17000 From: James Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 9:13am Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Jon, I feel that these are excellent observations, reflective of deep insight. Therefore, humbly, I have a line of questioning(s) for you (or others on-list) if you may consider it/them: What do you relect about the usefulness of koans in disrupting discursive thought to reach pure awareness? Is there a significant difference between discursive thought and pure awareness? If so, what is that difference? Do you believe it is possible to disrupt discursive thought, or simply to minimize it? Is either necessary for pure awareness? Could the Abhidhamma be viewed as a method of turning discursive thought into a vehicle for pure awareness (like an 'Intellectual Koan') or is it pure awareness itself? Thank you for considering my questions. Metta, James ps. For ESL members: dis·cur·sive ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d- skûrsv)adj. Covering a wide field of subjects; rambling. Proceeding to a conclusion through reason rather than intuition. 17001 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 0:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 25, Comm. Hi Christine, Thanks for this link concerning the hindrances and their abandonment. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel026.html I think it deserves careful study. Maybe I'll post some excerpts. It occured to me that insight as a remedy for the hindrances belongs in the dhammanupassana section where they are taken as object. In this section, Way 25, they are treated in a more conventional way that is applied to any practice of satipatthana or jhana. What are your thoughts on this section and satipatthana up to this point? I notice you never have any questions or comments. Not interested? Larry 17002 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 0:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 25, Comm. Hi Larry, :) I just knew you were going to ask about my interest at some point. Sorry for the silence, but please don't interpret it as lack of interest or support. I am vitally interested, but way behind. I am just having one of those periods from Hell at work, barely treading water, so can reply to posts that only require a little rambling thought but I don't currently have the energy/ability to apply reason, study, or reflect intelligently on scripture. Also trying to read and understand some of K. Sujin's 'Survey' (in the Files Section) before leaving for Hong Kong and Bangkok next Sunday. I read all the posts you put up Larry, and I'm taking 'Way of Mindfulness' with me - with some of the additional posts printed off as well. I've ruled a line after each of your Way posts and listed the additional posts made on that section, so I can quickly revise and catch up. Having three weeks off work should give me the delightful and refreshing opportunity to immerse myself in the Dhamma. :) Then you'll probaby groan when you see my name appear on the Posts List. :) I hope you know how grateful I am that you undertook the onerous job of conscientiouly posting the excerpts - I know you also will have times when work or private worlds can feel overwhelming - but you still do not fail us. Your interest and enthusiam is infectious, and I look forward to being more active in The Way corner in a week or so. with admiration, gratitude and metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Christine, > > Thanks for this link concerning the hindrances and their abandonment. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel026.html > > I think it deserves careful study. Maybe I'll post some excerpts. It > occured to me that insight as a remedy for the hindrances belongs in the > dhammanupassana section where they are taken as object. In this section, > Way 25, they are treated in a more conventional way that is applied to > any practice of satipatthana or jhana. > > What are your thoughts on this section and satipatthana up to this > point? I notice you never have any questions or comments. Not > interested? > > Larry 17003 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 4:33pm Subject: Way 26, Comm. "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html Commentary continued on, "a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending, and mindful, having overcome in this world covetousness and grief." By the instruction dealing with the overcoming of covetousness and grief, yogic power and yogic skill are shown. [Tika] Yogic power is the power of meditation. Yogic skill is dexterity in yoking oneself in meditation. Freedom from satisfaction and discontent in regard to bodily happiness and misery, the forbearing from delighting in the body, the bearing-up of non-delight in the course of body-contemplation, the state of being not captivated by the unreal, and the state of not running away from the real -- these, when practiced produce yogic power; and the ability to practice these is yogic skill. There is another method of interpretation of the passage: (A bhikkhu) lives contemplating the body in the body, ardent, and so forth. "Contemplating" refers to the subject of meditation. "Lives": lives protecting the subject of meditation which here is the body. In the passage beginning with "ardent", Right Exertion [sammappadhana] is stated by energy [atapa]; the subject of meditation proper in all circumstances [sabbatthika kammatthana] or the means of protecting the subject of meditation [kammatthana pariharana upaya], is stated by mindfulness and clear comprehension [sati sampajañña]; or the quietude that is obtained [patiladdha samatha] by way of the contemplation on the body [kayanupassana] is stated by mindfulness; insight [vipassana] by clear comprehension; and the fruit of inner culture [bhavana phala] through the overcoming of covetousness and grief [abhijjha domanassa vinaya]. [T] The subject of meditation useful in all circumstances is stated by referring to (the laying hold on) mindfulness and clear comprehension, because through the force of these two qualities there is the protection of the subject of meditation and suitability of attention for its unbroken practice. [T] Further, of these two qualities, mindfulness and clear comprehension, the following is stated in the commentary to the Atthasalini, Mula Tika, "To all who have yoked themselves to the practice of any subject of meditation, to all yogis, these two are things helpful, at all times, for the removal of obstruction and the increase of inner culture." 