For example, now I can hear the sound of waves. If the sound is actually taken to be waves or the visible object actually taken to be a computer, that is atta belief. ..... > > I wonder how that second type of wrong understanding would be expressed at a theoretical level. I suppose it could be when someone admits theoretically that there are only dhammas, but still maintains dhammas can be controlled. .... S: At such moments there is no knowing that what is experienced are only dhammas. If there were such knowing, there'd be no idea of control. .... > > In other words, when someone maintains that the Buddha's teaching was prescriptive, not descriptive. .... S: There is an idea of 'prescriptive' when dhammas are not understood as dhammas. From the Mulapariyaya Sutta: ‘..he perceves earth as earth; having perceived earth as earth, he conceives ( himself as ) earth; he conceives (himself) in earth; he conceives (himself apart) from earth; he conceives ‘earth as mine’; he delights in earth. What is the reason? Because it has not been fully understood by him, I declare.......’. ..... Metta Sarah ==== #129516 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Mar 20, 2013 6:05 pm Subject: Re: 3 gocaras sarahprocter... Dear Alberto, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sprlrt@... wrote: > I think this sutta, Meghiya, is particularly interesting, since here the Buddha tries to discourage a bhikkhu, not yet aacaragocarasampanno, from going to a secluded place to develop jhana (cetovimutti). > It reminds me of Ajahn, when asked if the Buddha didn't encourage monks to go to a secluded place to develop jhana, and replying by asking 'with or without understanding'? ... S: That's the point. Meghiya, the Buddha's attendant, saw a secluded mango grove which he considered perfect for living and meditating alone and for making an effort on the Path in spite of the Buddha's discouragement. Once there, he was overwhelmed by thoughts of sense-desire, ill-will and cruelty. When he returned, the Buddha said: "When liberation of heart is not fully mature , Meghiya, five things conduce to full maturity." These five in brief are: 1. The good friend 2. Morality. 3. Talk concerned with the Dhamma and development of wholesome states 4. the 4 Right Efforts 5. Insight leading to the destruction of dukkha. The sutta can be found here, but a lot more helpful detail is in the commentary: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.4.01.irel.html Metta Sarah ... > PS Thank you and Jon very much for uploading the audio files from Hua Hin. .... S: A pleasure, but we're having to pause as we're travelling on Sat. Will continue once settled in Hong Kong. ==== #129517 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Mar 20, 2013 6:25 pm Subject: Re: Discussion with Annie & Pt sarahprocter... Hi Pt, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > Thanks for your replies. I'd like to make sense of samatha only, so perhaps we could examine how samatha development would happen outside of sasana when there's no teachings about insight, realities, nor kusala samatha bhavana objects such as attributes of the Buddha, etc. ... S: Any of the 40 objects except Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha... ... >To narrow it down further, I'd like to examine moments of samatha bhavana only, so not sila, nor dana. > > 1. Since, we're outside a sasana, the only objects for samatha bhavana remaining are breath, kasinas, none of which are inherently kusala. So, samatha bhavana must rely on understanding of samatha kind rather than the object of citta? .... S: There is understanding of what calmness is, when the citta is kusala or akusala and how the object conditions calm. As you say, there is nothing inherently kusala about a kasina or breath, so just concentrating on such objects without any understanding is completely useless. ... > > 2. Even in daily life, it must be possible for moments of samatha bhavana to arise *irrespective* of the object of citta (since there are no inherently kusala objects outside a sasana), e.g. ideas about cooking, sounds, thinking, etc. .... S: Moments of calm, samatha, with any moments of kusala, but such occasional moments of calm cannot be referred to as samatha bhavana. For it to be samatha bhavana, it is the repeated experiencing/thinking of a particular object which conditions calm with understanding. This is by conditions and accumulations, not by trying to concentrate on such an object, such as death or breath, in order to develop samatha. ... >Again, I'm assuming it's the understanding of samatha kind that arises at the time, no matter what the object (idea) of the citta is at the time. ... S: As above. For it to be samatha bhavana, not just occasional moments of calm arising with kusala cittas in a day, it must be one or more of the specified objects reflected on wisely. This is why the understanding is so important. A swimmer will tell you they feel so calm and relaxed in the water or a walker will say the same in the mountains. This is not kusala calm. ... >And in these brief instances samatha bhavana would develop, which would eventually lead to the actual samatha bhavana with objects such as breath, kasinas, etc? .... S: No, it must be the right object from the beginning. For example, someone may reflect wisely on death now or metta and this may be a condition for more such wise reflection in future, by habit or tendency. This leads to samatha bhavana, but only without expectation or desire. If there is any wishing or trying to develop it, it will be wrong concentration for sure. And why not develop right understanding of the reality appearing now? The calm, samatha, at such times is far superior because it is accompanied by an understanding of the dhammas as anatta. There is detachment from whatever arises. Please keep asking any qus! Metta Sarah ==== #129518 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 3 gocaras nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 20-mrt-2013, heeft Alberto het volgende geschreven: > PS Thank you and Jon very much for uploading the audio files from > Hua Hin. ------ N: Yes, anumodana for all your work. I copied them and started to listen. Always something new to consider. Nina. #129519 From: "philip" Date: Thu Mar 21, 2013 2:44 am Subject: "Is that enough to develop understanding?" philofillet Dear all Always refreshing to hear Ajahn talk (Hin Hua) about seeing and visible object, no need to explain what it is, just understand it. Visible object now. Seeing now. "Is that enough for understanding to develop?" Phil #129520 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 21, 2013 6:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Is that enough to develop understanding?" nilovg Dear Phil, Op 20-mrt-2013, om 16:44 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Always refreshing to hear Ajahn talk (Hin Hua) about seeing and > visible object, no need to explain what it is, just understand it. > Visible object now. Seeing now. > > "Is that enough for understanding to develop?" > ------ N: We have to keep on listening and considering all kinds of realities that appear. Not only a few realities. I LIked: 'Seeing is not the moment of talking about it.' As you repeat: seeing now. But we are always forgetful and go back to our stories, sad or pleasant. We also have to consider aayatanas, we have to consider all details, from all angles. It is not enough to remind ourselves of 'Visible object now. Seeing now'. We can repeat this a hundred times without any understanding. Do we understand them as 'just dhammas' not self? Also detachment is very essential. To understand them as just dhammas cannot be accomplished in one day. I liked: 'aayatana is only at the moment of experiencing an object'. This makes it clear that aayatana is not just in the book. Phil, go on listening and giving your comments, that is really useful for all of us. Nina. #129521 From: "philip" Date: Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Is that enough to develop understanding?" philofillet Dear Nina, all > ------ > N: We have to keep on listening and considering all kinds of > realities that appear. Not only a few realities. I LIked: 'Seeing is > not the moment of talking about it.' There was a long thread in which people went on and on with ideas about seeing and visible object based on science and/or what seeing seems to be based on their experience. That is the way of the world. Understanding can only develop very very gradually, with alobha. Ideas about seeing based on experience will go wrong. As you repeat: seeing now. But > we are always forgetful and go back to our stories, sad or pleasant. And that won't change, strong conditions to do so. Unchangeable. But more and more islands of considering realities, including the accumulated tendency to think about stories. > We also have to consider aayatanas, we have to consider all details, > from all angles. It is not enough to remind ourselves of 'Visible > object now. Seeing now'. But they are ayatanas, aren't they? I love Abhidhamma details but I feel many/most of them will remain in the book, we can study them and appreciate how deep the Buddha's wisdom was and how little we understand. If we try to make the details relevant to our experience it is longs again. In my opinion. We can repeat this a hundred times without > any understanding. Do we understand them as 'just dhammas' not self? > Also detachment is very essential. To understand them as just dhammas > cannot be accomplished in one day. > I liked: 'aayatana is only at the moment of experiencing an object'. > This makes it clear that aayatana is not just in the book. > Phil, go on listening and giving your comments, that is really useful > for all of us. Thanks Nina. I think you said you were doing writing based on your trip to Thailand. Looking forward to that, when there are conditions for it to be shared. Phil P.s sorry if there are any strange spell-check typos. #129522 From: "philip" Date: Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Is that enough to develop understanding?" philofillet P.s "longs again" should have been "lobha again." Almost everything is lobha again. We live in a sea of lobha and ditthi, just a few rate moments of standing on islands of understanding realities than sliding back into the sea of lobha. It has to be that way, the best we can hope for (But no hoping for it, more lobha.) Phil #129523 From: "philip" Date: Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:59 am Subject: Sanna and sati philofillet Hi all Listening to Ven Dhammadaro: "At the moment of giving, sanna remembers what the object is but sati remembers to give." Phil #129524 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:32 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Question about Mahayana. jonoabb Hi Rob E 129512 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > J: Your point is that conditioned arising is not consistent with the idea of dhammas as 'discrete entities' that arise and fall away completely. I'm afraid I don't see any necessary inconsistency. I have no difficulty with the (hypothetical) possibility that that's just the way things are. > > > > For example, when sound arises it appears to come out of nowhere. What's the problem with that? > > RE: The problem with it is that it actually does not come out of nowhere, it is created by the conditions that cause the vibration, and that is true of dhammas as well. They don't come out of nothing, they come out of conditions. To say they arise out of nothing is to mystify the concrete process of dependent origination. It's all mechanical, not ex nihilo magic. > =============== J: I of course agree that dhammas are conditioned. However, to say that dhammas *arise out of conditions* (and hence could not possibly be discrete entities) seems to go beyond the idea of dhammas as being conditioned. To me, that means simply that they arise by virtue of conditions and not from any other cause. The vibration you mention is not something that is directly experienced by hearing consciousness (a vibration can only be experienced through the body-door). So it's just thinking about the scientific explanation of sound. But as is mentioned frequently here, the teachings are about an understanding of what can be directly experienced at the present moment. What the texts say about the arising and falling away of dhammas is what I mentioned before: one moment there is nothing (e.g., no audible object), then there is something (i.e., a moment of audible object), then there is nothing again (meaning that that moment of audible object has passed away completely). There is nothing in this description that contradicts the idea of audible object arising by virtue of conditions. Jon #129525 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Mar 21, 2013 10:08 pm Subject: Re: Discussion with Annie & Pt jonoabb Hi pt I too very much enjoyed our discussion last week. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi Sarah and Nina, > > Thanks for your replies. I'd like to make sense of samatha only, so perhaps we could examine how samatha development would happen outside of sasana when there's no teachings about insight, realities, nor kusala samatha bhavana objects such as attributes of the Buddha, etc. To narrow it down further, I'd like to examine moments of samatha bhavana only, so not sila, nor dana. > > 1. Since, we're outside a sasana, the only objects for samatha bhavana remaining are breath, kasinas, none of which are inherently kusala. So, samatha bhavana must rely on understanding of samatha kind rather than the object of citta? > =============== J: Just chipping in with a preliminary comment. As regards possible objects, these are more than just breath and the kasinas, and they include [recollections of] dana and sila. See the extract from Vism Ch. III below. (BTW, the objects not known outside the sasana include also foulness of the body, apparently.) Hope this helps make things clearer. Jon The Path of Purification: 104. 1. Herein, as to enumeration: it was said above, "from among the forty meditation subjects" (§28). Herein, the forty meditation subjects are these: ten kasinas (totalities), ten kinds of foulness, ten recollections, four divine abidings, four immaterial states, one perception, one defining. 105. Herein, the ten kasinas are these: earth kasina, water kasina, fire kasina, air kasina, blue kasina, yellow kasina, red kasina, white kasina, light kasina, and limited-space kasina. The ten kinds of foulness are these: the bloated, the livid, the festering, the cutup, the gnawed, the scattered, the hacked and scattered, the bleeding, the worminfested, and a skeleton. The ten kinds of recollection are these: recollection of the Buddha (the Enlightened One), recollection of the Dhamma (the Law), recollection of the Sangha (the Community), recollection of virtue, recollection of generosity, recollection of deities, recollection (or mindfulness) of death, mindfulness occupied with the body, mindfulness of breathing, and recollection of peace. The four divine abidings are these: loving-kindness, compassion, gladness, and equanimity. The four immaterial states are these: the base consisting of boundless space, the base consisting of boundless consciousness, the base consisting of nothingness, and the base consisting of neither perception nor non-perception. The one perception is the perception of repulsiveness in nutriment. The one defining is the defining of the four elements. This is how the exposition should be understood "as to enumeration." #129526 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:30 pm Subject: A reminder from Thailand? szmicio Dear Sarah, Can you remind us what you told me in Thailand. This particular reminder on visible object. What Ajahn told you when you were in hurry going to refugee camp? (As I recall). Can you refresh what Acharn told you long time ago? Best wishes Lukas #129527 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 22, 2013 7:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Is that enough to develop understanding?" nilovg Dear Phil, Op 20-mrt-2013, om 22:40 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > There was a long thread in which people went on and on with ideas > about seeing and visible object based on science and/or what seeing > seems to be based on their experience. That is the way of the > world. Understanding can only develop very very gradually, with > alobha. Ideas about seeing based on experience will go wrong. ----- N: absolutely. ---- > > Ph: As you repeat: seeing now. But > > we are always forgetful and go back to our stories, sad or pleasant. > > And that won't change, strong conditions to do so. Unchangeable. > But more and more islands of considering realities, including the > accumulated tendency to think about stories. ------ N: I was listening to Jan 4, Ivan's funeral. I said: "the stories make me so sad." Acharn: "Because of me." Acharn: "Thinking about Lodewijk and Ivan, there is attachment and it hinders, it hinders the understanding of seeing, but it takes a long time to really understand." ------ > > Ph: > We also have to consider aayatanas, we have to consider all > details, > > from all angles. It is not enough to remind ourselves of 'Visible > > object now. Seeing now'. > > But they are ayatanas, aren't they? ------ N: Sure, there is association of different realities when seeing. ------ > > Ph: I love Abhidhamma details but I feel many/most of them will > remain in the book, we can study them and appreciate how deep the > Buddha's wisdom was and how little we understand. If we try to make > the details relevant to our experience it is lobha again. In my > opinion. ----- N: No, not necessarily so, although lobha can always come in. Several times Acharn explained details of the Abhidhamma in such a relevant way. This moment, this moment. If Abh. does not pertain to this moment the study is useless. ------ > > Ph:Thanks Nina. I think you said you were doing writing based on > your trip to Thailand. Looking forward to that, when there are > conditions for it to be shared. N: Finished, but only the last sentences, the conclusion. At the same time I have ADL to make it ready for the last overhaul by Tom Westheimer. This takes a lot of time, so I finish this first. ----- Nina. #129528 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Mar 22, 2013 11:12 am Subject: Re: Discussion with Annie & Pt jonoabb Hi again pt, All A quick clarification/correction. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi pt > > I too very much enjoyed our discussion last week. > > (BTW, the objects not known outside the sasana include also foulness of the body, apparently.) > =============== J: It is the item 'mindfulness occupied with the body', one of the ten recollections in the list of forty kammatthaana, that is being referred to here, not the item 'ten kinds of foulness'. See the following from Ch VIII: "42. Now comes the description of the development of mindfulness occupied with the body as a meditation subject, which is never promulgated except after an Enlightened One's arising, and is outside the province of any sectarians." Jon > The Path of Purification: > > 104. 