17004 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 4:40pm Subject: commentary break Dear group, At this point we will take approximately a one month break in posting further excerpts from the Satipatthana Sutta Commentary. However we could continue to discuss, particularly on the points we have touched on so far and any additional material anyone would like to bring in would be most welcome. Larry 17005 From: robmoult Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 5:46pm Subject: Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi All, According to the Visuddhi Magga (XIV 128), the proximate cause of unpleasant mental feeling (domanassa) is "heart basis". I am using the BPS version of Visuddhi Magga. Can somebody check another version to see if this should be "heart base" (hadaya vatthu). This section of the Visuddhi Magga mentions the characterisitic / function / manifestation / proximate cause for all five types of feeling. Everything makes sense to me except for the proximate cause of domanassa. I cannot see how heart base could be the proximate cause. Any ideas? Thanks, Rob M :-) 17006 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 7:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Rob, "Heart basis" is how Bh Nyanamoli translates "hadaya-vatthu", see index under "heart". I don't understand either joy or grief. How can tranquility be the proximate cause of joy (somanasa)? What is the heart basis? Larry 17007 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 8:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi again Rob, Heart base is proximate cause of unpleasant mental feeling in the same sense as body faculty is proximate cause of pleasure or pain. Here 'proximate cause' apparently means 'base'. B. Bodhi suggests another way of looking at proximate cause would have 'contact' as p.c. Following that logic I would say heart base would be the 'base' proximate cause of pleasant mental feeling also. Apparently the commentaries say tranquility (passaddhi) is proximate cause only of meditative pleasant mental feeling. Larry 17008 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 9:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Rob M & Larry, This is an interesting discussion you’re having and you're raising difficult qus. I think as Larry says, heart base is proximate cause because it is base oo support for mind-door consciousness and mental states in the way that eye-base is the support for seeing and body faculty for (bodily) pleasure and pain. I believe one or two other kinds of consciousness, such as santirana (investigating) consciousness have heart base as proximate cause too. I’ve never questioned why tranquillity (pasaddhi)is the proximate cause of pleasant mental feeling before and any comments are speculative on my part only.(Larry, yr comments just given are v.interesting. Can you give me a reference to where the commentaries discuss tranquility as prox cause for ‘meditative pleasant mental feeling’ only, which makes sense. I take ‘meditative’ to refer to sobhana which raises the qu of unwholesome pleasant mental feelings....) From the Atthasalini, kaya passaddhi and citta passaddhi(the 2 kinds of calm - of cittas and cetaskikas) “taken together have the characteristic of pacifying the suffering of both mental factors and of consciousness; the function of crushing the suffering of both; and have mental factors and consciousness as proximate cause. They are the opponents of the corruptions, such as distraction (uddhacca), which cause the disturbance of mental factors and of consciousness.”(1,iV,ch1-130). From the Sammohavinodani, they are also defined as the “tranquillisation of distress” in the aggregates and consciousness. In other words, they are the opposite of uddhacca (restlessness) which accompanies all unwholesome states including lobha (attachment, so perhaps this ‘tranquillisation of distress’ or ‘pacifying the suffering’aspect is the reason it is prox cause??? Just thinking out loud. As we know, there are always many conditions at work, not just prox cause. In case you haven’t seen it, there is an interesting note in the BPS Visuddhimagga (X1V, n26)on the ‘heart-basis’. It gives an indication of how carefully we have to read the texts (esp. abhidhamma and commentaries) before jumping to any conclusions about ‘inconsistency’. Anyway, the first part is this: “The heart-basis....the support for the mind-element anf for the mind-consciousness-element”:how is that to be known? 1)From scriptures and 2)from logical reasoning. ‘the scripture is this: “The materiality dependent on which the mind-element and mind-consciousness-element occur is a condition, as a support condition, for the mind-element and the mind-consciousness-element and what is associated therewith (Ptn 1,4)” ***** There has also been quite a lot of discussion on hadaya-vatthu (heart-base) before on DSG. Those who are interested/sceptical, may find it helpful to read the posts under heart or hadaya in “useful posts”. Rob K wrote several detailed ones. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ Thanks again Rob M and Larry. Keep discussing and I’ll also try to raise any points left unresolved on proximate causes when we are in Bkk. Sarah ====== 17009 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 10:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Sarah, I got the bit about tranquility being only the proximate cause of pleasant meditative feeling from B. Bodhi's note 1 in ch. 3 of CMA. There are so many different kinds of pleasant mental feeling I couldn't sort it out. One difficulty with saying heart base is proximate cause of all pleasant mental feeling is that there are no physical bases in the immaterial plane. Is there pleasant mental feeling there? Also I didn't understand the proximate cause of equanimity (neutral feeling): "Its proximate cause is consciousness without happiness."[piti] Does that have a physical base or not with respect to immaterial or other planes/spheres (eg. supramundane consciousness)? There is a footnote on this in Vism that I didn't understand at all. Larry 17010 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 10:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Getting into Abhidhamma Hi Wendy, --- Uan Chih Liu wrote: > Hi all, > When I join this group, frankly I was really lost. And finally Robert > was kind enough to point me to Nina's "Abhidhamma in Daily Life". > I was wondering, if it's possible and feasible, to add a link or a file, > named "Beginner's Guide", where a list of links are given and > possibly ordered by degree of difficulties for the study of > Abhidhamma? .... You raise some sensible and practical suggestions here. Like you are finding, ADL has also been invaluable for me....when I first read the first couple of pages ( a long time ago) they had a great impact. Not everyone responds in the same way, however (ask James.....well, maybe don’t ask;-)). Seriously, there is a section in the U.P. for “New to the list and New to Dhamma” and one for “Pali links” (or sth similar). I think a section for Abhidhamma - Beginner’s Guide would be very helpful, if anyone, like CHRISTINE, would like to write a post as you suggest above with links and some kind of ‘order of difficulty’ as she did for the Pali one. Of course, any list or suggestions are always ‘personal’, and as we see here, the interests and ways of study are very different. Perhaps you can also write a post with your suggestions when you feel able/willing to do this. In the bookmarks section, there are links to several websites containing a lot of helpful material too, but I know this can be somewht overwhelming without guidance. For me, I’ve never separated abhidhamma from other parts of the tipitaka and never considered any of the sections separately or ever formally studied abhidhamma. I consider the realities appearing now in daily life to be abhidhamma and without the understanding of elements, of phenomena and of anatta (at least intellectually), I’m not sure how the suttas can be comprehended. I think you’ll also find anything on Rob K’s websites to be useful for your study. (There’s a helpful essay by a Burmese monk on abhidhamma and vipassana as well there which relates to my last point - ). http://www.abhidhamma.org/ http://www.vipassana.info/ Thanks for this prompt, Wendy and keep up your great qus and considerations. Asking the ‘right’ questions as you’re doing, can help a lot when we are lost;-) Sarah ===== 17011 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 11:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pali: sati sampajanna Dear Nina & Larry, Thank you both for your excellent contributions and dialogue on the Way to-date. Nina, we’d all be quite lost without your assistance and a special thanks for the time, patience and inspiration you have been providing for us all on DSG for the last many months on all the other topics as well. I hope you and Lodevick have a good flight and we look f/w to seeing you soon. A few brief comments: 1. Nina, I found your translation notes on the sampajano, satimaa section helpful and interesting. I didn’t see the detail about the 4 meditation subjects (metta etc) in Soma Thera’s transl. Perhaps eventually there will be a complete transl of sutta, comm and sub-com. Pls don’t be concerned about grammar mistakes - as Jim always says, any traslation is a ‘work-in-progress’ and we shouldn’t wait for perfect posts or translations. 2. The reference to ‘bare mindfulness’, I take to be referring to sati (bare=just sati), so the commentator speaks of ‘energy and so forth’, i.e the other factors which are essential for satipatthana to arise as discussed before: “....Are there not many other factors of the way, namely, understanding, thinking, speech, action, livelihood, effort, and concentration, besides mindfulness? To be sure there are. But all these are implied when the Arousing of Mindfulness is mentioned, because these factors exist in union with mindfulness”. This is how I read it. I’ll be interested to hear more when you’ve looked at the Pali after your trip. ***** Nina, I also appreciated your quote from A.Sujin on patience. “There can be patience even with regard to uttering useless speech. Before we are going to speak we should consider whether what we want to say is beneficial or not. If it is not beneficial there should be patience and we should refrain from that speech, because it is not helpful for anybody. Sati-sampajañña performs its function in such matters and we should investigate whether it has further developed.>” We can see the test of what we read in the Satipatthana sutta is in daily life, ‘in all circumstances’, including all kinds of communication;-) In appreciation, Sarah ===== 17012 From: robmoult Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 0:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi All, My interpretation of the Vis. saying that the proximate cause of equanimity being "consciousness without hapiness" relates to the fourth jhana (which has hapiness) gives away to the fifth jhana (which has equanimity). My interpretation of the Vis. saying that the proximate cause of joy being tranquility also relates to jhanas; to reach the first jhana, one must develop tranquility. So the proximate cause of equanimity and joy relate to jhanas. This leaves pain, pleasure and unpleasant mental feeling. After thinking about it, I suspect that if Vis. could not relate the state to jhana, it defaulted to a base; ergo: - Pleasure: body base - Pain: body base - Unpleasant mental feeling: heart base Does this make sense? Thanks, Rob M :-) 17013 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 0:58am Subject: Scrambled Egg-less 1 Hi James, I have a few comments I’d like to make on a few of your points from different posts, so this is going to be somewhat ‘scrambled’. 1. internet rules & standards ==================== It’s a rather sensitive subject and so I don’t want to discuss details but I’d just like to say that the argument that the ‘internet is a face-less, name-less...’ method of communciation with its own set of rules ‘accepted universally’ is only part of the picture imho and not the main determintion of whether there is any intended deception or not. As it said in the original quote I gave, if a false impression is given, it can be considered as false speech. We can only know for ourselves in this regard. If I turn up tomorrow with a cyber-name and the intention that everyone should think I’m a newcomer or should be misled in anyway, I’d consider it to be ‘lying or deceiving’. If I joined the ‘Highrise Gardeners Club’ with a cyber-name that was obviously just that, it would be different. You thought the member who was concerned about the ‘morality’ of a cyber-name and ‘started to use his own name was just being paranoid about his karma’. I disagree with your assessment and have respect for his concern . I’ve been reflecting quite a lot on right speech with my students. I’m used to playing tricks and jokes (which of course everyone enjoys). Kom, I think,quoted the part from the Rahula sutta about not even creating a false impression in fun which I can’t help reflecting on everytime I get out my collection of spiders, snakes or whatever;-( As Rob M would say, in the big course of things, these are not big-deal issues, but it doesn’t hurt to consider them. 2. Vinaya corner =========== You suggest the rules are ‘for the proper and smooth functioning of the Sangha, not as omnipresent, moral guidelines.’ I would suggest they are for both purposes. There is plenty we can learn about right speech and other aspects of morality and the danger of various kinds of unwholesome thought and action fom the rules ourselves. In a post to Larry, I wrote about the 4 kinds of morality (catuparisudhi-sila). The first was restraint with regard to the monks’ rules (patimokkha-samvara-sila): “Here the monk is restrained in accordance with the monks’ Disciplinary Code, is perfect in conduct and behaviour, and perceiving danger even in the least offences, he trains himself in the rules he has taken upon him”.