1. Herein, as to enumeration: it was said above, "from among the forty meditation subjects" (§28). Herein, the forty meditation subjects are these: > ten kasinas (totalities), > ten kinds of foulness, > ten recollections, > four divine abidings, > four immaterial states, > one perception, > one defining. > > 105. Herein, the ten kasinas are these: earth kasina, water kasina, fire kasina, air kasina, blue kasina, yellow kasina, red kasina, white kasina, light kasina, and limited-space kasina. > > The ten kinds of foulness are these: the bloated, the livid, the festering, the cutup, the gnawed, the scattered, the hacked and scattered, the bleeding, the worminfested, and a skeleton. > > The ten kinds of recollection are these: > recollection of the Buddha (the Enlightened One), > recollection of the Dhamma (the Law), > recollection of the Sangha (the Community), > recollection of virtue, > recollection of generosity, > recollection of deities, > recollection (or mindfulness) of death, > mindfulness occupied with the body, > mindfulness of breathing, and > recollection of peace. > > The four divine abidings are these: > loving-kindness, > compassion, > gladness, and > equanimity. > > The four immaterial states are these: > the base consisting of boundless space, > the base consisting of boundless consciousness, > the base consisting of nothingness, and > the base consisting of neither perception nor non-perception. > > The one perception is the perception of repulsiveness in nutriment. > > The one defining is the defining of the four elements. > > This is how the exposition should be understood "as to enumeration." > #129529 From: "azita" Date: Fri Mar 22, 2013 1:06 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. gazita2002 hallo Rob, No problem with the delay, all good here:) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: - snip - Therefore there is never a moment that it is definable as an absolute this or that, it is changing continuously. It is this understanding of anicca on the most microscopic level that would lead one to say that there is never a moment when you can put your finger on a dhamma and say "it is exactly that." > > > > Azita: I think its jus the opposite when its panna that understands on this so-called microscopic level, panna knows exactly what the dhamma is. We ordinary people with little developed wisdom can never know a dhamma exactly as it is; sure we can think about it, endlessly, but that's never going to reveal a moment of arising, existing, or falling away. > > Who cares what its called, because that's just a whole lot of thinking. > > Isn't it better to develop the wisdom that understands exactly how things really are? > > Yes, one has to say yes to the wisdom that understands - but I think it misses the point as to whether there is any definite dhamma to know, even for panna. Maybe what panna knows is that there is no dhamma per se, just a constant changing of conditions and actions, which is what I think is the only possible way of understanding arising, functioning and falling away - none of those phases is static and so there is never a definitve dhamma that stands still to be "known" as one single "thing." > > > RobE: Therefore I would say it is not "real as a definable object," it is real "as an active formation and dissolution in process" that never stops to be defined. We can talk about the cetasikas that are involved and the processes involved - contact, or vitakkha, et al, but not at any moment say that the dhamma is frozen as "this." So I think we mistakenly think of dhammas as static objects like a table or chair that we can stop and look at, and it is not that. > > > > > RobE: In that sense, "own-being" does not make sense to me, because the dhamma is not just one thing, but a changing process. Of what could its "being" consist of, other than constant transformation? > > > > Azita: Only panna can know, really know, what a characteristic of an appearing dhamma is. > > I think in the early stages of understanding, there is weak knowledge of passing dhammas but not until well developed panna begins to arise and experience again and again, a reality will there be less doubt about how things really are. Why not begin to develop panna now and then maybe there will be less wondering how dhammas 'work' > > Although I do wonder about the particular knowledges that come with wisdom, in this case I am not wondering, but making a statement of an observation. Your answers above do not really address those observations. Instead they dismiss those observations. I think it's important to have an open mind in order to gain further knowledge about the way things are. If there is to be true pariyatti, it cannot deny the nature of things. I am asking about this observation in the following way: if there is constant change in every stage of the existence of a dhamma, which there is, how can there be a single clear state of being or characteristic that can be pinned down and defined? It is logically impossible. One can talk about the exact nature of the process, but the dhamma itself is nothing but a constant series of changes in that process, not an object that is ever this or that. Azita: before I reply to any of the above, one question. what to you, is a dhamma? patience, courage and good cheer azita #129530 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Mar 22, 2013 3:46 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Azita. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "azita" wrote: > Azita: before I reply to any of the above, one question. what to you, is a dhamma? That's an interesting question. I consider a dhamma to be a rising moment of experience in which a particular nama or rupa is experienced by citta - consciousness. A nama is a mental factor and a rupa is a physical factor, such as hardness, etc. One particular mental or physical event is the object of consciousness in any given moment, and that moment of experience arises and then falls away, giving way to another arising moment of experience. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - #129531 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Mar 22, 2013 6:38 pm Subject: Re: A reminder from Thailand? sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > Can you remind us what you told me in Thailand. This particular reminder on visible object. What Ajahn told you when you were in hurry going to refugee camp? (As I recall). Can you refresh what Acharn told you long time ago? .... S: I think that what I told you was about how, when I was young and staying with A.Sujin in the late 70s, I was thinking that rather than just sitting around enjoying wonderful Thai hospitality and studying the Dhamma, that I should be helping Vietnamese refugees arriving by sea or offering other kinds of humanitarian help. (I'd worked as a social worker and been very involved in community projects.) I mentioned my dilemma and concerns to her. Her response was very simple and memorable and made a big impression at the time: "Khun Sarah, understanding seeing or visible object now is more important (or more precious) than any thinking" End of story! Always back to now! What is the reality appearing now? Metta Sarah p.s You asked about "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" for Adam. As Nina mentioned, there will be a new edition and print run before too long. For now, there are no spare copies anywhere, although you can download the latest edition from Alan's website. ========== #129532 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Mar 22, 2013 6:44 pm Subject: Re: Sakkaya ditthi sarahprocter... Dear Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > Today I saw in a notebook "sakkaya ditthi equals khandas as as integral unit." Is this correct? Is there also sakkaya ditthi when we take seeing for self, sanna for self etc, or only when we take all khandas together as unit for self? I guess I should know the answer clearly enough from all those sutras in SN, but I will ask you to write a few words on that when you have time. ... S: See Nyantiloka's dictionary: "There are 20 kinds of personality-belief....... (1-5) the belief to be identical with corporeality, feeling, perception, mental formations *OR* consciousness; (6-10) to be contained in them; (11-15) to be independent of them; (16-20) to be the owner of them (M.44; S.XXII.1)." When rupa, such as hardness, is taken to be self, when self is taken to be inside that rupa, independent of that rupa, the owner of that rupa and so on for each khandha. Metta Sarah -==== #129533 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Mar 22, 2013 6:51 pm Subject: Re: A reminder from Thailand? szmicio Dear Sarah, Yes, this is that one reminder. Visible object more important, since it's there, than anything else. And this is good. > "Khun Sarah, understanding seeing or visible object now is more important (or more precious) than any thinking" > Always back to now! What is the reality appearing now? L: Dosa and domanassa vedana. I was thinking why it appears? What are the conditions for dosa now to arise and appear? Why it is like that? > p.s You asked about "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" for Adam. As Nina mentioned, there will be a new edition and print run before too long. For now, there are no spare copies anywhere, although you can download the latest edition from Alan's website. L: I have one copy but I am using this. I can give it to Adam a bit later. But good if anyone else can send him and make some postal contact with him. Since I know in such a places a Dhamma friend would be very helpful to him. He would be glad and more interested in Dhamma than me writing and sending a book to him. Best wishes Lukas #129534 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Mar 22, 2013 7:44 pm Subject: Re: A reminder from Thailand? sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Always back to now! What is the reality appearing now? > > L: Dosa and domanassa vedana. I was thinking why it appears? What are the conditions for dosa now to arise and appear? Why it is like that? ... S: Thinking about the story of dosa and domanassa rather than understanding seeing now, visible object now, dosa now..... just passing dhammas of no consequence. All anatta! Metta Sarah ===== #129535 From: "philip" Date: Fri Mar 22, 2013 8:12 pm Subject: Re: Sakkaya ditthi philofillet Hi Sarah Ah right, the 20. Thanks. Phil #129536 From: "philip" Date: Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Is that enough to develop understanding?" philofillet Hi Nina > ------ > N: I was listening to Jan 4, Ivan's funeral. I said: "the stories > make me so sad." Acharn: "Because of me." > Acharn: "Thinking about Lodewijk and Ivan, there is attachment and it > hinders, it hinders the understanding of seeing, but it takes a long > time to really understand." Little by little by little. I still think the "cold shower" of "there is no Nina" is premature for us, if we are comforted by thinking this, there is some sort of misappropriation of panna that we haven't really developed yet, it seems to me. But we can gradually approach the deep truth, get glimpses of it. But for now our loved ones are horrifibly real. I say horribly real because there is so much suffering of worrying about them. And beautifully real because they are such precious companions. These days I worry about Naomi getting ill. She works such long hours. I suffer worrying about our old age together, counting pennies. All this useless worrying. Last night I was comforted by this, from SPD: "We may believe that everything belongs to us, but such a belief occurs only at the moments when vitthi cittas arise. When vitthi cittas do not arise, we do not see, hear, smell etc, we do not experience any object through the six doors....why then do we not develop panna so that attachment and clinging to the objects that appear through the six doors will be eradicated and there will be less akusala. " Fine but we have to develop that wisdom very gradually without forcing things. Wow interesting technology I dictated the last two sentences by speaking into my phone and it was transcribed automatically! Phil > ------ > > > > Ph: > We also have to consider aayatanas, we have to consider all > > details, > > > from all angles. It is not enough to remind ourselves of 'Visible > > > object now. Seeing now'. > > > > But they are ayatanas, aren't they? > ------ > N: Sure, there is association of different realities when seeing. > ------ > > > > Ph: I love Abhidhamma details but I feel many/most of them will > > remain in the book, we can study them and appreciate how deep the > > Buddha's wisdom was and how little we understand. If we try to make > > the details relevant to our experience it is lobha again. In my > > opinion. > ----- > N: No, not necessarily so, although lobha can always come in. Several > times Acharn explained details of the Abhidhamma in such a relevant > way. This moment, this moment. If Abh. does not pertain to this > moment the study is useless. > ------ > > > > Ph:Thanks Nina. I think you said you were doing writing based on > > your trip to Thailand. Looking forward to that, when there are > > conditions for it to be shared. > N: Finished, but only the last sentences, the conclusion. At the same > time I have ADL to make it ready for the last overhaul by Tom > Westheimer. This takes a lot of time, so I finish this first. > ----- > Nina. > > > > > #129537 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Mar 23, 2013 2:20 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. jonoabb Hi Rob E and Azita Butting in to seek clarification. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Azita. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "azita" wrote: > > > Azita: before I reply to any of the above, one question. what to you, is a dhamma? > > That's an interesting question. I consider a dhamma to be a rising moment of experience in which a particular nama or rupa is experienced by citta - consciousness. A nama is a mental factor and a rupa is a physical factor, such as hardness, etc. One particular mental or physical event is the object of consciousness in any given moment, and that moment of experience arises and then falls away, giving way to another arising moment of experience. > =============== J: Rob, you seem to be saying that it is the arising moment of experience -- but not the nama or rupa that is the object of that moment of experience -- that is the dhamma. Am I reading you correctly? Jon #129538 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Mar 23, 2013 2:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "Is that enough to develop understanding?" jonoabb Hi Phil (and Nina) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > Hi Nina > > > ------ > > N: I was listening to Jan 4, Ivan's funeral. I said: "the stories > > make me so sad." Acharn: "Because of me." > > Acharn: "Thinking about Lodewijk and Ivan, there is attachment and it > > hinders, it hinders the understanding of seeing, but it takes a long > > time to really understand." > > Little by little by little. I still think the "cold shower" of "there is no Nina" is premature for us, if we are comforted by thinking this, there is some sort of misappropriation of panna that we haven't really developed yet, it seems to me. But we can gradually approach the deep truth, get glimpses of it. But for now our loved ones are horrifibly real. I say horribly real because there is so much suffering of worrying about them. And beautifully real because they are such precious companions. These days I worry about Naomi getting ill. She works such long hours. I suffer worrying about our old age together, counting pennies. All this useless worrying. > > Last night I was comforted by this, from SPD: > > "We may believe that everything belongs to us, but such a belief occurs only at the moments when vitthi cittas arise. When vitthi cittas do not arise, we do not see, hear, smell etc, we do not experience any object through the six doors....why then do we not develop panna so that attachment and clinging to the objects that appear through the six doors will be eradicated and there will be less akusala. " > > Fine but we have to develop that wisdom very gradually without forcing things. > =============== J: Agreed that wisdom develops gradually and cannot be forced. However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't hear, and consider as best we're able, descriptions of the deeper aspects of the teachings, such as the danger involved in clinging to objects that are experienced through the sense-doors. Hearing about such matters can condition useful reflection; it will not necessarily give rise to wishing for higher levels of understanding, or ideas of wrong practice such as somehow 'dealing with' the clinging. And I think similar considerations apply to statements such as "there is no Nina". Much depends on the context (i.e., the circumstances in which the comment is made). Jon #129539 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Mar 23, 2013 2:46 pm Subject: Re: A reminder from Thailand? jonoabb Hi Lukas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > > p.s You asked about "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" for Adam. As Nina mentioned, there will be a new edition and print run before too long. For now, there are no spare copies anywhere, although you can download the latest edition from Alan's website. > > L: I have one copy but I am using this. I can give it to Adam a bit later. But good if anyone else can send him and make some postal contact with him. Since I know in such a places a Dhamma friend would be very helpful to him. He would be glad and more interested in Dhamma than me writing and sending a book to him. > =============== J: Can Adam receive and send mail without restriction? If no suitable books are available for sending at the moment, he may appreciate receiving copies of selected messages, transcription of talks, or parts of Dhamma texts. Please give a mailing address (and correct name). Thanks. Jon #129540 From: "htoonaing@..." Date: Sat Mar 23, 2013 5:41 pm Subject: Re: Sanna and sati htoonaing... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: Hi all > > Listening to Ven Dhammadaro: > > "At the moment of giving, sanna remembers what the object is but sati remembers to give." > > Phil ---------------------------- Dear Phil and all, 'At the time of giving' there have been many moments. Each moment is each citta. Sa~n~naa is one of 7 sabba-citta-saadhaara.na cetasika. Sanna is one of 7 cetasikas that deal with any form of citta. Sanna arises with each arising citta. Sanna is to perceive. Sanna is perception. Sanna cognises. Sanna memorises. Sanna just notes. Sati is totally different. Sati arises only with sobhana-cittas. Sati never arises with unwholesome cittas. Mindfulness in doing bad thing is not sati. Sati is like door-man. Whenever there is sati then the citta is sobhana citta. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing #129541 From: "htoonaing@..." Date: Sat Mar 23, 2013 5:53 pm Subject: Re: Sakkaya ditthi htoonaing... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > Hi Sarah > > Ah right, the 20. Thanks. > > > Phil ---------------------------------- Dear Philip and all, There are 5 aggregates. 5 khandhaas. 1. ruupa (ruupakkhandhaa) 2. vedanaa ( vedanaakkhandhaa) 3. sa~n~naa ( sannaakkhandhaa) 4. sa`nkhaaraa (sankhaarakkhandhaa) 5. vi~n~naa.na (vinnaanakkhandhaa) 1. form, 2. feeling, 3. perception, 4. sankhaara 5. consciousness Each khandha is wrongly viewed by sakkaaya di.t.thi in 4 different ways. So there are 5 X 4 = 20 sakkaaya ditthi. 1. form is equal to self 2. I have form 3. Inside me is form 4. Inside form is me With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing #129542 From: "htoonaing@..." Date: Sat Mar 23, 2013 6:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipassanaa _003 (DT 890 )to Htoo. htoonaing... Dear Nina, Thank you very much for your kind comments on the post V(003). Yes. There is interconnection among 4 kinds of siila. I mentioned the first kind only for beginners. Buddha's saasanaa is three-fold. Siiala, samaadhi and pa~n~naa. With regard to vipassanaa these three have to go hand in hand. Without panna siila cannot be pure. Without samaadhi siila cannot be pure. Without siila samaadhi cannot be developed. Without siila there is no true panna. Without samaadhi panna cannot be developed. Without panna samaadhi is not solid. Vanjanaa or trick-dhamma trick the practicioner that is false-samaadhi will be assumed as true samaadhi when there is no panna. So there is interconnections. But the degree is not discussed in the reply. Someone who wants to practice vipassanaa keep 5 precepts. When he keeps the degree of panna is not high yet. And also samaadhi is also not high. But on the course of vipassanaa the individual repercusses on his siila and becomes calm and samaadhi goes up. When samaadhi makes the media clear then low-pannaa become higher one and the highest is at the time of arahat-ship path-consciousness. With many thanks, Htoo Naing #129543 From: "htoonaing@..." Date: Sat Mar 23, 2013 7:05 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Vipassanaa (DT 888 ) to Htoo. htoonaing... Nina (23.2.2013) wrote: Dear Htoo, Nina: As you say, just thinking sitting, etc. is no developing. It is thinking about a whole situatiuon instead of being aware of naama and ruupa one at a time. Sitting is a whole situation, it is not ruupa.While sitting there can be mindfulness of naama such as feeling and ruupa such as hardness, when they appear. ------- Htoo: True. As long as naama or ruupa is directly viewed it is vipassanaa. But moments have to be in close succession. Or javanas have to be in close viithi. Vipassanaa is developing paanaa. Panna arises with kusala(vipassanaa kusala) cittas. A the beginning there is sparse pannaa(sparse vipassanaa cittas) but as vipassanaa progresses then pannaa arise in close succession. It is like rubbing flints or fire-stones until fire arises. ----------------- > > H: Expectation always associates with wanting something. But when > > there is strong chanda but no lobha it is the right expectation. > > The word expectation cannot explain the word chanda. This chanda is > > almost always mixed with lobha. > > ------- N: Yes, people confuse lobha and chanda. Chanda can be akusala or > kusala -------- Htoo: I saw and read on a page of a site that chanda is wrongly accused as lobha. Example " The Buddha became thirst on His last trip because of diarrhoea/dysentery." There is wanting to drink pure water. But it is no lobha. -------------------------- > H: Without pa.tipatti there is no pa~n~naa. ------ N: There is pa~n~naa of different levels. Intellectual understanding stemming from listening to the Dhamma is pa~n~naa but not direct understanding of realities. Through pa.tipatti, awareness and understanding of characteristics of realities that appear, direct understanding is developed. -------- Htoo: I agree all above. Indirect understanding(vipassanaa pannaa) will change to direct understanding (magga pannaa or path-wisdom). ----------------------------- > Htoo: Bhaavetiiti bhaavanaa. Developing the mind while ripening > > pa~n~naa always directs to the very present. > > > > The very present for example for me now when I am typing is that > > screen is seen, words are seen, hands are typing and nothing stand > > still. So also is thinking. ------- N: Quite right, pa~n~naa understands the present object. Then you write about examples, wanting to show that nothing stands still. I think that you know the difference between awareness and thinking of a situation, but your words here could be misunderstood. You also write in this post: ' Just thinking sitting, just thinking standing and just thinking walking or just thinking lying is not developing.' Thus, you understand that developing direct understanding is not thinking. Since I know that people find it difficult to understand the difference I shall elaborate a little on this subject. ---------- Htoo: Please go on. --------- Nina: Thinking is a reality, no self thinks but citta. ---------------------------- Htoo: No self can think. But it is citta who does the job of thinking, I agree. -------------------- Nina: We do not see the screen but we can think of it after seeing what is visible. A screen does not impinge on the eyesense, it is not visible object. ---------------------- Htoo: What we see here is light, brightness, form, shape, color and not the creen or not the word or not the sentense etc. True. ------------------------- Nina: It is a whole, a collection of things, a concept. However, without seeing visible object we could not think of a screen or words on the screen. -------------------- Htoo: Here the dhamaayatana that play its role. Concepts are based on realities. ---------------------- Nina: Visible object and seeing fall away very rapidly, but so long as the arising and falling away of naama and ruupa has not been directly understood, it seems that they stay. Because of sa~n~naa we think of a screen. > Hands are typing: this is thinking of a whole situation, because the > rupas we take for a hand have fallen away as soon as we think of > them. Where is the hand? > ------ > Nina. > > ------------------------ Htoo: Thanks Nina for your elaborative discussion. Even a single dhamma may lead to realization of dhamma. Example is pathavii. We stand up on the ground the earth. There is touching of soles and the earth. That touching is supported by bones and again joints again backbones and again head. At the top is cerebral cortex. Pathavii support. Vithambhana lakkha.na. Mindfulness on the body continuously regarding pathavii-pho.t.thabbaaramma.na causing kaayavi~nnaa.na is the best vipassanaa. Kaayavinnaana is directed. So naama is directed. This will finally lead to path consciousness. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing #129544 From: "htoonaing@..." Date: Sat Mar 23, 2013 7:23 pm Subject: Vipassanaa _004 (DT 891 ) htoonaing... Dear Dhamma Friends, Construction of morality is prerequisite for vipassanaa. The training of siila, samaadhi and panna have to go hand in hand while marching to nibbaana. Nibbana has entrance door. It is the 4th path-consciousness or arahatta-magga-citta. Vipassana is marching to nibbaana. That is marching to arahatta-magga. This is first to march to sotapatti-magga. Before reaching sotapaatti magga is sa`nkhaarupekkhaa-vipassanaa-naana. Vipassanaa meditators have to first march to this naana. But there are many stages before reaching this naana. This naana is like 4th jhaana. It has all the power of 4th jhaana. It is equivalent to 4th jhaana. To attain sotapatti-magga-naana samaadhi of 4th-jhaana-equivalent is required. Without samaadhi sa`nkhaarupekhhaa naana cannot be attained. Long before this sa`nkhaarupekkhaa naana are many vipassanaa-naana. The first step in vipassanaa naanas is sammasana-naana. Again there are far-long-way before this sammasana-naana. Reaching to sammasana-milestone is just arrival at the foot of Mount Meru'. May you be well and happy, With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing #129545 From: "philip" Date: Sat Mar 23, 2013 10:02 pm Subject: Re: Sanna and sati philofillet Dear Htoo Thanks for the explanation about sati and the other post about sakkaya ditthi. For now I just want to add that I just heard Ven Dhammadaro talking about "Sati of the level of thinking and sati of the level of characteristics."I might follow up on that later. Phil #129546 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Mar 24, 2013 4:21 am Subject: Re: Vipassanaa (DT 888 ) to Htoo. szmicio Dear Htoo, Thanks for your very helpful posts. So different words, stands for different realities. Best wishes Lukas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htoonaing@..." wrote: > > Nina (23.2.2013) wrote: > > Dear Htoo, > > Nina: As you say, just thinking sitting, etc. is no developing. It is thinking about a whole situatiuon instead of being aware of naama and ruupa one at a time. Sitting is a whole situation, it is not ruupa.While sitting there can be mindfulness of naama such as feeling and ruupa such as hardness, when they appear. > ------- > Htoo: True. As long as naama or ruupa is directly viewed it is vipassanaa. But moments have to be in close succession. Or javanas have to be in close viithi. Vipassanaa is developing paanaa. Panna arises with kusala(vipassanaa kusala) cittas. A the beginning there is sparse pannaa(sparse vipassanaa cittas) but as vipassanaa progresses then pannaa arise in close succession. It is like rubbing flints or fire-stones until fire arises. > ----------------- > > > > > H: Expectation always associates with wanting something. But when > > > there is strong chanda but no lobha it is the right expectation. > > > The word expectation cannot explain the word chanda. This chanda is > > > almost always mixed with lobha. > > > > ------- > N: Yes, people confuse lobha and chanda. Chanda can be akusala or > > kusala > -------- > Htoo: I saw and read on a page of a site that chanda is wrongly accused as lobha. Example " The Buddha became thirst on His last trip because of diarrhoea/dysentery." There is wanting to drink pure water. But it is no lobha. > -------------------------- > > H: Without pa.tipatti there is no pa~n~naa. > ------ > N: There is pa~n~naa of different levels. Intellectual understanding > stemming from listening to the Dhamma is pa~n~naa but not direct > understanding of realities. Through pa.tipatti, awareness and > understanding of characteristics of realities that appear, direct > understanding is developed. > -------- > Htoo: I agree all above. Indirect understanding(vipassanaa pannaa) will change to direct understanding (magga pannaa or path-wisdom). > ----------------------------- > > Htoo: Bhaavetiiti bhaavanaa. Developing the mind while ripening > > > pa~n~naa always directs to the very present. > > > > > > The very present for example for me now when I am typing is that > > > screen is seen, words are seen, hands are typing and nothing stand > > > still. So also is thinking. > ------- > N: Quite right, pa~n~naa understands the present object. Then you write about examples, wanting to show that nothing stands still. I > think that you know the difference between awareness and thinking of > a situation, but your words here could be misunderstood. You also write in this post: ' Just thinking sitting, just thinking standing and just thinking walking or just thinking lying is not developing.' Thus, you understand that developing direct understanding is not thinking. > > Since I know that people find it difficult to understand the difference I shall elaborate a little on this subject. > ---------- > Htoo: Please go on. > --------- > Nina: > > Thinking is a reality, no self thinks but citta. > ---------------------------- > Htoo: No self can think. But it is citta who does the job of thinking, I agree. > -------------------- > Nina: > > We do not see the screen but we can think of it after seeing what is visible. A screen does not impinge on the eyesense, it is not visible object. > ---------------------- > Htoo: What we see here is light, brightness, form, shape, color and not the creen or not the word or not the sentense etc. True. > ------------------------- > Nina: > > It is a whole, a collection of things, a concept. However, without seeing visible object we could not think of a screen or words on the screen. > -------------------- > Htoo: Here the dhamaayatana that play its role. Concepts are based on realities. > ---------------------- > Nina: > > Visible object and seeing fall away very rapidly, but so long as the > arising and falling away of naama and ruupa has not been directly > understood, it seems that they stay. Because of sa~n~naa we think of > a screen. > > Hands are typing: this is thinking of a whole situation, because the > > rupas we take for a hand have fallen away as soon as we think of > > them. Where is the hand? > > ------ > > Nina. > > > > > ------------------------ > Htoo: > > Thanks Nina for your elaborative discussion. Even a single dhamma may lead to realization of dhamma. Example is pathavii. We stand up on the ground the earth. There is touching of soles and the earth. That touching is supported by bones and again joints again backbones and again head. At the top is cerebral cortex. Pathavii support. Vithambhana lakkha.na. > > Mindfulness on the body continuously regarding pathavii-pho.t.thabbaaramma.na causing kaayavi~nnaa.na is the best vipassanaa. Kaayavinnaana is directed. So naama is directed. This will finally lead to path consciousness. > > With Unlimited Metta, > > Htoo Naing > #129547 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Mar 24, 2013 2:13 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > I see no reason why dhammas should not have an inherent characteristic in a sense that 'person', 'self' or 'thing' does not. In fact, the whole point of the teaching about dhammas is that they are 'real' in a sense that cannot be said of 'person', 'self' or 'thing'. I agree to this extent: dhammas really do exist, and a "self" does not. One is an arising reality, the other is a concept. So far so good. However the danger is in seeing the dhamma as a static entity as well as something that has "interiority" and what I mean by that is that it has a characteristic that it owns or contains, which would make it a kind of being in its own right, rather than a simple occurrence which flashes by with no meaning or substance of any note. I don't know exactly how you hear "own-being" when the term is used, but to me it smacks of a sort of raising up of the dhamma to a status that is beyond a simple activity taking place due to conditions. Having an "inherent" characteristic implies something that exists and contains something, rather than it merely has a way of functioning and behavior for a moment. When attributes are attached to something it is dressed up by them and is made to seem more important. In other words, I worry that those same attachments that are normally given to the concept of a self can equally be given to the concept of a dhamma as a "true existent form" that can be attached to. Since the point is detachment, I don't understand why terms like paramatha and own-being are given to something which we want to lessen, not increase. In addition, I worry about looking at a dhamma as a "something" that is seen to exist in a definitive moment in which it is frozen and identifiable, and then disappears en masse. We know that a dhamma exists in three stages and that in each stage it is continuing to change, so there is no moment in which the dhamma is a single identifiable thing or has a single identifiable characteristic. It think it's better to see its characteristic as something that is observable in its activity but not something that it has an any given sub-moment or that it owns or contains, since it is really a conditioned occurrence and has no real substance. > > =============== > > RE: > > "From nothing...to nothing" sounds like the opposite of conditioned to me. If something is conditioned it does not arise from nothing, but from conditioning. That seems very off-message to me. Perhaps you can help me understand how conditioned arising and ex nihilo creationism can coexist. > > =============== > > J: Your point is that conditioned arising is not consistent with the idea of dhammas as 'discrete entities' that arise and fall away completely. I'm afraid I don't see any necessary inconsistency. I have no difficulty with the (hypothetical) possibility that that's just the way things are. But what is the way things are? Is it that a dhamma really does hang in the air for a moment as a definite frozen thing? I don't think that is the way things are. In fact a dhamma is constantly changing and is just a changing phenomenon and nothing else. It isn't a "thing" at all in that sense. So the problem for me is not failing to accept that it may be "just the way things are," but that I think it's actually not the way dhammas are. > For example, when sound arises it appears to come out of nowhere. What's the problem with that? I think I already said this - if so I apologize for the redundancy. The problem with that is that sound doesn't arise out of nowhere and that appearance is an illusion. It arises out of conditions that cause a vibration which creates the sound, even in dhamma terms. In addition, from "nothing to nothing" isn't just arising and falling away completely. It implies that there is a moment that the dhamma arises ex nihilo, and that cannot be the case in a conditioned universe. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - #129548 From: "thomaslaw03" Date: Sun Mar 24, 2013 3:29 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. thomaslaw03 Hi, I consider this: Everything exists, this is one extreme. Everything does not exist, this is the other extreme. Dhammas are empty of both existence and non-existence, which all come from self-attachment (Choong MK, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, pp. 60-66, 92-97, 192-199). Regards, Thomas Law --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > I see no reason why dhammas should not have an inherent characteristic in a sense that 'person', 'self' or 'thing' does not. In fact, the whole point of the teaching about dhammas is that they are 'real' in a sense that cannot be said of 'person', 'self' or 'thing'. > > I agree to this extent: dhammas really do exist, and a "self" does not. One is an arising reality, the other is a concept. So far so good. > > However the danger is in seeing the dhamma as a static entity as well as something that has "interiority" and what I mean by that is that it has a characteristic that it owns or contains, which would make it a kind of being in its own right, rather than a simple occurrence which flashes by with no meaning or substance of any note. I don't know exactly how you hear "own-being" when the term is used, but to me it smacks of a sort of raising up of the dhamma to a status that is beyond a simple activity taking place due to conditions. Having an "inherent" characteristic implies something that exists and contains something, rather than it merely has a way of functioning and behavior for a moment. When attributes are attached to something it is dressed up by them and is made to seem more important. In other words, I worry that those same attachments that are normally given to the concept of a self can equally be given to the concept of a dhamma as a "true existent form" that can be attached to. Since the point is detachment, I don't understand why terms like paramatha and own-being are given to something which we want to lessen, not increase. > > In addition, I worry about looking at a dhamma as a "something" that is seen to exist in a definitive moment in which it is frozen and identifiable, and then disappears en masse. We know that a dhamma exists in three stages and that in each stage it is continuing to change, so there is no moment in which the dhamma is a single identifiable thing or has a single identifiable characteristic. It think it's better to see its characteristic as something that is observable in its activity but not something that it has an any given sub-moment or that it owns or contains, since it is really a conditioned occurrence and has no real substance. > > > > =============== > > > RE: > > > "From nothing...to nothing" sounds like the opposite of conditioned to me. If something is conditioned it does not arise from nothing, but from conditioning. That seems very off-message to me. Perhaps you can help me understand how conditioned arising and ex nihilo creationism can coexist. > > > =============== > > > > J: Your point is that conditioned arising is not consistent with the idea of dhammas as 'discrete entities' that arise and fall away completely. I'm afraid I don't see any necessary inconsistency. I have no difficulty with the (hypothetical) possibility that that's just the way things are. > > But what is the way things are? Is it that a dhamma really does hang in the air for a moment as a definite frozen thing? I don't think that is the way things are. In fact a dhamma is constantly changing and is just a changing phenomenon and nothing else. It isn't a "thing" at all in that sense. So the problem for me is not failing to accept that it may be "just the way things are," but that I think it's actually not the way dhammas are. > > > For example, when sound arises it appears to come out of nowhere. What's the problem with that? > > I think I already said this - if so I apologize for the redundancy. The problem with that is that sound doesn't arise out of nowhere and that appearance is an illusion. It arises out of conditions that cause a vibration which creates the sound, even in dhamma terms. > > In addition, from "nothing to nothing" isn't just arising and falling away completely. It implies that there is a moment that the dhamma arises ex nihilo, and that cannot be the case in a conditioned universe. > > Best, > Rob E. > > - - - - - - - - - - - > #129549 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Mar 24, 2013 3:41 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > J: I of course agree that dhammas are conditioned. However, to say that dhammas *arise out of conditions* (and hence could not possibly be discrete entities) seems to go beyond the idea of dhammas as being conditioned. To me, that means simply that they arise by virtue of conditions and not from any other cause. I think we would agree that they arise *due to* conditions. Without those conditions they would not arise. That seems to me to be a contradiction to the idea that they arise "out of nothing" or from nothing or nowhere. Conditions do not suddenly arise either, they are continuous. Forms that appear are part of the flow of conditions, not separate from them. A dhamma is not separate from that which causes its arising, it does not come from nowhere, and it doesn't disappear into nothing, it becomes part of the next set of conditions for further dhammas to arise, is that not so? > The vibration you mention is not something that is directly experienced by hearing consciousness (a vibration can only be experienced through the body-door). I recall the vibratory nature of sound being described as a rupa in scripture, but I can't put my finger on where. In any case sound arises due to conditions as much as anything else. Whether it appears to come out of nowhere or not, it actually doesn't.Conditions are continuous, and at certain points those conditions come together to cause sound to arise. It's part of an ongoing series of co-arising conditions. > So it's just thinking about the scientific explanation of sound. But as is mentioned frequently here, the teachings are about an understanding of what can be directly experienced at the present moment. Can conditionality be experienced in the present moment? > What the texts say about the arising and falling away of dhammas is what I mentioned before: one moment there is nothing (e.g., no audible object), then there is something (i.e., a moment of audible object), then there is nothing again (meaning that that moment of audible object has passed away completely). There is nothing in this description that contradicts the idea of audible object arising by virtue of conditions. Well, as you say, it's not really nothing, it's "no discernible audible object" at the moment when an audible experience is not arising, but there is some other experience at that time - so to me that does not define "nothing" to me. That is quite different than "not-sound." To me saying it comes out of nothing is romanticizing the dhamma, which is merely conditioned. To say it falls away completely is different than saying it arises from nothing. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #129550 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Mar 24, 2013 3:44 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Jon, and Azita. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Rob E and Azita > > Butting in to seek clarification. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Azita. > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "azita" wrote: > > > > > Azita: before I reply to any of the above, one question. what to you, is a dhamma? > > > > That's an interesting question. I consider a dhamma to be a rising moment of experience in which a particular nama or rupa is experienced by citta - consciousness. A nama is a mental factor and a rupa is a physical factor, such as hardness, etc. One particular mental or physical event is the object of consciousness in any given moment, and that moment of experience arises and then falls away, giving way to another arising moment of experience. > > =============== > > J: Rob, you seem to be saying that it is the arising moment of experience -- but not the nama or rupa that is the object of that moment of experience -- that is the dhamma. Am I reading you correctly? That's a good question - maybe I'm a little confused. A citta itself is a dhamma is it not? So citta experiencing a rupa for instance is a dhamma experiencing a dhamma. If citta experiences a dhamma, that is a moment of experience, it is also an arising dhamma in its own right. Yes, it has a dhamma as its object as well. Hence the potential confusion? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - #129551 From: Lukas Date: Sun Mar 24, 2013 6:09 pm Subject: Ayoniso-manasikara Sutta - 3 kinds of vitakka szmicio Dear friends, Here is Ayoniso-manasikara Sutta: I have heard that on one occasion a certain monk was dwelling among the Kosalans in a forest thicket. Now at that time, he spent the day's abiding thinking evil, unskillful thoughts: i.e., thoughts of sensuality, thoughts of ill will, thoughts of doing harm. Then the devata inhabiting the forest thicket, feeling sympathy for the monk, desiring his benefit, desiring to bring him to his senses, approached him and addressed him with this verse: From inappropriate attention you're being chewed by your thoughts. Relinquishing what's inappropriate, contemplate appropriately. Keeping your mind on the Teacher, the Dhamma, the Sangha, your virtues, you will arrive at joy, rapture, pleasure without doubt. Then, saturated with joy, you will put an end to suffering & stress. The monk, chastened by the devata, came to his senses. and Paali: Ayonisosuttaṃ.  231. Ekaṃ samayaṃ aññataro bhikkhu kosalesu viharati aññatarasmiṃ vanasaṇá¸e. Tena kho pana samayena so bhikkhu divÄvihÄragato pÄpake akusale vitakke vitakketi. SeyyathÄ«daṃ: kÄmavitakkaṃ byÄpÄdavitakkaṃ vihiṃsÄvitakkaṃ.  Atha kho yÄ tasmiṃ vanasaṇá¸e adhivatthÄ devatÄ tassa bhikkhuno anukampikÄ atthakÄmÄ taṃ bhikkhuṃ saṃvejetukÄmÄ yena so bhikkhu tenupasaá¹…kami. Upasaá¹…kamitvÄ taṃ bhikkhuṃ gÄthÄhi ajjhabhÄsi:  Ayoniso manasikÄrÄ so vitakkehi khajjasi, Ayoniso1 paá¹­inissajja yoniso anuvicintaya2.  SatthÄraṃ dhammamÄrabbha3 saá¹…ghaṃ sÄ«lÄni attano4, Adhigacchasi pÄmojjaṃ pÄ«tisukhamasaṃsayaṃ, Tato pÄmojjabahulo dukkhassantaṃ karissasÄ«ti.  Atha kho so bhikkhu tÄya devatÄya saṃvejito saṃvegamÄpÄdÄ«ti L: My point to this is 3 kinds of akusla vitakka: kaamavitakka, byaapaadavitakka, vihimsaavitakka. This are translated as: a thought of senses, ill-will thought and cruelty thought. How whould you translate this free or interprete? I mean if we talk in context of realities, can we say: kaamavitakka is vitakka with lobha, the other with dosa? and the 3rd with strong dosa? All anatta. Best wishes Lukas #129552 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Mar 24, 2013 6:21 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. szmicio Hi Thomas, > I consider this: Everything exists, this is one extreme. Everything does not exist, this is the other extreme. Dhammas are empty of both existence and non-existence, which all come from self-attachment (Choong MK, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, pp. 60-66, 92-97, 192-199). L: Yes, just useless viewpoint. Here is a Kokanuda Sutta: On one occasion Ven. Ananda was staying near Rajagaha, at Tapoda monastery. Then, as night was ending, he got up & went to the Tapoda Hot Springs to bathe his limbs. Having bathed his limbs and having gotten out of the springs, he stood wearing only his lower robe, drying his limbs. Kokanuda the wanderer, as night was ending, also got up & went to the Tapoda Hot Springs to bathe his limbs. He saw Ven. Ananda from afar, and on seeing him said to him, "Who are you, my friend?" "I am a monk, my friend." "Which kind of monk?" "A son-of-the-Sakyan contemplative." "I would like to ask you about a certain point, if you would give me leave to pose a question." "Go ahead and ask. Having heard [your question], I'll inform you." "How is it, my friend: 'The cosmos is eternal. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless.' Is this the sort of view you have?" "No, my friend, I don't have that sort of view." "Very well, then: 'The cosmos is not eternal. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless.' Is this the sort of view you have?" "No, my friend, I don't have that sort of view." "Very well, then: 'The cosmos is finite... The cosmos is infinite... The soul & the body are the same... The soul is one thing and the body another... After death a Tathagata exists... After death a Tathagata does not exist... After death a Tathagata both does & does not exist... After death a Tathagata neither does nor does not exist. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless.' Is this the sort of view you have?" "No, my friend, I don't have that sort of view." "Then in that case, do you not know or see?" "No, my friend. It's not the case that I don't know, I don't see. I do know. I do see." "But on being asked, 'How is it, my friend: "The cosmos is eternal. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless." Is this the sort of view you have?' you inform me, 'No, my friend, I don't have that sort of view.' On being asked, 'Very well then: "The cosmos is not eternal... The cosmos is finite... The cosmos is infinite... The soul & the body are the same... The soul is one thing and the body another... After death a Tathagata exists... After death a Tathagata does not exist... After death a Tathagata both does & does not exist... After death a Tathagata neither does nor does not exist. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless." Is this the sort of view you have?' you inform me, 'No, my friend, I don't have that sort of view.' But on being asked, 'Then in that case, do you not know or see?' you inform me, 'No, my friend. It's not the case that I don't know or see. I do know. I do see.' Now, how is the meaning of this statement to be understood?" "'The cosmos is eternal. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless,' is a viewpoint. 'The cosmos is not eternal... The cosmos is finite... The cosmos is infinite... The soul & the body are the same... The soul is one thing and the body another... After death a Tathagata exists... After death a Tathagata does not exist... After death a Tathagata both does & does not exist... After death a Tathagata neither does nor does not exist. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless,' is a viewpoint. The extent to which there are viewpoints, view-stances, the taking up of views, obsessions of views, the cause of views, & the uprooting of views: that's what I know. That's what I see. Knowing that, I say 'I know.' Seeing that, I say 'I see.' Why should I say 'I don't know, I don't see'? I do know. I do see." "What is your name, my friend? What do your fellows in the chaste life call you?" "My name is Ananda, my friend, and that's what my fellows in the chaste life call me." "What? Have I been talking with the great teacher without realizing that it was Ven. Ananda? Had I recognized that it was Ven. Ananda, I would not have cross-examined him so much. May Ven. Ananda please forgive me." Best wishes Lukas #129553 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Mar 24, 2013 6:34 pm Subject: Re: A reminder from Thailand? szmicio Hi Jon, > J: Can Adam receive and send mail without restriction? L: This depends. But even if he could, than there is no time for that there. Whole day filled with useless activities. Best wishes Lukas #129554 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Mar 24, 2013 7:18 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. jonoabb Hi Rob E (and Azita) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon, and Azita. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > > Hi Rob E and Azita > > > > Butting in to seek clarification. > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > > > Hi Azita. > > > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "azita" wrote: > > > > > > > Azita: before I reply to any of the above, one question. what to you, is a dhamma? > > > > > > That's an interesting question. I consider a dhamma to be a rising moment of experience in which a particular nama or rupa is experienced by citta - consciousness. A nama is a mental factor and a rupa is a physical factor, such as hardness, etc. One particular mental or physical event is the object of consciousness in any given moment, and that moment of experience arises and then falls away, giving way to another arising moment of experience. > > > =============== > > > > J: Rob, you seem to be saying that it is the arising moment of experience -- but not the nama or rupa that is the object of that moment of experience -- that is the dhamma. Am I reading you correctly? > > That's a good question - maybe I'm a little confused. A citta itself is a dhamma is it not? So citta experiencing a rupa for instance is a dhamma experiencing a dhamma. If citta experiences a dhamma, that is a moment of experience, it is also an arising dhamma in its own right. Yes, it has a dhamma as its object as well. Hence the potential confusion? > =============== J: Right. Cittas are dhammas, but so are rupas and cetasikas. So your previous definition of `dhamma' as "a rising moment of experience (in which a particular nama or rupa is experienced)" is lacking in that it is cast purely in terms of cittas. Another shortcoming in your definition is that the object of a citta is not limited to a nama or a rupa; a concept may also be an object of a citta. Would you mind giving a definition that encompasses these aspects as well. Thanks. Jon #129555 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Is that enough to develop understanding?" nilovg Dear Phil, Op 22-mrt-2013, om 23:43 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > I still think the "cold shower" of "there is no Nina" is premature > for us, if we are comforted by thinking this, there is some sort of > misappropriation of panna that we haven't really developed yet, it > seems to me. But we can gradually approach the deep truth, get > glimpses of it. > ------ N: As Acharn says: a glimpse of understanding. Understanding is like a drop in the ocean of ignorance. ------- > Ph: But for now our loved ones are horrifibly real. I say horribly > real because there is so much suffering of worrying about them. And > beautifully real because they are such precious companions. These > days I worry about Naomi getting ill. She works such long hours. I > suffer worrying about our old age together, counting pennies. All > this useless worrying. > ------- N: As Acharn says: because of me. As to seeking comfort in understanding and lobha, a fact you mention often, at the moment of understanding there is no lobha, since understanding always goes together with alobha, detachment. ------- > > Last night I was comforted by this, from SPD: > > "We may believe that everything belongs to us, but such a belief > occurs only at the moments when vitthi cittas arise. When vitthi > cittas do not arise, we do not see, hear, smell etc, we do not > experience any object through the six doors....why then do we not > develop panna so that attachment and clinging to the objects that > appear through the six doors will be eradicated and there will be > less akusala. " > ------ N: This is true, we can check this to some extent. ------- Ph: Is there also sakkaya ditthi when we take seeing for self, sanna for self etc, or only when we take all khandas together as unit for self? ------ N: You received answers. I am not inclined to think of Khandhas as a unit , but consider one reality at a time. Khandhas as a unit seems so theoretical. What appears now? Feeling? Feeling is khandha. We believe we are in feeling, feeling is in us, etc. Nina. #129556 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 6:16 am Subject: Re: "Is that enough to develop understanding?" szmicio Dear Nina and Phil, I think it all must be very natural, like daily life. Right understanding, not different than daily life. > ------- > N: As Acharn says: because of me. > As to seeking comfort in understanding and lobha, a fact you mention > often, at the moment of understanding there is no lobha, since > understanding always goes together with alobha, detachment. > ------- L: I asked recently via internet. Understanding doesnt come even I would like to understand. Acharn repeated: 'I would like to'. She added later: 'Right understanding cannot attached to anything'. Best wishes Lukas #129557 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 10:25 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. kenhowardau Hi Thomas (and Lukas), --- > T: I consider this: Everything exists, this is one extreme. Everything does not exist, this is the other extreme. --- KH: Lucas has shown how the Buddha considered those views. But it was very different from the way you have considered them. You wrote: ----- T: Dhammas are empty of both existence and non-existence, which all come from self-attachment ----- KH: We can see from Lukas's quote that the view "everything is empty of both existence and non-existence" was not the sort of view held by the Buddha. It was just as wrong as "everything exists" or "everything does not exist." --------- > T: (Choong MK, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, pp. 60-66, 92-97, 192-199). --------- KH: I suspect Choon MK was writing about early Mahayana Buddhism, not early Theravada Buddhism. Some Mahayanists seem to have thrown conditioned dhammas into the definition of "everything." But dhammas were taught exclusively by the Buddha; they were not things that ordinary people held views about. So the Buddha never said the view "dhammas exist" was a wrong view. He said it was a right view. (SN22:94 Flowers: "And what is it, bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as existing, of which I too say that it exists? Form that is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. Feeling ...) Ken H #129558 From: Sukinder Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 10:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question about Mahayana. sukinderpal Hi Rob E, > > > > Do you agree that for example, feeling has a characteristic, function, > > manifestation and proximate cause different from say, perception? > > > > Oh, of course I have no problem acknowledging that each dhamma has its > own function and that it performs this function in a particular way, > assisted by accompanying cetasikas and caused by conditions. When we > use the word "characteristic" however that tends to suggest a static > object that contains a specific "thing" that is a characteristic, and > this interpretation of characteristic I would not agree with. I would > see the characteristic way that feeling takes place to indeed be a > unique process, a dynamic process, that performs its function, but > there is no "characteristic" riding along as a part of a dhamma apart > from what it is doing and the actions of itself and the cetasikas that > work with it. That image of a "characteristic" that is observed like > an actual mark on a dhamma is very similar to the presumption we have > about a person that they have a thing called a self somewhere inside > them and it is performing some sort of coordinating function. I think > we have to be very careful of forming such ideas about dhammas. > A dhamma rises and falls away in an instant and in that it performs its particular function. "Self" does not exist and therefore can't be said to rise and fall away or perform any function. How then can saying that a dhamma has a particular characteristic be similar to positing a "self"? Feeling is feeling, perception is perception, consciousness is consciousness, each a dhamma, therefore not self.We take all dhammas for self, hence why each needs to be seen for what they are. And how are they known if not by both the particular and general characteristics? There is no characteristic, function, manifestation and proximate cause of a dhamma when that dhamma has not arisen, nor is there when it has fallen away. But when seeing for example has arisen, why would it not be known for the particular characteristic different from say, visible object? How does its fleetingness take away the possibility of knowing that it is one kind of dhamma different from another? And what about knowing nama as different from rupa, or kusala vs. akusala vs. kiriya vs. vipaka? Do you think that these distinctions should also not be made since they all are extremely fleeting? Metta, Sukin #129559 From: "thomaslaw03" Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 12:51 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. thomaslaw03 Hi Lukas, - "> L: Yes, just useless viewpoint." I think the teachings of the middle way indicated in the Samyutta suttas (Samyukta sutras) are not useless at all. They are in a practical sense, rather than on idealistic and systematic theory. - "> Here is a Kokanuda Sutta: On one occasion Ven. Ananda ..." This is the teachings of the middle way for working in a practice sense. Thomas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > > I consider this: Everything exists, this is one extreme. Everything does not exist, this is the other extreme. Dhammas are empty of both existence and non-existence, which all come from self-attachment (Choong MK, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, pp. 60-66, 92-97, 192-199). > > L: Yes, just useless viewpoint. > Here is a Kokanuda Sutta: > > On one occasion Ven. Ananda was staying near Rajagaha, at Tapoda monastery. Then, as night was ending, he got up & went to the Tapoda Hot Springs to bathe his limbs. Having bathed his limbs and having gotten out of the springs, he stood wearing only his lower robe, drying his limbs. Kokanuda the wanderer, as night was ending, also got up & went to the Tapoda Hot Springs to bathe his limbs. He saw Ven. Ananda from afar, and on seeing him said to him, "Who are you, my friend?" > > "I am a monk, my friend." > > "Which kind of monk?" > > "A son-of-the-Sakyan contemplative." > > "I would like to ask you about a certain point, if you would give me leave to pose a question." > > "Go ahead and ask. Having heard [your question], I'll inform you." > > "How is it, my friend: 'The cosmos is eternal. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless.' Is this the sort of view you have?" > > "No, my friend, I don't have that sort of view." > > "Very well, then: 'The cosmos is not eternal. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless.' Is this the sort of view you have?" > > "No, my friend, I don't have that sort of view." > > "Very well, then: 'The cosmos is finite... The cosmos is infinite... The soul & the body are the same... The soul is one thing and the body another... After death a Tathagata exists... After death a Tathagata does not exist... After death a Tathagata both does & does not exist... After death a Tathagata neither does nor does not exist. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless.' Is this the sort of view you have?" > > "No, my friend, I don't have that sort of view." > > "Then in that case, do you not know or see?" > > "No, my friend. It's not the case that I don't know, I don't see. I do know. I do see." > > "But on being asked, 'How is it, my friend: "The cosmos is eternal. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless." Is this the sort of view you have?' you inform me, 'No, my friend, I don't have that sort of view.' On being asked, 'Very well then: "The cosmos is not eternal... The cosmos is finite... The cosmos is infinite... The soul & the body are the same... The soul is one thing and the body another... After death a Tathagata exists... After death a Tathagata does not exist... After death a Tathagata both does & does not exist... After death a Tathagata neither does nor does not exist. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless." Is this the sort of view you have?' you inform me, 'No, my friend, I don't have that sort of view.' But on being asked, 'Then in that case, do you not know or see?' you inform me, 'No, my friend. It's not the case that I don't know or see. I do know. I do see.' Now, how is the meaning of this statement to be understood?" > > "'The cosmos is eternal. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless,' is a viewpoint. 'The cosmos is not eternal... The cosmos is finite... The cosmos is infinite... The soul & the body are the same... The soul is one thing and the body another... After death a Tathagata exists... After death a Tathagata does not exist... After death a Tathagata both does & does not exist... After death a Tathagata neither does nor does not exist. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless,' is a viewpoint. The extent to which there are viewpoints, view-stances, the taking up of views, obsessions of views, the cause of views, & the uprooting of views: that's what I know. That's what I see. Knowing that, I say 'I know.' Seeing that, I say 'I see.' Why should I say 'I don't know, I don't see'? I do know. I do see." > > "What is your name, my friend? What do your fellows in the chaste life call you?" > > "My name is Ananda, my friend, and that's what my fellows in the chaste life call me." > > "What? Have I been talking with the great teacher without realizing that it was Ven. Ananda? Had I recognized that it was Ven. Ananda, I would not have cross-examined him so much. May Ven. Ananda please forgive me." > > > Best wishes > Lukas > #129560 From: "thomaslaw03" Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 1:28 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. thomaslaw03 Hi Ken H, -"> T: Dhammas are empty of both existence and non-existence, which all come from self-attachment > ... > KH: We can see from Lukas's quote that the view "everything is empty of both existence and non-existence" was not the sort of view held by the Buddha. It was just as wrong as "everything exists" or "everything does not exist." " I think the view "everything is empty of both existence and non-existence" was found in the Samyutta sutta (Samyukta sutras). Existence and non-existenceis are linked to the view "everything exists" and "everything does not exist." These views all come from self-attachment, and are regarded as the two extremes (see SN 22.90). - "> T: (Choong MK, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, pp. 60-66, 92-97, 192-199). > ... > KH: I suspect Choon MK was writing about early Mahayana Buddhism, not early Theravada Buddhism. Some Mahayanists seem to have thrown conditioned dhammas into the definition of "everything." But dhammas were taught exclusively by the Buddha; they were not things that ordinary people held views about. So the Buddha never said the view "dhammas exist" was a wrong view. He said it was a right view. (SN22:94 Flowers: .... " The writing is about Early Buddhism (not early Mahayana or early Theravada). The notion that seeing and knowing "things" ("everything") as they realy are (= seeing and knowing yourself as you really are) (= dhammas)is the core teachings of Early Buddhism found in Samyutta suttas (Samyukta sutras). Thomas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Thomas (and Lukas), > > --- > > T: I consider this: Everything exists, this is one extreme. Everything does not exist, this is the other extreme. > --- > > KH: Lucas has shown how the Buddha considered those views. But it was very different from the way you have considered them. You wrote: > > ----- > T: Dhammas are empty of both existence and non-existence, which all come from self-attachment > ----- > > KH: We can see from Lukas's quote that the view "everything is empty of both existence and non-existence" was not the sort of view held by the Buddha. It was just as wrong as "everything exists" or "everything does not exist." > > --------- > > T: (Choong MK, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, pp. 60-66, 92-97, 192-199). > --------- > > KH: I suspect Choon MK was writing about early Mahayana Buddhism, not early Theravada Buddhism. Some Mahayanists seem to have thrown conditioned dhammas into the definition of "everything." But dhammas were taught exclusively by the Buddha; they were not things that ordinary people held views about. So the Buddha never said the view "dhammas exist" was a wrong view. He said it was a right view. (SN22:94 Flowers: > > "And what is it, bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as > existing, of which I too say that it exists? Form that is impermanent, > suffering, and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. Feeling ...) > > Ken H > #129561 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 6:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipassanaa _003 (DT 890 )to Htoo. nilovg Dear Htoo, Thank you for your post. As you say, siila is not pure without pa~n~naa. I am just adding something. Op 23-mrt-2013, om 8:35 heeft htoonaing@... het volgende geschreven: > Someone who wants to practice vipassanaa keep 5 precepts. When he > keeps the degree of panna is not high yet. ----- N: Some readers may think that keeping the five precepts is like keeping some rules. and that there has to be first this, than vipassanaa. Or, he cling to and idea of self who keeps the precepts and can practise vipassanaa. All sorts of interpretations are given by different people. Instead of rules, maybe we can see the precepts as ways of training. One sees the value of avoiding what can harm others. It depends on conditions whether this is always possible for a person. Meanwhile as he develops more understanding of the present reality, like seeing now, visible object now, there are more conditions to avoid harming others. ------ Nina. #129562 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 6:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vipassanaa (DT 888 ) to Htoo. nilovg Dear Htoo, Op 23-mrt-2013, om 9:05 heeft htoonaing@... het volgende geschreven: > Mindfulness on the body continuously regarding pathavii- > pho.t.thabbaaramma.na causing kaayavi~nnaa.na is the best > vipassanaa. Kaayavinnaana is directed. So naama is directed. This > will finally lead to path consciousness. ------- N: We have to ask ourselves: directed by whom? Some readers may have misunderstandings and when they read directing, they may think of a self directing. It is good to remember conditions, it depends on conditions of which object there is mindfulness: it may be feeling, or citta, or dhamma. When seeing now, there may be mindfulness of seeing, it is hard to predict anything. Or mindfulness of visible object, or mindfulness of attachment. Cittas are so fast, there is no time to direct any of them. We do not have to think of the applications of mindfulness. Pa~n~naa and sati, when they arise, perform their functions. There may be just one short moment of understanding and then many, many moments of forgetfulness. But we should not mind, it is conditioned. If we try to direct anything it is impossible to understand anattaa. ------ Nina. #129563 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 6:38 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. kenhowardau Hi Thomas, >< KH: We can see from Lukas's quote that the view "everything is empty of both existence and non-existence" was not the sort of view held by the Buddha. It was just as wrong as "everything exists" or "everything does not exist." " >> > T: I think the view "everything is empty of both existence and non-existence" was found in the Samyutta sutta (Samyukta sutras). ---- KH: I couldn't find the Samyatta Sutta, but are you aware of a formula (found, not only in the Kokanuda Sutta quoted by Lukas, but frequently throughout the suttas) describing wrong views as, for example, "The self exists, the self does not exist. The self both exists and does not exist. The self neither exists nor does not exist"? Or, in another example, "I shall be reborn, I shall not be reborn, I shall be both reborn and not reborn, I shall be neither reborn nor not reborn." I am assuming that the same formula would apply to your example of "everything exists" and it would show clearly that "everything is empty of both existence and non-existence" was a wrong view. Basically, all wrong views assume a permanent existence of some kind. And so they are all wrong, no matter what they say. They are doomed from the start. The view "everything exists" is a view about lasting (conventionally known) things. It is not a view about the conditioned things described by the Buddha. Therefore, that view, along with "everything neither exists nor does not exist," must be wrong. --------- > T: Existence and non-existence are linked to the view "everything exists" and "everything does not exist." These views all come from self-attachment, and are regarded as the two extremes (see SN 22.90). -------- KH: I am not sure what you mean by "come from self attachment." It sounds suspiciously like something Thanissaro B might have said on Access to Insight. I hope you are not saying that anatta is a mere mediation technique (in which attachment to thoughts of self and no-self are temporarily suppressed). If you are saying that then some serious re-education is urgently required. :-) Ken H #129564 From: "thomaslaw03" Date: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:05 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. thomaslaw03 Hi Ken H, About the middle way of emptiness (such as neither existence/arising/eternalism nor non-existence/ceasing/annihilationism, neither sameness nor difference, neither coming nor going) found in Samyutta suttas/Samyukta sutras, you may first read SN 22.90 = SA 262 (See also Choong MK, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism (2000), pp. 60-66, 91-97, 192-199, 239; and The Notion of Emptiness in Early Buddhism (1999), pp. 32-40). I hope this helps. Thomas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > >< KH: We can see from Lukas's quote that the view "everything is empty of both existence and non-existence" was not the sort of view held by the Buddha. It was just as wrong as "everything exists" or "everything does not exist." " > >> > > > T: I think the view "everything is empty of both existence and non-existence" was found in the Samyutta sutta (Samyukta sutras). > ---- > > KH: I couldn't find the Samyatta Sutta, but are you aware of a formula (found, not only in the Kokanuda Sutta quoted by Lukas, but frequently throughout the suttas) describing wrong views as, for example, "The self exists, the self does not exist. The self both exists and does not exist. The self neither exists nor does not exist"? Or, in another example, "I shall be reborn, I shall not be reborn, I shall be both reborn and not reborn, I shall be neither reborn nor not reborn." > > I am assuming that the same formula would apply to your example of "everything exists" and it would show clearly that "everything is empty of both existence and non-existence" was a wrong view. > > Basically, all wrong views assume a permanent existence of some kind. And so they are all wrong, no matter what they say. They are doomed from the start. > > The view "everything exists" is a view about lasting (conventionally known) things. It is not a view about the conditioned things described by the Buddha. Therefore, that view, along with "everything neither exists nor does not exist," must be wrong. > > --------- > > T: Existence and non-existence are linked to the view "everything exists" and "everything does not exist." These views all come from self-attachment, and are regarded as the two extremes (see SN 22.90). > -------- > > KH: I am not sure what you mean by "come from self attachment." It sounds suspiciously like something Thanissaro B might have said on Access to Insight. I hope you are not saying that anatta is a mere mediation technique (in which attachment to thoughts of self and no-self are temporarily suppressed). > > If you are saying that then some serious re-education is urgently required. :-) > > Ken H > #129565 From: "philip" Date: Tue Mar 26, 2013 11:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Is that enough to develop understanding?" philofillet Hi Nina (and Jon and Lukas) > ------ > N: As Acharn says: a glimpse of understanding. Understanding is like > a drop in the ocean of ignorance. Or an opening in the dome of lobha, or the curtain of moha. Well, both. That rare island of understanding, momentary, arising due to conditions, with alobha. I think listening is helpful for this, we listen without forcing understanding, but it clicks now and then. At other times, we push, and force things. Venerable Dhammadaro speaks very well about this in part 2 of his talks in the audio file. He talks about subtle wrong practice. It's easy to see obvious wrong practice, such as meditation, walking slow etc. But what about subtle wrong practice. For example, we might look hard at an object, trying to determine visible object. Or we might hear about feeling, and try to check what is feeling now. Or when we are angry, we might assume that there is dosa to be experienced intentionally at this moment. That sort of thing. But there are lots of realities other than dosa when there is anger, no rules about what reality is to be object of awareness now. But in our wanting and trying we overreach, momentarily, This is not something to try to stop, it happens due to conditions. But we can be aware of it. > ------- > > Ph: But for now our loved ones are horrifibly real. I say horribly > > real because there is so much suffering of worrying about them. And > > beautifully real because they are such precious companions. These > > days I worry about Naomi getting ill. She works such long hours. I > > suffer worrying about our old age together, counting pennies. All > > this useless worrying. > > > ------- > N: As Acharn says: because of me. > As to seeking comfort in understanding and lobha, a fact you mention > often, at the moment of understanding there is no lobha, since > understanding always goes together with alobha, detachment. Ph: Yes, always with alobha. That is the key. A *big* key. People who reject abhidhamma can get around this and decide that their practice can be rooted in wanting, without problem. (Maybe they can claim kusala chanda, wishful thinking.) But for those who accept that the Dhamma is very deep, there can be no cavalier attitutude towards lobha ditthi in practice. That leaves out 99.99% of Buddhists... So to coclude my participation in this thread, I would say Abhidhamma is not in the book only when sati is aware of a reality witout attachment. If life is being experienced in Abhidhamma terms on a regular and predictable basis, I would suggest that a lot of lobha will also be there and that it is not bhavana, because bhavana must be kusala. Little by little by little, that is the only way. Thanks also re the sakkaya ditthi explanations. Phil #129566 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Mar 26, 2013 1:03 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. jonoabb Hi Rob E --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > J: I see no reason why dhammas should not have an inherent characteristic in a sense that 'person', 'self' or 'thing' does not. In fact, the whole point of the teaching about dhammas is that they are 'real' in a sense that cannot be said of 'person', 'self' or 'thing'. > > RE: I agree to this extent: dhammas really do exist, and a "self" does not. One is an arising reality, the other is a concept. So far so good. > =============== J: Exactly so, dhammas really do exist (i.e., have existence, albeit momentary), whereas a "self" does not -- it is a notion (and an incorrect one at that). To my understanding, dhammas are distinguishable one from another (e.g., visible object from audible object or from seeing consciousness), and they are so distinguishable because each has a distinct characteristic that can be directly discerned by panna (of the level of satipatthana). Anything that is not a dhamma (or a characteristic of a dhamma) is, in ultimate terms, not a thing at all but is a notion (of a thing). > =============== > RE: However the danger is in seeing the dhamma as a static entity as well as something that has "interiority" and what I mean by that is that it has a characteristic that it owns or contains, which would make it a kind of being in its own right, rather than a simple occurrence which flashes by with no meaning or substance of any note. I don't know exactly how you hear "own-being" when the term is used, but to me it smacks of a sort of raising up of the dhamma to a status that is beyond a simple activity taking place due to conditions. Having an "inherent" characteristic implies something that exists and contains something, rather than it merely has a way of functioning and behavior for a moment. When attributes are attached to something it is dressed up by them and is made to seem more important. In other words, I worry that those same attachments that are normally given to the concept of a self can equally be given to the concept of a dhamma as a "true existent form" that can be attached to. Since the point is detachment, I don't understand why terms like paramatha and own-being are given to something which we want to lessen, not increase. > =============== J: You are worried about the terminology that is used in the texts to describe dhammas, because you feel the terms used (e.g., `own being', Pali: sabhava) may conduce to attachment rather than to detachment. Now choice of terminology is what I would call a presentational matter. I am more interested in the accuracy of what is being described, regardless of the terms used. I'd be interested to know what concerns you have in this regard. For example, is there anything intrinsically improbable about dhammas having so-called "own being" (as properly understood, and without expressing concern about the choice of terminology). And as regards terminology, to which you and some others attach much importance, what terminology would you prefer to see used? Jon #129567 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Mar 26, 2013 6:11 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. kenhowardau Hi Thomas, ------ > T: About the middle way of emptiness (such as neither existence/arising/eternalism nor non-xistence/ceasing/annihilationism, neither sameness nor difference, neither coming nor going) found in Samyutta suttas/Samyukta sutras, you may first read SN 22.90 = SA 262 (See also Choong MK, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism (2000), pp. 60-66, 91-97, 192-199, 239; and The Notion of Emptiness in Early Buddhism (1999), pp. 32-40). > I hope this helps. ------ KH: Thanks for trying but, no, it doesn't help. Rather than read books I would prefer to discuss the "middle way of emptiness." In Theravada `emptiness' (sunnatta) "refers exclusively to the anatta doctrine:" "Void is the world because it is devoid of a self or anything belonging to a self" (Buddhist Dictionary, Nyanatiloka). I am willing to accept that the Mahayana schools may have different meanings for emptiness, but in Theravada it definitely means `devoid of a permanent self, or soul.' So paramattha dhammas exist, and they are soulless. The Channa Sutta (SN 22.90) you referred me to bears this out. "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "non-existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one." By and large, the world is seen as a place where the self lives eternally or where the self is annihilated. Only the Buddha has taught a middle way, in which there are only dhammas, and no self. Ken H #129568 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Mar 26, 2013 11:11 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. upasaka_howard Hi, Jon (and Robert) - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > To my understanding, dhammas are distinguishable one from another (e.g., visible object from audible object or from seeing consciousness), and they are so distinguishable because each has a distinct characteristic that can be directly discerned by panna (of the level of satipatthana). ======================================= Just an 0bservation: Distinguishability of objects of consciousness that are alleged to be separate realities does not imply their being actual realities or separate entities. Yes, paramattha dhammas are distinguishable, but so are Ford cars from Mercedes, pine trees from rose bushes, you from me, and the Dhammastudy group from the U.S. Congress from the U.S. Supreme Court. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #129569 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Mar 26, 2013 11:25 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Thomas) - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > ------ > > T: About the middle way of emptiness (such as neither existence/arising/eternalism nor non-xistence/ceasing/annihilationism, neither sameness nor difference, neither coming nor going) found in Samyutta suttas/Samyukta sutras, you may first read SN 22.90 = SA 262 (See also Choong MK, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism (2000), pp. 60-66, 91-97, 192-199, 239; and The Notion of Emptiness in Early Buddhism (1999), pp. 32-40). > > > I hope this helps. > ------ > > KH: Thanks for trying but, no, it doesn't help. Rather than read books I would prefer to discuss the "middle way of emptiness." > > In Theravada `emptiness' (sunnatta) "refers exclusively to the anatta doctrine:" "Void is the world because it is devoid of a self or anything belonging to a self" (Buddhist Dictionary, Nyanatiloka). ---------------------------------- HCW: Yes, and in Mahayana as well. What is the meaning of this "self" that is denied? What does it mean for an odor to be devoid of self? Does anyone think that an odor has a spirit/soul within it? What people think is that an odor has a core of separate existence and identity, and that is the error being made at that level. ----------------------------------- > > I am willing to accept that the Mahayana schools may have different meanings for emptiness, but in Theravada it definitely means `devoid of a permanent self, or soul.' > > So paramattha dhammas exist, and they are soulless. --------------------------------- HCW: They are devoid of self/own being. ---------------------------------- > > The Channa Sutta (SN 22.90) you referred me to bears this out. "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "non-existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one." ---------------------------- HCW: Yes, the notion of real and separate existence just does not occur to one with right discernment. ------------------------------ > > By and large, the world is seen as a place where the self lives eternally or where the self is annihilated. Only the Buddha has taught a middle way, in which there are only dhammas, and no self. > > Ken H > ============================== With metta, Howard Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick — this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately./ (From the Phena Sutta) _______________________________ /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) ________________________________ /He who neither goes too far nor lags behind and knows about the world: "This is all unreal," — such a monk gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta ) #129570 From: Ken O Date: Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:32 am Subject: Dhamma Books ashkenn2k Dear all I am interested to do dhamma books dana. If you want it, please indicate to me off list and what book you want and the mailing address. I will then reply to you. Please note the books should be Theravada books that are translation of suttas or ancient commentaries or Abhidhamma. It can be for you or your organisation that promotes Theravada Buddhism. I may not accede to all the requests as I have limited resources :-) thank you kc #129571 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question about Mahayana. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 26-mrt-2013, om 13:11 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Yes, paramattha dhammas are distinguishable, but so are Ford cars > from Mercedes, pine trees from rose bushes, you from me, and the > Dhammastudy group from the U.S. Congress from the U.S. Supreme Court. ------ N: Your answer made me consider more paramattha dhammas, ultimate realities, that each have their own characteristic to be directly known by pa~n~naa when they appear one at a time. Quite a different world from the world of conventional truth such as a Ford, a Mercedes. Paramattha dhammas can be distinguished only by pa~n~naa. Seeing is not thinking, seeing is not visible object, they are different realities. They are real when they appear right now. We have to consider the present moment, the whole of the teachings deal with the present moment. Ford and Mercedes are not real in the ultimate sense. They are a collection of things we can think of. Through eyes only visible object can be seen and it falls away immediately. Through touch only hardness can be experienced and it falls away immediately. ----- Nina. #129572 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:46 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. jonoabb Hi Rob E --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > =============== > RE: In addition, I worry about looking at a dhamma as a "something" that is seen to exist in a definitive moment in which it is frozen and identifiable, and then disappears en masse. We know that a dhamma exists in three stages and that in each stage it is continuing to change, so there is no moment in which the dhamma is a single identifiable thing or has a single identifiable characteristic. It think it's better to see its characteristic as something that is observable in its activity but not something that it has an any given sub-moment or that it owns or contains, since it is really a conditioned occurrence and has no real substance. > =============== J: You have reservations about the notion of a dhamma as both: a/. coming into existence for a moment then ceasing to exist ever again; and b/. for its brief moment of existence, having a characteristic that can be discerned by panna You prefer the notion of a characteristic as something that is a product of the act of rising and falling, or of the dhamma performing its function, than as something that is intrinsic to the dhamma itself. However, you don't say why the latter should be preferred to the former. > =============== > > J: Your point is that conditioned arising is not consistent with the idea of dhammas as 'discrete entities' that arise and fall away completely. I'm afraid I don't see any necessary inconsistency. I have no difficulty with the (hypothetical) possibility that that's just the way things are. > > RE: But what is the way things are? Is it that a dhamma really does hang in the air for a moment as a definite frozen thing? I don't think that is the way things are. In fact a dhamma is constantly changing and is just a changing phenomenon and nothing else. It isn't a "thing" at all in that sense. So the problem for me is not failing to accept that it may be "just the way things are," but that I think it's actually not the way dhammas are. > =============== J: Your point is that if a dhamma is a constantly changing phenomenon, it cannot be a discrete entity. Dhammas are "changing phenomena" in the sense that they arise, persist for a mere sub-moment and then fall away. I don't see why such form of changing should preclude dhammas from being discrete entities. The 2 ideas seem entirely consistent to me. > =============== > > J: For example, when sound arises it appears to come out of nowhere. What's the problem with that? > > RE: I think I already said this - if so I apologize for the redundancy. The problem with that is that sound doesn't arise out of nowhere and that appearance is an illusion. It arises out of conditions that cause a vibration which creates the sound, even in dhamma terms. > > In addition, from "nothing to nothing" isn't just arising and falling away completely. It implies that there is a moment that the dhamma arises ex nihilo, and that cannot be the case in a conditioned universe. > =============== J: Yes, I'm aware of your views on this. As I said in my previous post, your point is that conditioned arising is not consistent with the idea of dhammas as 'discrete entities' that arise and fall away completely. Personally I don't see the problem. Perhaps you could spell out the perceived inconsistency in more detail. Jon #129573 From: "azita" Date: Wed Mar 27, 2013 12:08 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. gazita2002 hallo Rob and Jon, I see Jon has asked an important question here Rob and given important information re dhammas. I agree with what Jon has written about nama and rupa and would like to add that if there were no nama dhaammas and rupa dhammas then there would be no 'us' Cittas have realities as objects e.g. other namas or rupas, or citta can have concept as object, e.g. earth kasina which can be object of jhana citta. patience, courage and good cheer azita > > > > > Azita: before I reply to any of the above, one question. what to you, is a dhamma? > > > > > > > > That's an interesting question. I consider a dhamma to be a rising moment of experience in which a particular nama or rupa is experienced by citta - consciousness. A nama is a mental factor and a rupa is a physical factor, such as hardness, etc. One particular mental or physical event is the object of consciousness in any given moment, and that moment of experience arises and then falls away, giving way to another arising moment of experience. > > > > =============== > > > > > > J: Rob, you seem to be saying that it is the arising moment of experience -- but not the nama or rupa that is the object of that moment of experience -- that is the dhamma. Am I reading you correctly? > > > > That's a good question - maybe I'm a little confused. A citta itself is a dhamma is it not? So citta experiencing a rupa for instance is a dhamma experiencing a dhamma. If citta experiences a dhamma, that is a moment of experience, it is also an arising dhamma in its own right. Yes, it has a dhamma as its object as well. Hence the potential confusion? > > =============== > > J: Right. Cittas are dhammas, but so are rupas and cetasikas. > > So your previous definition of `dhamma' as "a rising moment of experience (in which a particular nama or rupa is experienced)" is lacking in that it is cast purely in terms of cittas. > > Another shortcoming in your definition is that the object of a citta is not limited to a nama or a rupa; a concept may also be an object of a citta. > > Would you mind giving a definition that encompasses these aspects as well. Thanks. > > Jon > #129574 From: Linh Hong Date: Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:04 am Subject: Question on Parami honglinhftu Hi all, I'm Linh from Vietnam. I'm studying on Parami and find it a hard topic. I have 1 question: When listening to the Dhamma and there's understanding arising, at that moment, is there any parami accumulated? Is any moment of understanding a parami? If right understanding is the forerunner, and if panna is the factor that eradicates kilesa if then why mention dana, sila, etc? Thanks for your help! #129576 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Mar 27, 2013 7:09 pm Subject: Re: Question on Parami sarahprocter... Hi Linh, Glad to hear from you again:) You always ask good (and difficult!) qus: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Linh Hong wrote: > When listening to the Dhamma and there's understanding arising, at that moment, is there any parami accumulated? Is any moment of understanding a parami? .... S: When there is understanding of realities, even at a right theoretical level, it is the beginning of the development of the paramis. At such moments, not only is there right undersanding, but there is right effort, truthfulness, renunciation, sila, equanimity and other qualities. .... > If right understanding is the forerunner, and if panna is the factor that eradicates kilesa if then why mention dana, sila, etc? ... S: Panna needs the support of all the other paramis in order to develop. For example, at moments of right understanding, there is renunciation of attachment, there is patience with whatever reality is experienced, there is truthfulness, right effort and so on. When the other paramis are mentioned, such as dana and sila, they must arise with understanding to be parami. They all support each other: From the comy to the Cariya Pitaka (Bodhi transl): "Therein, giving is stated first, for giving assists (the development of) virtue and is easy to practise. Giving accompanied by virtue is abundantly fruitful and beneficial, so virtue is stated immediately after giving. Virtue accompanied by renunciation... renunciation by wisdom ... wisdom by energy ... energy by patience ... patience by truthfulness ... truthfulness by determination ... determination by loving-kindness ... and loving-kindness accompanied by equanimity is abundantly fruitful and beneficial; thus equanimity is stated immediately after loving-kindness." If we cannot give up greed for material things or live with good conduct, developing hiri and otappa (shame and moral dread), how can the defilements ever be eradicated? Look forward to hearing your further comments. Metta Sarah ====== #129577 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Mar 27, 2013 7:12 pm Subject: Re: "Is that enough to develop understanding?" sarahprocter... Dear Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > Always refreshing to hear Ajahn talk (Hin Hua) about seeing and visible object, no need to explain what it is, just understand it. Visible object now. Seeing now. > > "Is that enough for understanding to develop?" .... S: Yes, it is enough when understanding arises now. Just that which is seen, just the reality which sees it! That's all. Actually, very simple and yet, so subtle, because Self always gets in the way, wanting to 'do' something, wanting to ask a 'how?' or 'what?' or look for a short-cut which always turns out to be such a long-cut! Just visible object now appearing. Just seeing now which sees it. That's all! Metta Sarah ===== #129578 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Mar 27, 2013 7:29 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: to Htoo, Dhamma Rakkhita. sarahprocter... Dear Htoo, Good to see you writing here again after the long interval! I meant to add a comment on something you wrote a couple of months ago: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htoonaing@..." wrote: > Dhamma sanga.nii says 56 components are in the 1st mahaakusala citta. But Abhidhammatthasangaha say there are 39. That is 38 cetasiks along with pure citta. ... S: This is what I wrote before on this topic when it was raised by other friends: >S: I'm quoting from the introduction to U Kyaw Khine's translation of the Dhsg as it may be helpful to go through the perceived discrepancy again. The introduction is by U Ko Lay. "The dhamma factors which constitute the first meritorious thought, numbering fifty-six, are first listed and then defined in the section on the definition of dhamma factors. Of these, 18 dhamma factors occur once in the list; 7 dhamma factors occur twice; 1 dhamma factor occurs 3 times; 2 dhamma factors occur 4 times; 1 dhamma factor occurs 6 times; 1 dhamma factor occurs 7 times. Thus the list in this section in reality consists of only 30 dhamma factors." * S: It then goes through it detail to show which dhamma factors occur once, twice and so on. The dhamma factor which appears 6 times is "samaadhi (concentration), as samatha (calm or tranquility of mind), as cittassekaggata (one-pointedness of mind), as samaadindriya (faculty of concentration), as samaadhibala (power of concentration), as sammaa samaadhi (Right concentration) and as avikkhepa (non-distraction). The dhamma factor which occurs 7 times is "Pa~n~naa (wisdom), as pa~n~nindriya (faculty of wisdom), as sammaadi.t.thi (Right View) as a constituent of the Ariya Path), as pa~n~naabala (power of wisdom), as amoha (non-bewilderment), as sammaadi.t.thi (Right View as a mental factor for good action), as sampaja~n~na (clear comprehension) and as vipassanaaa (insight)." Later it summarises and says that though we talk about, for example, contact (phassa) and other mental factors as being the proximate cause for wholesome cittas to arise, "this is only an analytical view. The actual fact is that there are thirty dhamma factors occurring as fifty-six items in the complete list and these arise simultaneously." It goes on to stress that besides these 56 dhamma factors, there are also 9 more which may occur, "wherever appropriate, on the occasion of the arising of those fifty-six dhamma factors", making a total of 65. These 9 are the `yevaapana...dhammaa', i.e chanda, adhimokkha, manasikaara, tatramajjhattataa, karu.naa, muditaa, sammaavacaa, sammaakammanta and sammaa-aajiva. Down to the maths: a) 30 dhamma factors. Exclude mind (citta) = 29 cetasikas. b) 29 cetasikas + 9 yevaapanakas = 38 sobhana cetasikas arising in the sensuous sphere. c) Also 14 akusala cetasikas. 38 sobhana + 28 akusala = 52 cetasikas as given in the Abhidammattha Sangaha. *** S: Hope that helps sort out any apparent discrepancy. Metta Sarah ==== #129579 From: Linh Hong Date: Wed Mar 27, 2013 7:30 pm Subject: Re: Question on Parami honglinhftu Thank Sarah for such quick help! I share the same ideas that developing panna is a long long process and when we all were born with kilesas, if there is no support from other qualities: dana, sila,nekkhama,...,it will so hard to achieve panna parami. However, i'm still little confused. Somewhat i still think that panna is the only thing that we need to develop, and others come later. Seems i've mixed all qualities in one panna. Can we make it clearer? One more question! Why we don't have some other paramis such as sati parami, saddha parami,...etc...I mean we have all 19 sobha cetasikas. When sobha one arises, then akusala cannot arise, and with panna eqquiped, it can be parami? Hope you can understand my "clumsy English". #129580 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Mar 27, 2013 7:40 pm Subject: Re: A reminder from Thailand? sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > L: ....Whole day filled with useless activities. .... S: When we think like this, it is not the understanding of realities - it is an idea of particular situations as being useful and others as being useless. It's the understanding that's important. Seeing now, is the same as seeing whilst working on a construction site, walking in the forest or washing dishes. Just visible object that's seen! Metta Sarah ===== #129581 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Mar 27, 2013 7:52 pm Subject: Re: "Is that enough to develop understanding?" sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > I think it all must be very natural, like daily life. Right understanding, not different than daily life. ... S: Well said. ... > L: I asked recently via internet. Understanding doesnt come even I would like to understand. Acharn repeated: 'I would like to'. She added later: 'Right understanding cannot attached to anything'. .... S: Yes, always "I would like"..... always wanting something for oneself. So more clinging, less understanding at such times... Metta Sarah ==== #129582 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Mar 27, 2013 7:57 pm Subject: Re: Ayoniso-manasikara Sutta - 3 kinds of vitakka sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Lukas wrote: > Here is Ayoniso-manasikara Sutta: > > I have heard that on one occasion a certain monk was dwelling among the Kosalans in a forest thicket. Now at that time, he spent the day's abiding thinking evil, unskillful thoughts: i.e., thoughts of sensuality, thoughts of ill will, thoughts of doing harm. <...> > From inappropriate attention > you're being chewed by your thoughts. > Relinquishing what's inappropriate, contemplate appropriately. Keeping your mind on the Teacher, > the Dhamma, the Sangha, your virtues, you will arrive at joy, rapture, pleasure without doubt. <...> > L: My point to this is 3 kinds of akusla vitakka: kaamavitakka, byaapaadavitakka, vihimsaavitakka. This are translated as: a thought of senses, ill-will thought and cruelty thought. How whould you translate this free or interprete? I mean if we talk in context of realities, can we say: kaamavitakka is vitakka with lobha, the other with dosa? and the 3rd with strong dosa? .... S: In any case, these are example of common, unwholesome thinking that makes up most of our day. When there's wise thinking about the Triple Gem, about renunciation of attachment, ill-will and harm, we live peacefully, easily, wherever we are. Metta Sarah ===== #129583 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Mar 27, 2013 9:25 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Jon and Azita. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > J: Right. Cittas are dhammas, but so are rupas and cetasikas. > > So your previous definition of `dhamma' as "a rising moment of experience (in which a particular nama or rupa is experienced)" is lacking in that it is cast purely in terms of cittas. > > Another shortcoming in your definition is that the object of a citta is not limited to a nama or a rupa; a concept may also be an object of a citta. > > Would you mind giving a definition that encompasses these aspects as well. Thanks. Well, what I had in mind is that we don't know dhammas at all except by way of citta, so maybe what I should have said is that a dhamma is the "object of a moment of experiencing by citta" or something like that. What I was driving at in a somewhat clumsy way was that dhammas arise with the momentary experience of cittas. Rupas are said to arise independently of citta, but we don't know anything about those rupas. They are not pertinent to the progress of ignorant or wise cittas. I like the idea of connecting the definition of dhammas to the experience of citta for that reason - those experiences of dhammas either deluded or wise are the ones that are part of the path. But in and of themselves I guess I would define them as either namas which are momentarily arising mental factors, or rupas, which are momentarily arising physical factors and don't experience anything. I hope as a basic, crude definition of dhammas that is at least partly satisfactory. Dhammas in general can be defined as "phenomena" whose arising is both momentary and actual. The reason this came up is that Azita asked me for my definition of dhammas on the way to talking about own-being and other attributes of dhammas. I hope those other areas will also be discussed. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - #129584 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Mar 27, 2013 9:48 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > J: You are worried about the terminology that is used in the texts to describe dhammas, because you feel the terms used (e.g., `own being', Pali: sabhava) may conduce to attachment rather than to detachment. > > Now choice of terminology is what I would call a presentational matter. Well the choice of the type of terminology is presentational, but the meaning of the terminology is not presentational, but substantial. I am still trying to find out what the meaning and implications of own-being are. What does it mean exactly, and what does it say about the nature of a dhamma? If that is clarified, then we could talk about presentation, which also can indeed lend itself to misunderstand and attachment to properties that are imagined because of the implications of the terms. Paramatha dhammas is like that too. When I try to get a good idea of the implications of the term it seems to slip away. I am told that it just means that dhammas are the true unit of existence and experience and therefore are "ultimate." Since they actually do arise they are called "realities," and if that is all there is to it, then I would say the presentational terminology still has problems for me, but at least I would understand that the basic meaning is okay. For me, giving something an attribute that it "owns" sounds like it is being granted more dimensionality and substance than it has. How and in what way does a dhamma "own" anything? What is meant by that? To say it "has a characteristic" that arises and falls away with the existence of the dhamma itself, meaning it presents and behaves a certain way, is fine. But to say it "owns" its characteristic and to attach "being" to it smacks of a self to me. To say something is an "ultimate reality" instead of simply saying it's a real momentary phenomenon, which is more clinical, seems like it is extolling the dhamma and putting it on an ontological pedestal. It is triumphant sounding language, and so again it sounds like it is building up the wonderfulness of this phenomenon, instead of merely noting its characteristics in a detached tone. So I would call "own-being" merely "having a certain way of behaving and certain properties" or something like that, rather than giving it an honorific noun that sounds like it is extremely special; and I would call "paramatha dhammas" merely existent phenomena or arising phenomena or something like that, that doesn't smack of an honorific being given to it, as if the dhamma is a resplendent ultimate wonder that has some special kind of beingness to it. It seems very much to me that these terms give the dhamma a kind of celebrity that breeds a special attachment rather than detachment, and they do not feel or sound right to me at all. I mean if you weren't used to the terms and heard about something that was an ultimate reality that had own-being would you not think it was some kind of magical wonder with special deep attributes? That is how it sounds to me. > I am more interested in the accuracy of what is being described, regardless of the terms used. Well, I can understand that if the terms are just technical and you can give me a nice clear definition of what they mean. But what concerns me are the implications of the language, because if there are implications it actually affects the accuracy of what is being implied, which may be as important as what is described, unless the meaning of the terms is clearly circumscribed. So I think a great place to start would be to hear your definition of "own-being" and "paramatha dhamma" in technical terms, so we can discuss both the accuracy and the aura that may or may not surround those terms. I would really appreciate that, since I am somewhat unclear what all the implications really are. > I'd be interested to know what concerns you have in this regard. For example, is there anything intrinsically improbable about dhammas having so-called "own being" (as properly understood, and without expressing concern about the choice of terminology). > > And as regards terminology, to which you and some others attach much importance, what terminology would you prefer to see used? I have discussed some of that above, and would be happy to underline or amend my preferred choices of terms depending on how the clarification of the definitions comes out. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - #129585 From: "annieaqua" Date: Wed Mar 27, 2013 10:00 pm Subject: Re: Discussion with Annie & Pt annieaqua Dear Sarah, Jon, pt and group Apologies for my late reply. A had a wonderful afternoon and thank you Sarah and Jon for hosting and delicious banana bread. I found the discussion very beneficial especially as I was feeling at the time very caught up in finalising the packing up and ending of a chapter in my life there in Sydney and starting on my se Asia travels. As you said Sarah, I am very new to the teachings and also very open to learning and being introduced to it all. Sarah, Jon and pt made me feel very safe to ask questions and I am grateful for the discussing in basic terms of the teachings. As I am on my travels now, I must say the ideas discussed regarding realities and seeing visible object, not self, attachment as cause of grief and the seeking pleasant feelings has all been very beneficial. I have reminded myself of these teachings in certain situations especially when feeling challenged and on reflection while sitting on one of the endless bus trips so far. I also have been reading Ninas book The Buddhas Path which is a great introduction into the teachings and I am finding this text of great benefit. Sarah also suggested I download some audio recordings and I have been able to listen to listen to some of them on bus rides. I did have some questions and thoughts about what i have been reading. What is meant by detachment to physical things? for example i feel great attachment to my mothers wedding ring that I was given. Does that mean for example, I must give it away or not care if I loose? What does it mean to have no attachment to self? I am on a journey of self discovery and self growth and is this not what life is about? I want to better myself and be the best person i can be. how does one go on in life and better ones self if there is no concept of self? What does life look like and what does it mean? How does one earn money and forge a career? How can I be selfless without self care first? I am also very much looking forward to the June meeting in Thailand. A highlight for my trip. Thank you again introducing me to these teachings. Annie --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi pt > > I too very much enjoyed our discussion last week. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > > > Hi Sarah and Nina, > > > > Thanks for your replies. I'd like to make sense of samatha only, so perhaps we could examine how samatha development would happen outside of sasana when there's no teachings about insight, realities, nor kusala samatha bhavana objects such as attributes of the Buddha, etc. To narrow it down further, I'd like to examine moments of samatha bhavana only, so not sila, nor dana. > > > > 1. Since, we're outside a sasana, the only objects for samatha bhavana remaining are breath, kasinas, none of which are inherently kusala. So, samatha bhavana must rely on understanding of samatha kind rather than the object of citta? > > =============== > > J: Just chipping in with a preliminary comment. > > As regards possible objects, these are more than just breath and the kasinas, and they include [recollections of] dana and sila. See the extract from Vism Ch. III below. (BTW, the objects not known outside the sasana include also foulness of the body, apparently.) > > Hope this helps make things clearer. <....> #129586 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:40 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. jonoabb Hi Rob E --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > J: I of course agree that dhammas are conditioned. However, to say that dhammas *arise out of conditions* (and hence could not possibly be discrete entities) seems to go beyond the idea of dhammas as being conditioned. To me, that means simply that they arise by virtue of conditions and not from any other cause. > > RE: I think we would agree that they arise *due to* conditions. Without those conditions they would not arise. That seems to me to be a contradiction to the idea that they arise "out of nothing" or from nothing or nowhere. Conditions do not suddenly arise either, they are continuous. Forms that appear are part of the flow of conditions, not separate from them. A dhamma is not separate from that which causes its arising, it does not come from nowhere, and it doesn't disappear into nothing, it becomes part of the next set of conditions for further dhammas to arise, is that not so? > =============== J: Dhammas are both; a/. conditioned, in the sense that they arise due to conditions, and b/. of momentary existence, in the sense that it can be said of a given dhamma that first it was not, then it was, and then it was not (again). These are not contradictory notions/aspects. > =============== > RE: In any case sound arises due to conditions as much as anything else. Whether it appears to come out of nowhere or not, it actually doesn't. Conditions are continuous, and at certain points those conditions come together to cause sound to arise. It's part of an ongoing series of co-arising conditions. > =============== J: When I said in an earlier post that sound appears to come out of nowhere, I was paraphrasing the aspect of momentary existence described at (b) above. It was not meant to be a denial of the conditioned aspect of dhammas. > =============== > RE: Can conditionality be experienced in the present moment? > =============== J: Developed panna can understand the conditioned nature of dhammas. > =============== > RE: Well, as you say, it's not really nothing, it's "no discernible audible object" at the moment when an audible experience is not arising, but there is some other experience at that time - so to me that does not define "nothing" to me. That is quite different than "not-sound." To me saying it comes out of nothing is romanticizing the dhamma, which is merely conditioned. To say it falls away completely is different than saying it arises from nothing. > =============== J: As before, there is nothing contradictory in talking about dhammas as conditioned in their arising and dhammas as having mere momentary existence (i.e., not there, there, not there). Jon #129587 From: "philip" Date: Thu Mar 28, 2013 1:00 am Subject: Re: "Is that enough to develop understanding?" philofillet Hi Sarah > S: Yes, it is enough when understanding arises now. Just that which is seen, just the reality which sees it! That's all. Actually, very simple and yet, so subtle, because Self always gets in the way, wanting to 'do' something, wanting to ask a 'how?' or 'what?' or look for a short-cut which always turns out to be such a long-cut! > > Just visible object now appearing. Just seeing now which sees it. That's all! > It is enough, if left alone, but so many accumulated kilesa that condition the demanding of more from understanding,the needing of more. As Nina pointed out, I mention the possibility/probability that we seek comfort from Dhamma. I am in that situation at the moment. Went to see the film Amour, about the elderly couple going through the "indignities" of old age, illness and death together. It was too soon after seeing my mother's last hardships, and too close to my recurring worries about what is to come for Naomi and I. Only Nama and rupa, Ven Dhammadaro talks about how people can say this with confidence, saddha. If there is saddha, understanding must be kusala, therefore with alobha. Like all kusala, saddha is occasional, arising due to conditions. I am grateful to have friends who speak of the true Dhamma. No feelgood falseties of the kind propagated by Mahayana (in Japan at least.) Only Nama and rupa, with a capital N because this damn phone won't allow me to write it otherwise. Phil #129588 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Mar 28, 2013 1:02 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. jonoabb Hi Rob E (and Azita) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon and Azita. > ... > RE: Well, what I had in mind is that we don't know dhammas at all except by way of citta, so maybe what I should have said is that a dhamma is the "object of a moment of experiencing by citta" or something like that. What I was driving at in a somewhat clumsy way was that dhammas arise with the momentary experience of cittas. Rupas are said to arise independently of citta, but we don't know anything about those rupas. They are not pertinent to the progress of ignorant or wise cittas. > > I like the idea of connecting the definition of dhammas to the experience of citta for that reason - those experiences of dhammas either deluded or wise are the ones that are part of the path. But in and of themselves I guess I would define them as either namas which are momentarily arising mental factors, or rupas, which are momentarily arising physical factors and don't experience anything. I hope as a basic, crude definition of dhammas that is at least partly satisfactory. Dhammas in general can be defined as "phenomena" whose arising is both momentary and actual. > =============== J: Regarding, "Dhammas can be defined as "phenomena" whose arising is both momentary and actual", I think this is a pretty good attempt at a very difficult subject. However, your definition begs the question of what a "phenomenon" is :-)) In other words, what makes a dhamma/phenomenon a dhamma/phenomenon (and not a concept)? To my understanding, the answer is tied up with the fact that dhammas are said to be both (a) irreducible and (b) knowable for what they are. This is expressed in the texts by saying that a dhamma has an inherent characteristic (sabhava), and that this characteristic is observable to panna. > =============== > RE: The reason this came up is that Azita asked me for my definition of dhammas on the way to talking about own-being and other attributes of dhammas. I hope those other areas will also be discussed. > =============== J: Yes, I hope so too. But there is obviously a need to know how basic terms such as "dhammas" are understood by the other person, and I think that's why Azita asked the question. Jon #129589 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 28, 2013 3:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question on Parami nilovg Dear Linh, Op 27-mrt-2013, om 9:30 heeft Linh Hong het volgende geschreven: > Why we don't have some other paramis such as sati parami, saddha > parami,...etc...I mean we have all 19 sobha cetasikas. When sobha > one arises, then akusala cannot arise, and with panna eqquiped, it > can be parami? ----- N: As Sarah explained to you, we need all paramis, we have so many defilements. These makes one too weak to reach the other shore. The paramis are like medicine and food for us on the long, long way. They go together with pa~n~naa, our goal is not to "have" them for ourselves, but to lessen defilements. You asked about saddhaa, etc. Acharn explained that we do not have to think of the names of the paramis, but the meaning is: the development of all kinds of kusala through body, speech and mind. And as Sarah explained, all paramis support each other and are together. All good qualities are being developed, saddhaa, confidence, included. This cetasika arises with each kind of kusala. The ten paramis are mentioned to help us and encourage us while developing satipa.t.thaana. Otherwise we may forget certain aspects of kusala, like patience, khanti. Or equanimity, upekkhaa. Or viriya, effort, energy or courage. I quote from Acharn Sujin's book (from the chapter on the Perfection of wisdom): ' The thought of death and impermanence can be a condition for further developing the perfections. The Commentary to the “Conduct of Yudañjaya” explains about the beginning of paññå in that life of the Bodhisatta. We read: “By offering mahå-dåna before he retired from the world and by his giving up of the kingdom he fulfilled the perfection of giving. By his restraint in action and speech he fulfilled the perfection of síla. By his going forth from worldly life and by his attainment of jhåna he fulfilled the perfection of renunciation. In that life paññå began to develop by wise consideration of impermanence and in that way he finally attained the higher powers (abhiññås), and the paññå which could distinguish the dhammas that were beneficial from those that were not beneficial for the development of generosity and other ways of kusala, and this was the perfection of paññå. By energy for the accomplishment of what was beneficial in all his undertakings he fulfilled the perfection of energy. By patience associated with paññå (ñåùa khanti) and by endurance (adhivasana khanti) he fulfilled the perfection of patience. By not speaking wrongly, deviating from what he had promised, he fulfilled the perfection of truthfulness. By his unshakable determination in all that he undertook and observed, he fulfilled the perfection of determination. By the power of the divine abiding of loving-kindness, thinking only of the benefit of all beings, he fulfilled the perfection of loving kindness. By his evenmindedness towards beings’ contrarious behaviour, and by the divine abiding of equanimity, he fulfilled the perfection of equanimity. These are the ways by which he fulfilled the ten perfections.” The perfection of paññå is essential for the development of the other perfections in the right way. We should remember that the goal of the development of the perfections is paññå which penetrates the four noble Truths. Since its development to that degree takes an endlessly long time, paññå, in its turn, is also dependent on the other perfections. We can notice in this life that someone who has developed the perfections will be inclined to listen to the Dhamma, whereas some-one who has not developed the perfections does not see the benefit of the development of paññå and does not want to listen to the Dhamma. Even though there is still opportunity to listen to the true Dhamma, he is not interested in lis- tening...... We need all ten perfections, because we have such an amount of defilements. It is not sufficient to only develop the perfection of paññå. If we do not understand what the perfections are and in what way we should develop them in our daily life, we cannot realize the four noble Truths, but we have merely vain expectations of achieving this. We do not know ourselves and we do not understand that we need the perfections which are a supporting condition for the development of kusala and for the elimination of akusala dhammas. When we have understood that satipaììhåna should be developed together with the perfections, there are conditions for the perfection of generosity, the giving away of things for the benefit of someone else, for the perfection of síla, the abstention from akusala kamma and the perfection of renunciation: detachment from visible object, sound and the other sense objects. This is a very gradual process, but at times someone may notice that he is inclined to become more de- tached from sense objects, that he has had already enough of them, and that he should not indulge in them too much.' ---------- Nina. #129590 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:09 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > =============== > > RE: Well, as you say, it's not really nothing, it's "no discernible audible object" at the moment when an audible experience is not arising, but there is some other experience at that time - so to me that does not define "nothing" to me. That is quite different than "not-sound." To me saying it comes out of nothing is romanticizing the dhamma, which is merely conditioned. To say it falls away completely is different than saying it arises from nothing. > > =============== > > J: As before, there is nothing contradictory in talking about dhammas as conditioned in their arising and dhammas as having mere momentary existence (i.e., not there, there, not there). Well, just to torture the point a little bit, to say that a sound arises out of nothing because it starts out nonexistent, then exists, then falls away, I think is still leaving out critical information about its nature. The conditions that give rise to sound are already in formation before the sound arises. So sound arises out of those conditions, not out of nothing. There is something else happening that "becomes" a sound at a certain point, and sound arises out of whatever that is, not out of nothing or out of nowhere. If I am a child and then I grow up [to use an analogy not a direct corollary] it is not correct to say the child has fallen away completely and out of nowhere has come a freshly minted adult. The child has turned into an adult and the conditions for an adult being formed are present in the child and all the surrounding conditions that cause him to grow into an adult. A dhamma also arises as part of a process. It only is seen to fall arise out of nothing if one is only looking at a particular snapshot in the process and not at the whole progression of conditions that led to it arising and in fact were it in neophyte form. I always thought that the whole idea of conditionality was to see the connection of an arising dhamma to the conditions that give rise to it, not to see it as somehow a disconnected entity that pops up apart from the conditions that cause it to arise. In other words, the exact opposite of it just popping up out of nowhere. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #129591 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:25 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > J: Regarding, "Dhammas can be defined as "phenomena" whose arising is both momentary and actual", I think this is a pretty good attempt at a very difficult subject. > > However, your definition begs the question of what a "phenomenon" is :-)) > > In other words, what makes a dhamma/phenomenon a dhamma/phenomenon (and not a concept)? > > To my understanding, the answer is tied up with the fact that dhammas are said to be both (a) irreducible My read on this is that it is a dhamma entails the exact process or activity that takes place at a particular moment of reality, therefore is irreducible. There is some dispute about whether that action cannot be broken down into further micro-actions [even Abhidhamma describes the three phases of a dhamma's existence and it is quite possible that those three phases also have further details of change that could be specified further - perhaps ad infinitum due to the thorough-going nature of anicca which never reduces to a static existent object but only a dynamic changing one] but I will put that aside for now, since at the very least the activity that makes up a dhamma is actual. > and (b) knowable for what they are. This is expressed in the texts by saying that a dhamma has an inherent characteristic (sabhava), Could you review the way in which the inherent characteristic of each dhamma is defined? Do you mean that a visible object has the characteristic of being visible? Or is it something else. And how do the three inherent characteristics of dukkha, anicca and anatta come into play in this arena? > and that this characteristic is observable to panna. I would guess that panna is able to observe the specific defining characteristic of a dhamma as well as the three marks, depending on the level of panna...? In what way do you look at the inherent nature of the dhamma's characteristic? From the description above it seems to simply denote that "visible object is different from audible object etc. and that this difference is distinct and can be observed," to paraphrase you from earlier. If that is all it is, there would be no objection to that in itself, and then I wonder what the heck "own-being" is about since it seems to turn this simplicity into a high-falutin' concept which I am still waiting for someone to explain. I also don't exactly understand the need to invoke "inherency" if all that is being said is that the dhamma "is a visible object," or "is a tactile object" or whatever. Those seems to be merely descriptive rather than "inherent." "Inherent" is something about its nature that can't be changed, but it is sort of redundant of something that merely "is what it is" and could therefore neither be changed or not-changed. In other words, it just happens to be that - no big mystery about it. The fact that an object is either definitely visible or audible, etc., is important in that it is definite and identifiable, but beyond that it doesn't really have any meaning. It just allows panna to know what's happening at the moment, to put it loosely, rather than remaining confused. > > =============== > > RE: The reason this came up is that Azita asked me for my definition of dhammas on the way to talking about own-being and other attributes of dhammas. I hope those other areas will also be discussed. > > =============== > > J: Yes, I hope so too. But there is obviously a need to know how basic terms such as "dhammas" are understood by the other person, and I think that's why Azita asked the question. Fair enough - I agree, and it was also a little illuminating to see how difficult it might be to really say what a dhamma is. That is pretty interesting. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #129592 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:30 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Howard, and Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ======================================= > Just an 0bservation: Distinguishability of objects of consciousness that are alleged to be separate realities does not imply their being actual realities or separate entities. Yes, paramattha dhammas are distinguishable, but so are Ford cars from Mercedes, pine trees from rose bushes, you from me, and the Dhammastudy group from the U.S. Congress from the U.S. Supreme Court. I was wondering why the U.S. Supreme Court never answered my questions about the inherent nature of dhammas. Howard, if there is a visible object followed by a sound object are you saying that we don't know whether they are in fact facets of the same object, experienced at separate moments, or whether they are indeed separate realities? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #129593 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:52 am Subject: Sabhava dhamma = little momentary atta? truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, You made a very very good point. In order to avoid reifying a person as an indivisible phenomenon, the Abhidhammikas postulated absolute reality to be be discreet and momentary indivisible dhammas that are different from each other. So rather than person, atta, is a single thing with own nature (sabhava), the whole issue was simply moved toward more miniscule timescale - but not removed all together. With best wishes, Alex >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >RE: Well, just to torture the point a little bit, to say that a sound arises out of nothing because it starts out nonexistent, then exists, then falls away, I think is still leaving out critical information about its nature. The conditions that give rise to sound are already in formation before the sound arises. So sound arises out of those conditions, not out of nothing. There is something else happening that "becomes" a sound at a certain point, and sound arises out of whatever that is, not out of nothing or out of nowhere. If I am a child and then I grow up [to use an analogy not a direct corollary] it is not correct to say the child has fallen away completely and out of nowhere has come a freshly minted adult. The child has turned into an adult and the conditions for an adult being formed are present in the child and all the surrounding conditions that cause him to grow into an adult. A dhamma also arises as part of a process. It only is seen to fall arise out of nothing if one is only looking at a particular snapshot in the process and not at the whole progression of conditions that led to it arising and in fact were it in neophyte form. I always thought that the whole idea of conditionality was to see the connection of an arising dhamma to the conditions that give rise to it, not to see it as somehow a disconnected entity that pops up apart from the conditions that cause it to arise. In other words, the exact opposite of it just popping up out of nowhere. #129594 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:06 am Subject: Re: Sabhava dhamma = little momentary atta? epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > > You made a very very good point. In order to avoid reifying a person as an indivisible phenomenon, the Abhidhammikas postulated absolute reality to be be discreet and momentary indivisible dhammas that are different from each other. So rather than person, atta, is a single thing with own nature (sabhava), the whole issue was simply moved toward more miniscule timescale - but not removed all together. > > With best wishes, > > Alex Well I'm not sure exactly what the deal is, but I am worried about what you are saying above. To see individual moments as indivisible and somehow independent with their own inherent nature and characteristic, apart from all that gives rise to them, and apart from the constant changes that they undergo in the three phases of existence, even according to Abhidhamma, leaves the dhamma as a kind of entity in my view, unless it is specified how this independently indivisible unit continues to change and participate in conditionality. You cannot say that the dhamma is frozen in its nature for its tiny moment, and then the next dhamma is likewise frozen in its nature with its own little characteristic, like two snapshots that arise just as they are, and then also say that anicca is in force and that conditionality is also fully in force. Conditionality is absolute. It does not go away for the tiny moment that each dhamma exists. It is not as though conditions let this little being pop out of nowhere fully formed and during that moment conditionality is temporarily suspended; then conditionality acts again like a magical formula and pops out another fully formed independent dhamma with its own characteristic, and then say that conditionality is understood and fully operational. Conditionality does not give rise to temporarily unconditioned dhammas. The dhammas themselves are part and parcel of conditionality and are just the results of conditions as well as the conditions for more dhammas to arise. The nature of the dhamma reflects the nature of the conditions that gave rise to it, the dhamma is part of that process. It really kind of astounds me that the commentators choose to say that "it is as if it appeared out of nowhere," or "arose out of nothing and returns to nothing." That indeed makes it sounds as if they have independent existence, rather than that they came fully conditioned out of the co-arising of necessary conditions for their formation. It does sound like we are talking about a kind of momentary being that comes out of nowhere, as if by magic, has its "own being," meaning its own independent characteristic which is fully formed and knowable as such, and then goes away without undergoing any change in its nature! In fact the three phases of arising, changing while standing and falling away show that the dhamma is not a static entity with a clear static characteristic but that it is a functional process that is always in flux and change. Rather than "own-being" one might say that it has "no-being" or "changing nature," because it is not standing still at all. I have no problem with a dhamma being a visible "object of seeing," or a nama being a particular function such as vittakha, but one shouldn't fall into the false idea that vittakha is a static function either. Whatever takes place is part of the process of change, arising, functioning, falling away. There is no instant anything. And it is that fully conditioned process that also demonstrates the absolute presence of anicca on every level. The dhamma arises as the expression of conditions - such as visible object meeting eye-sense through contact and then giving rise to the namas that understand and process the visual object, etc. - and it continues to express the changing nature of conditions as it itself changes, falls away and gives rise to the next conditioned reality, which is also in a state of constant flux [anicca.] Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #129595 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Mar 28, 2013 11:10 am Subject: Re: Sabhava dhamma = little momentary atta? truth_aerator Hi RobertE, all, >RE:Well I'm not sure exactly what the deal is, but I am worried >about what you are saying above. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The deal is that as I understand it, dhammas are final analysis. They are not reducable to even smaller dhammas. In this sense they are exactly the sort of indivisible atta that Abhidhammikas try to reject. The only thing is that these attas are instantaneous. >RE:To see individual moments as indivisible and somehow independent >with their own inherent nature and characteristic, apart from all >that gives rise to them, and apart from the constant changes that >they undergo in the three phases of existence, even according to >Abhidhamma, leaves the dhamma as a kind of entity in my view, unless >it is specified how this independently indivisible unit continues to >change and participate in conditionality. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are correct. It seems that entity has shifted from long lived human to sub-atomic and momentary entities called dhammas. >RE:In fact the three phases of arising, changing while standing and >falling away show that the dhamma is not a static entity with a >clear static characteristic but that it is a functional process that >is always in flux and change. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does that mean that what we call "dhamma" is composed of three even smaller sub-dhammas (dhamma arising, dhamma changing while standing, and dhamma falling)? Do those smaller sub-dhammas themselves have arising, changing, falling away sub-sub dhammas? And them sub-sub dhammas? Ad infinitum? With best wishes, Alex #129596 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Mar 28, 2013 6:30 pm Subject: Re: Discussion with Annie & Pt sarahprocter... Dear Annie, Great to hear from you and I'm so glad you found the discussion so useful. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "annieaqua" wrote: > As I am on my travels now, I must say the ideas discussed regarding realities and seeing visible object, not self, attachment as cause of grief and the seeking pleasant feelings has all been very beneficial. I have reminded myself of these teachings in certain situations especially when feeling challenged and on reflection while sitting on one of the endless bus trips so far. .... S: The teachings always come back to "now" and what seems so challenging or rewarding now will be soon be forgotten. It does help a lot to remember that the realities are the same, whatever the circumstances and that, in the end, the only really worthwhile thing in life is the development of understanding of the present truths. ... > > I also have been reading Ninas book The Buddhas Path which is a great introduction into the teachings and I am finding this text of great benefit. Sarah also suggested I download some audio recordings and I have been able to listen to listen to some of them on bus rides. .... S: Excellent! I think that "The Buddha's Path" is the best introduction to the Teachings, too. I think you read my mind as I had wanted to give you a copy of it, but didn't have a spare one, so am delighted that you've found it. (Nina, I do hope we get this book re-printed soon - I meet so many people I'd like to give copies of it too.) ... > > I did have some questions and thoughts about what i have been reading. > > What is meant by detachment to physical things? for example i feel great attachment to my mothers wedding ring that I was given. Does that mean for example, I must give it away or not care if I loose? ... S: That would be a wrong understanding. One might give away all one's possessions, such as the ring, but that would not be the giving up of attachment. We all have a lot of attachment to what is seen, heard, smelt, tasted and touched all day long. Gradually, through understanding, there is the growth of detachment to these sense objects, but not by trying to have less attachment or by thinking we should not have any. .... > > What does it mean to have no attachment to self? ... S: Again, all day long there is clinging to oneself in one way or another. Gradually, through the understanding that actually there is no self - just different experiences, such as the seeing of visible object and the hearing of sound, there will be less clinging to an idea of a "Me" that is so special and important. We can also learn that it is the clinging to "me" that causes so much distress and that at moments of understanding or caring for the needs of others, there is peace and equanimity instead of clinging and agitation. .... >I am on a journey of self discovery and self growth and is this not what life is about? ... S: And any true discovery will show that there is no core of self, there are just mental and physical phenomena arising and falling away all day long. In other words, the "self discovery and self growth" is a mirage. With more understanding, there will be less seeking and more acceptance with the realities of life which arise now. ... >I want to better myself and be the best person i can be. ... S: This is more "wanting", more clinging to "me" being a certain way, rather than the development of detachment and acceptance of what is! ... >how does one go on in life and better ones self if there is no concept of self? .... S: "One" doesn't do anything or go on or better oneself, because there is no "one" to do anything! Just develop understanding, rather than trying to "better" or "do" anything. This is the way that detachment rather than attachment develops. .... >What does life look like and what does it mean? ... S: Like now - seeing, hearing, likes, dislikes, ups and downs..... just different dhammas (realities), not self, arising and falling away by conditions. Very ordinary! ... > How does one earn money and forge a career? .... S: Just as usual. No obstacle at all. As usual, but with more understanding. .... > How can I be selfless without self care first? .... S: No "you" to be selfless or anything else. At moments of kindness, metta or understanding, there is no clinging to oneself and one's own needs. .... > I am also very much looking forward to the June meeting in Thailand. A highlight for my trip. ... S: We're greatly looking forward to having you and Lan with us too! And we'll have to have a "pink cap" photo together for our swimming friends in Manly! .. > Thank you again introducing me to these teachings. ... S: Thank you for sharing your interest and excellent comments and questions here. Look forward to hearing more when you have a chance. So glad to hear you've been listening to some of the audio too. Do you know which series it is? Metta Sarah p.s. Grey and heavy rain back in Hong Kong and missing all our friends, but still just realities such as seeing, visible object, attachment, aversion and so on.... life goes on.... ====== #129597 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:50 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. jonoabb Hi Howard (and Rob E) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Jon (and Robert) - > ... > > J: To my understanding, dhammas are distinguishable one from another (e.g., visible object from audible object or from seeing consciousness), and they are so distinguishable because each has a distinct characteristic that can be directly discerned by panna (of the level of satipatthana). > > ======================================= > HCW: Just an 0bservation: Distinguishability of objects of consciousness that are alleged to be separate realities does not imply their being actual realities or separate entities. Yes, paramattha dhammas are distinguishable, but so are Ford cars from Mercedes, pine trees from rose bushes, you from me, and the Dhammastudy group from the U.S. Congress from the U.S. Supreme Court. > =============== J: Thanks for this observation. Agreed that knowing A from B does not imply that either A or B is a dhamma. As I said in my earlier message, dhammas are distinguishable by virtue of each dhamma having a characteristic that can be directly discerned (by panna of the level of satipatthana). This is not the case with ideas that are mind-created (i.e., concepts). Jon #129598 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:58 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. jonoabb Hi Azita (and Rob E) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "azita" wrote: > > hallo Rob and Jon, > > I see Jon has asked an important question here Rob and given important information re dhammas. > > I agree with what Jon has written about nama and rupa and would like to add that if there were no nama dhaammas and rupa dhammas then there would be no 'us' > > Cittas have realities as objects e.g. other namas or rupas, or citta can have concept as object, e.g. earth kasina which can be object of jhana citta. > =============== J: Good observations. Hope you don't feel I've hijacked your thread with Rob E; I certainly didn't mean to! But I thought you sensed a difference of view on a fundamental point that needed to be brought up, to avoid the discussion being at cross-purposes. Looking forward to your resumption of the discussion with Rob E soon. Jon #129599 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:00 pm Subject: Re: Discussion with Annie & Pt jonoabb Hi Annie --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "annieaqua" wrote: > > Dear Sarah, Jon, pt and group > ... > A: I did have some questions and thoughts about what i have been reading. > > What is meant by detachment to physical things? for example i feel great attachment to my mothers wedding ring that I was given. Does that mean for example, I must give it away or not care if I loose? > =============== J: The aim of the teaching is the development of awareness and understanding of things that have validity/reality in the ultimate sense (Pali: `dhammas'). This is the path to the gradual eradication of attachment and other unwholesome mental states. However, that goal is a very long-term one. In the meantime, we are all stuck with our accumulated unwholesome tendencies (including, of course, attachment). As you will have observed from your own experience in life, some attachments seem to fall away as our way of thinking changes (e.g., as we pass through different stages of life), while others seem to persist throughout (e.g., certain tastes, pleasant bodily feelings). In either case, though, the underlying accumulated tendency (i.e., to like a given object) remains. There's no way that attachment can be just given up, even if we are convinced we have managed to do so! > =============== > A: What does it mean to have no attachment to self? I am on a journey of self discovery and self growth and is this not what life is about? I want to better myself and be the best person i can be. how does one go on in life and better ones self if there is no concept of self? What does life look like and what does it mean? How does one earn money and forge a career? How can I be selfless without self care first? > =============== J: We all have the accumulated tendency to think in terms of "I", "me" and "mine". As you obviously realise, it would be unrealistic to think that unwholesome attachments and views should be put away first before there can be the development of the wholesome tendencies and views (which have also been accumulated, but to a relatively lesser degree). But there can be a beginning of development at any time, once we have heard/read the right information and our interest has been aroused. The starting point is finding out more about what these "dhammas" are and what is meant by awareness and understanding of them. > =============== > A: I am also very much looking forward to the June meeting in Thailand. A highlight for my trip. > > Thank you again introducing me to these teachings. > =============== J: It's great to see your interest. Jon