(Nyantiloka dict, quoting from Vinaya sources). I take ‘perceiving danger’ as referring to the danger of accumulating unwholesome states at the present moment. ***** more 'scrambled' comments to follow very soon..... 17014 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 1:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Scrambled Egg-less 2 contd from Scrambled 1 to James 3 Testing Abhidhamma ================= You suggest that (the abhidhamma) “From untestable, undescribed observation, it then reaches a hypothesis of the nature of ultimate and conventional reality. It doesn’t invite others to test this theory because it doesn’t give the method by which it was reached.” This was written about 3 days ago (Rubbish 1), so it may be redundant by now, I’m not sure;-). Nothing could be further from how I read and understand the abhidhamma which is described in detail and to be tested out at this very moment. The ‘method’ is that of sati sampajanna or sati and panna, assisted by other factors, as we’re discussing in the ‘Way’corner. No ‘me’ or ‘you’ to do anything. 4.Rupas ====== I’m not sure if you see rupas as ‘in’ or ‘out’ at the moment. Pls just ignore any of my comments which are no longer relevant. In Rubbish 3 you suggested the theory was ‘arrived at through simple observtion and philosophical pondering’ and ask whether it is an accurate way ‘of describing ultimate reality’ ‘Not according to modern scientific discoveries’. I agree with the last sentence, but it means little to me. The dhammas which we read about in the texts (inc the abhidhamma) were ‘arrived at’ by direct understanding, highly developed panna and the omniscience of a Buddha. As you said elsewhere, we could have a scholarly discussion about the origins which would be quite useless. The only way to test the validity of paramattha dhammas (ultimate realities) is by the development of panna. I still think you will find it usefu, nonetheless, to read the series I wrote from the Vinaya commentary, if only to understand why some of us don’t accept comments dismissing the Abhidhamma as the word/Teachings of the Buddha and how according to the commentaries, the Abhidhamma was recited (for the most part) at the 1st Council. 5. Effective dialogues =============== You gave many helpful pointers (inc. those for the ‘facilitators) which I appreciated. I don’t agree (I’m avoiding that word ‘question’ which sounded too polite to you;-))that the Buddha didn’t speak much about ‘how to conduct effective dialogues...’ However, I believe the entire Teachings could be said to be about effective dialogue. We can only communicate according to the degree of wisdom, morality and other wholesome states accumulated and also according to our tendencies and natural inclinations. We’re all bound to make plenty of mistakes as a result. Hopefully some learning is taking place for us all. As I’ve mentioned to you already, I’m really learning a lot from your generous, skilful and very imaginative posts to the starkids. They’ve really been enjoying these and the other helpful ones from everyone else and so have I. 6. DSG standards ============= “This group is excellent, but not perfect either. I mean, to let rif-raf like me in it doesn’t say much for its standards! LOL! j/k. Seriously, there is no reason to rest on any laurels. Mara will take any opportunity to strike and ‘true dialogue’ is one area where Mara excels.” Oh, yikes.....sounds like trouble...thanks for the reminder....rif-raf in dialogue with Mara is a sure recipe for nightmares.....;-) Good point about using experiences ‘to learn dharma’. maybe we also ‘learn dharma’ to use in experience. This is more than enough for now. Thank you for all the helpful topics and comments. Sarah ======= 17015 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 2:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Rob M, Caution: I’m on very unsure ground with any comments I make on this thread....... --- robmoult wrote: > Hi All, > > My interpretation of the Vis. saying that the proximate cause of > equanimity being "consciousness without hapiness" relates to the > fourth jhana (which has hapiness) gives away to the fifth jhana > (which has equanimity). ..... Do you have any reason or reference for this? The section we’re discussing is under ‘the Agregates’ in the section on Panna (understanding) in the vism. It is referring to all kinds of feelings as I understand as included in the khandha. In the note to equanimity (n56 ) It explains from the Pm (and I’ve seen in several other places) that the seeing, hearing, smelling & tasting consciousiness might ‘logically be associated with pleasure and pain’, in fact they are ‘associated with equanimity’ because of the gentle impact ‘like that of two pieces of cotton wool’....(so Larry, I think ‘consciousness without happiness’ refers to seeing etc). > My interpretation of the Vis. saying that the proximate cause of joy > being tranquility also relates to jhanas; to reach the first jhana, > one must develop tranquility. .... I’ve just seen the note Larry skilfully found of B. Bodhi’s. It’s just a footnote of his which says “tranquillity (passaddhi), it seems, is the proximte cause only for the joyful feeling that arises in meditative development.” This would certainly make it sound like it could refer to jhanas but I’d like to know where ‘it seems’ can be found - i.e a reference and more exact details. Again, in the Vis the suggestion as I read it, is that all pleasant mental feelings are being referred to. I’m sure there must be reference in other commentaries, but I’m out of time and Tai chi is calling (Howard, I’m now using the silver balls for a new movement which is great for my wrists;-)). ..... > So the proximate cause of equanimity and joy relate to jhanas. This > leaves pain, pleasure and unpleasant mental feeling. > > After thinking about it, I suspect that if Vis. could not relate the > state to jhana, it defaulted to a base; ergo: > - Pleasure: body base > - Pain: body base > - Unpleasant mental feeling: heart base > > Does this make sense? .... It sounded good when I first saw it (as did Larry’s theories), but I’ll have to leave you to it for now;-) Sarah (rushing out) ============= 17016 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 2:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Getting into Abhidhamma Hi Wendy, and all, I hope you may find the short articles helpful to give you 'bite- sized' perspectives on the Abhidhamma. All of them helped me in some way to understand just a little, and it proved enough to give me the courage and patience to tackle longer texts. I found any questions could be confidently put to the dsg members, no question is too simple. I have also included links to some of the books, texts, and websites related to Abhidhamma. Personally, I'd read the articles first. Then your own interest will take you anywhere and everywhere. :) (I hope the links all work.) metta, Christine Article: Abhidhamma and Practice http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhidhamma_and_practice.htm Article: Be here now http://www.abhidhamma.org/be%20here%20now.htm Article: 'Abhidhamma Notes' http://www.dhammastudy.com/Introduction.html Article: Understanding Reality http://www.abhidhamma.org/understanding%20reality.html Article: 'Some Introductory Notes on Abhidhamma' http://www.baynet.net/~arcc/dhamma/abhi1.html The Abhidhamma Philosophy (about nine pages) http://www.buddhanet.net/abhidh01.htm Fourteen essays by members of a group of lay people who studied the Abhidhamma http://www.samatha.demon.co.uk/publications/abhidhammapapers/ Article: Abhidhamma and Vipassana http://www.abhidhamma.org/sitagu%20sayadaw.htm e-books online: http://www.vipassana.info/contents-vipassana.htm e-Books in multiple formats on-line: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Articles and books graded as to level of difficulty: http://www.dhammastudy.com/engindex.html And anytime is a good time for wandering around in the dsg 'Useful Posts'. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hi Wendy, > > --- Uan Chih Liu wrote: > Hi all, > > When I join this group, frankly I was really lost. And finally Robert > > was kind enough to point me to Nina's "Abhidhamma in Daily Life". > > I was wondering, if it's possible and feasible, to add a link or a file, > > named "Beginner's Guide", where a list of links are given and > > possibly ordered by degree of difficulties for the study of > > Abhidhamma? 17017 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 4:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Selfishness/Jonothan Tom Thanks for these interesting points and observations. --- proctermail wrote: > Hello Jonothan ... > I qoute... > > As far as selfish motives are concerned, these are an inherent > aspect > > of our lives. Like it or not, the intrinsic nature of us all is > > 'unwholesome' and tending to become more so, ... > > are you implying that modern capitalist society seems breed > selfishness? this is something i believe and was made into a > seroius > argument by Weber in 'Protestant ethic and the spirit of > capitalism' I think what I was implying was that regardless of how well-meaning we may be (or how ideologically sound our thinking), selfishness is going to pervade almost everything we do. Recognising that this is how things are, and always have been (regardless of the political or social structure of the time), can be very beneficial in the long run because it allows us to face up to what I would describe as 'the real problem'. > i take your point about little animals that are inevitably going to > get caught unknowingly under our feet...i guess its more about > being aware. I was actually trying to suggest that what is most relevant and important in this area is knowing the difference between intentional action on the one hand and unintentional action (whether done with or without knowledge) on the other hand. Jon (keeping it short, too) 17018 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 5:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. James Thanks for writing. I've been following your many posts with interest. --- James wrote: > Jon, > > I feel that these are excellent observations, reflective of deep > insight. ... If only, if only ... > ... Therefore, humbly, I have a line of questioning(s) for you > (or others on-list) if you may consider it/them: What do you > relect > about the usefulness of koans in disrupting discursive thought to > reach pure awareness? Is there a significant difference between > discursive thought and pure awareness? If so, what is that > difference? Do you believe it is possible to disrupt discursive > thought, or simply to minimize it? Is either necessary for pure > awareness? Could the Abhidhamma be viewed as a method of turning > discursive thought into a vehicle for pure awareness (like > an 'Intellectual Koan') or is it pure awareness itself? Thank you > for considering my questions. To my understanding, awareness is a mental factor like any other mental factor (they come in both wholesome and unwholesome varieties). That is to say, it arises with a moment of consciousness and experiences the same object as the moment of consciousness. It may be a weak or strong, of short or long duration, depending on the conditioning factors. It will arise intermingled with other moments of consciousness, sometimes wholesome but mainly unwholesome. Awareness may have as its object any reality (dhamma). Discursive thinking, being one kind of reality, may be the object of awareness. For the person interested in developing awareness, discursive thinking is not something to be 'disrupted', but is simply another object that if presently arising is to be known as it truly is. I hope this is to the point of your questions (please say if it's not). Looking forward to following this along further. Jon 17019 From: James Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 6:07am Subject: Re: Scrambled Egg-less 2 Hi James, I have a few comments I'd like to make on a few of your points from different posts, so this is going to be somewhat `scrambled'. (Hi Sarah, It was very interesting to see this post to say the least. Some of these topics go back kinda far. I'm surprised you didn't respond `in the heart of the battle'. Like Christine wrote in another post, some posts are easy to respond to and some posts require deep thought, study, and reflection time to respond to. I consider my posts to be more the former than the latter; but it is good to have both kinds I guess. I will just make a few quick comments about the sections: 1. internet rules & standards ==================== (Put simply, this forum is about thought, not about personality. The only thing I agree with about your assessment, and you really didn't raise this point but I was thinking this to be where we would be in agreement, bhikkhu's should follow a higher standard of morals than lay people and if there is ever any doubt, they should always take the high road. However, I didn't want to state that in my earlier post because I can see how valuable this group can be to bhikkhus, especially those in isolation. So I wanted to `cut them some slack', since it is a grey area. If you wanted to rejoin the group as an anonymous person, I don't see a problem with that; but maybe for a bhikkhu to do that it would be a little questionable. If Kom doesn't want to joke, that is his right. I know that the Buddha did joke, however, and appreciated a 'lightness' and joy in approaching life and the dharma. Everyone has their own personality.) 2. Vinaya corner =========== You suggest the rules are `for the proper and smooth functioning of the Sangha, not as omnipresent, moral guidelines.' (I was referring to the rules for bhikkhu's, not the first five precepts. I see the first five as moral rules and the remainder as training rules. I believe the remaining rules are not `moral' rules: sleeping in high beds, wearing makeup, carrying an umbrella on the street, etc. They are special rules for monks and not intrinsically `moral'. If they were intrinsically moral, then we all should follow them. Since we don't, I would guess that would make daily life very unmoral for the layperson by your definition of the morality of the training rules. I believe the morality comes in the fact that the monk has made a vow to follow the rules to the letter of the law. If the monk doesn't, then that becomes a breach of morality.) ***** 3 Testing Abhidhamma ================= You suggest that (the abhidhamma) "From untestable, undescribed observation, it then reaches a hypothesis of the nature of ultimate and conventional reality. It doesn't invite others to test this theory because it doesn't give the method by which it was reached." Nothing could be further from how I read and understand the abhidhamma which is described in detail and to be tested out at this very moment. (Quick reply—I was speaking only of Rupa, not Nama. Nama can be known through meditation, but how can the nature of matter outside of the body, when not observed directly, be known through meditation? But this is a dead issue now. I understand that the Abhidhamma is not approaching the subject of `rupa' like that. Frankly, it doesn't care about scientific proof. As Rob M and others explained. Sorry to drag you through my growing pains, but I am sure there are some lurkers who have the same questions but are afraid to ask/comment.) 4.Rupas ====== I'm not sure if you see rupas as `in' or `out' at the moment. (I see rupas as `in'. I think I understand how they fit within the abhidhamma's methodology. I don't know if this particular method fits my personality or style, but I will continue to lurk, read, and decide. I am not going to comment much more on that subject until I understand it first-hand for myself. And if I disagree, I won't comment at all. There won't be a need to `disprove' a philosophy. 5. Effective dialogues =============== You gave many helpful pointers (inc. those for the `facilitators) which I appreciated. I don't agree (I'm avoiding that word `question' which sounded too polite to you;-))that the Buddha didn't speak much about `how to conduct effective dialogues...' However, I believe the entire Teachings could be said to be about effective dialogue. (I agree ultimately, but not conventionally. I don't know of a sutta where he spelled it out in black-and-white. He didn't encourage his monks to dialogue with each other…actually he praised them the most when they didn't talk at all.) 6. DSG standards ============= LOL! Your comments were funny. And the other post I read about `don't ask James about the Abhidhamma' made me laugh too. Maybe I need a special `Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy in regards to the Abhidhamma! :-) Thank you for all the helpful topics and comments. (You're very welcome.) Metta, James ps. Thanks for not putting my name in the subject heading. "Scambled Egg-less for James" would have made me hungry, and I'm on a diet! :-) 17020 From: James Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 8:27am Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > James > > Thanks for writing. I've been following your many posts with > interest. (Thank you. It makes me smile when you write 'many posts'. Yes, I do write a lot of posts because they are like 'thinking outloud' to me. Since I think a lot, I write a lot. That is why this subject of discursive thought and awareness really interests me at the present. ) > > To my understanding, awareness is a mental factor like any other > mental factor (they come in both wholesome and unwholesome > varieties). That is to say, it arises with a moment of consciousness > and experiences the same object as the moment of consciousness. It > may be a weak or strong, of short or long duration, depending on the > conditioning factors. It will arise intermingled with other moments > of consciousness, sometimes wholesome but mainly unwholesome. (It was my understanding, which is probably incorrect, that discursive thinking will 'corrupt' awareness and make it unwholesome. Perhaps that is from too much Zen, Beginner's mind reading. Taming the monkey mind and what-not. What do you mean by wholesome and unwholesome? The Buddha used those terms to mean different things in different situations...at least by translation. Those words really lack the depth of meaning they should probably have...do you think?. They make me think that thoughts, mental objects, and mental states are either 'chaste' or 'naughty' :-) > > Awareness may have as its object any reality (dhamma). Discursive > thinking, being one kind of reality, may be the object of awareness. > For the person interested in developing awareness, discursive > thinking is not something to be 'disrupted', but is simply another > object that if presently arising is to be known as it truly is. (Wow. This is probably the first time I have seen this position about discursive thought and awareness. I have felt it was probably true, but thougt that to make discursive thought the subject of awareness was much like 'playing with fire.' What do you think? And how are you able to do this without the discrusive thought interrupting awareness of discursive thought? I know this is a tough question. Sorry for the efforts on your part to explain to me, but I do appreciate it.) > > I hope this is to the point of your questions (please say if it's > not). Looking forward to following this along further. > (Good, because you have raised probably more questions, at least in my mind, with your answers. But we can stop at any point if you like or feel I am not ready/able to understand at this point in my practice.) Metta, james 17021 From: Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 4:18am Subject: To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Hi, Jon (and all) - I found the following post of yours in the Useful Posts section of the DSG Files, under "Accumulations": ************************************* From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Oct 10, 2000 1:20 pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] meditation, hatred ,and fear Mike > By the way, I've noticed that the term > 'accumulations' is often used in the group's > correspondence. Does this refer to vipaka? > Sankhaara? Both? Neither? Yes, there are some terms we have been using for so long that we forget they are not standard use! Thanks for raising this. "Accumulations" as I used it refers to those various tendencies we all have that make up the distinct personality and character by which we are conventionally known. For example, our preferences for particular tastes or colours, our good and bad qualities, the way we walk and talk and so on. Being easily angered or being interested in the dhamma would be other examples. They are called accumulations because, of course, they have been accumulated during the past. The defilements (kilesas) are those akusala inclinations we have accumulated. They come in different strengths, the subtle ones being the latent tendencies referred to in Kom’s post. Actually, since every citta is conditioned (in among other ways) by the citta which immediately precedes it, each citta contains the sum of all previous cittas. So in fact there is much more that is accumulated than the tendencies I have referred to. I hope this makes sense. Jonothan ******************************************** The notion of accumulations is an intuitively understandable one. Yet I am unclear as to specifics. From the Abhidhammic perspective, any mind-moment consists solely of an act of citta/vi~n~nana/discernment together with associated cetasikas, all involved with the same object of experience. For the accumulations to be found, they must lie among the cetasikas. Exactly where? The most likely would be, it seems to me, cetana. However, during a single mind-moment, can there be multiple cetanas operative? If not, how is the near-infinite collection of accumulations, existing and to be "passed on", accounted for? (Of course, nothing is passed on - currently occurring conditions are merely conditions for the arising of subsequent conditions.) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17022 From: James Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 9:29am Subject: Re: Scrambled Egg-less-PS Sarah, A Post Script to my message: You state in your post that the Buddha composed the Abhidhamma and he would, being enlightened, know the nature of rupa not directly observed. I cannot say that with such confidence. I do not presume to know the mind of a Buddha and have no idea if enlightenment is like omniscience. The Buddha simply said he was awake, he didn't say he was 'all knowing'. What do you think? Metta, James 17023 From: James Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 9:29am Subject: Re: Scrambled Egg-less-PS Sarah, A Post Script to my message: You state in your post that the Buddha composed the Abhidhamma and he would, being enlightened, know the nature of rupa not directly observed. I cannot say that with such confidence. I do not presume to know the mind of a Buddha and have no idea if enlightenment is like omniscience. The Buddha simply said he was awake, he didn't say he was 'all knowing'. What do you think? Metta, James 17024 From: Uan Chih Liu Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 11:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Getting into Abhidhamma Hi Christine and Sarah, Thank you for your posts. They are indeed very helpful to me. I will take my time read through them and check through the links, and who knows, I may one day come back to construct a page of my own: "Abhidhamma for Dummies". with metta, Wendy ----- Original Message ----- From: "christine_forsyth" Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 2:16 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Getting into Abhidhamma > Hi Wendy, and all, > > I hope you may find the short articles helpful to give you 'bite- > sized' perspectives on the Abhidhamma. All of them helped me in some > way to understand just a little, and it proved enough to give me the > courage and patience to tackle longer texts. I found any questions > could be confidently put to the dsg members, no question is too > simple. > > I have also included links to some of the books, texts, and websites > related to Abhidhamma. > Personally, I'd read the articles first. Then your own interest will > take you anywhere and everywhere. :) (I hope the links all work.) > > metta, > Christine > > Article: Abhidhamma and Practice > http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhidhamma_and_practice.htm > Article: Be here now > http://www.abhidhamma.org/be%20here%20now.htm > Article: 'Abhidhamma Notes' > http://www.dhammastudy.com/Introduction.html > Article: Understanding Reality > http://www.abhidhamma.org/understanding%20reality.html > Article: 'Some Introductory Notes on Abhidhamma' > http://www.baynet.net/~arcc/dhamma/abhi1.html > The Abhidhamma Philosophy (about nine pages) > http://www.buddhanet.net/abhidh01.htm > Fourteen essays by members of a group of lay people who studied the > Abhidhamma > http://www.samatha.demon.co.uk/publications/abhidhammapapers/ > Article: Abhidhamma and Vipassana > http://www.abhidhamma.org/sitagu%20sayadaw.htm > > > e-books online: > http://www.vipassana.info/contents-vipassana.htm > e-Books in multiple formats on-line: > http://www.zolag.co.uk/ > Articles and books graded as to level of difficulty: > http://www.dhammastudy.com/engindex.html > > And anytime is a good time for wandering around in the dsg 'Useful > Posts'. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > Hi Wendy, > > > > --- Uan Chih Liu wrote: > Hi all, > > > When I join this group, frankly I was really lost. And finally > Robert > > > was kind enough to point me to Nina's "Abhidhamma in Daily Life". > > > I was wondering, if it's possible and feasible, to add a link or > a file, > > > named "Beginner's Guide", where a list of links are given and > > > possibly ordered by degree of difficulties for the study of > > > Abhidhamma? > 17025 From: Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 5:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Sarah and Rob, Sarah thanks for explaining about the cotton and the hammer; I think I get it, sort of. Maybe the reason 'heart base' isn't given as proximate cause for pleasant mental feeling and neutral feeling is because it isn't proximate in the way it is for unpleasant mental feeling. One peculiar thought that occurred to me is that it almost seems like the absence of pleasant mental feeling causes pleasant mental feeling, baring interference by unpleasant mental feeling. Consciousness without happiness causes neutral feeing; neutral feeling is almost the same as tranquility; tranquility causes pleasant mental feeling. Therefor consciousness without happiness causes happiness. Larry 17026 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 6:28pm Subject: Abhidhamma1 " Dear group. A letter I wrote a while ago "stvrn" wrote: > > In Theravadhee Sri Lankan Pali "Dhamma Sangini" and Vibhanga goes into > various unnecessary analysis. When reading these Abhidharma books one > do not get the same serene joy reading suttas. Initial simple suttas, > preached by Lord Buddha, was unnecessarily anlyzed and its original > broad meaning was blurred. >___________________ Dear stvrn, It may be that some or many people do not get serene joy from considering the Abhidhamma - but certainly some do, and I can attest to that. The Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis of ancient times also did: The Atthasalini(Pali text Society)translation by Pe Maung Tin of Burma: ""The bhikkhus who study the Abhidhamma experience infinite rapturous joy in reflecting: As though grouping the mutitude of stars in the sky (into consteallations) the Teacher taught things mental and material dividing them into various parts and portions - things subtle and abstruse such as the unique conetnt of aggreagates (khandhas) sense-organs (ayatanas) elements(dhatus) , controlling factors, powers factors of wisdom, kamma and its result; and the distinction between mind and matter.""(p14) There is more about the joy that comes through considering the profound insights explained in the Abhidhamma and how it can lead to arahantship. In the Intro. to the Vibhanga(Abhidhamma pitaka)(Pali text society) Iggelden writes "It is all very well to say 'I know what needs to be done to break the continuity of rebirth and death'. In fact very few people know of even the most elementary reasons for the continuity of process, let alone of breaking it. It is the detailed description, analysis and reasons given for this cyclic process that the scriptures spend so much care in putting before us. It is all very well to say 'What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for, it only clutters the mind?'The question is, though, how many people when they seriously ask themselves as to the extent and range of some such apparently simple terms as greed, hatred and ignorance, can know their full and proper implications and manifestations within their own thoughts and actions..This the scriptures are at pains to make clear to even the dullest reader.."Endquote. He goes on in a similar vein for pages. It is natural that some people see the benefits of Abhidhamma and others don't. All of us have accumulated vastly different experiences during our very long stay in samsara vatta (the round of births and deaths) - we have different tastes, opinions and practices because of this. I hope you have the opportunity to investigate more the wisdom in the Abhidhamma and the rest of the Tipitaka. I find it all helpful; the vinaya, the suttas, the Jatakas, the Dhammapada; everything was taught for our benefit and handed on faithfully by the order of bhikkhus and bhikkhuni over these last millenia. How wonderful the Sangha, the Buddha and the Dhamma. Robert --- End forwarded message --- 17027 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 6:37pm Subject: Abhidhamma3 Dear Group, Some quotes from the Sutta Pitaka and Vinaya: The Abhidhamma in the Vinaya. (Vin, 1V,344): "If without any intention of reviling the Vinaya one were to instigate another, saying, Pray study the Suttas or Gathas or Abhidhamma first and afterwards you will learn the Vinaya - there is no offence in him," In the Bhikkhuni Vibhanga Vin,1V,344( "Abhikkhuni is guilty of a minor offence) if she questions on the Abhidhamma or Vinaya after getting permission (to question) on the Suttanta, or on the Suttanta or Vinaya after getting permission (to question) on the Abhidhamma, or on the suttanta or Abhidhamma after getting permission (to question) on the Vinaya."...... Sanghadisesa VII, in the Book of Discipline, PTS, translated by I.B. Horner: "Then the venerable Dabba, the Mallian, being so chosen, assigned one lodging in the same place for those monks who belonged to the same company. For those monks who knew the Suttantas he assigned a lodging in the same place, saying: "These will be able to chant over the Suttantas to one another." For those monks versed in the Vinaya rules, he assigned a lodging in the same place, saying: "They will decide upon the Vinaya with one another." For those monks teaching dhamma he assigned a lodging in the same place, saying: "They will discuss dhamma[ in the actual Pali this is specified as ABHIDHAMMA] with one another." Sutta: The Mahagosinga sutta (MN 1, 218) Mahamoggalana said `Brother Sariputta, in the religion the talk of two bhikkhus on the ABHIDHAMMA, each asking and answering the other without faltering, is in accord with the Dhamma. Now such a bhikkhu, brother Sariputta, might enhance the beauty of the Gosinga Sala Forest. "" There are other references to the Abhidhamma in the sutta pitaka too: Petavatthu: "at that time the Buddha the exalted one was residing on the Pandukambala stone at the foot of the great coral tree in tavimtimsa (deva world) [expounding the abhidhamma] At that time devas and brahmas of the 10,00 fold universe held a meeting and approached the buddha. Buddhavamsa(about past buddha's): 1. Dipankara Buddha: "at the time when dipankara Buddha expounded the Dhamma in the tavitimsa world 90,000 crores of devas and brhamas realised the four noble truths..." It repeats for sevral other buddhas. Also the Abhidhamma pitaka can be called different names: In the Atthasalini it says "Thus as rehearsed at the (first)council, the Abhidhamma is Pitaka by Pitaka classification, Khuddaka-Nikaya by Nikaya classification, Veyyakarana by part classification and constitutes two or three thousand untis of text by the classification of textual units" . Sometimes you will read suttas where the Buddha refers to those bhikkhus who are skilled in the veyyakarana - and this may refer to the Abhidhamma. In the end I think historical studies can't satisfy us. We have to look at the Abhidhamma in depth to understand why it has been held up as the word of the Buddha, to see why it must have been the province of omnniscient wisdom. The Abhidhamma was taught by the Buddha to his mother and a myriad of other devas in the Tavitimsa deva world, it was not something to be revealed later. While he was teaching in the Deva world he also - by means of a created double - taught Sariputta (a human). Sariputta then taught his 500 students who all became arahant upon completion. It was not kept only for later times and was very much a part of the Dhamma while the Buddha was alive. From the atthasalini: "The textual order of the Abhidhamma originated with Sariputta; the numerical series in the Great Book was also determined by him. In this way the elder, without spoiling the unique doctrine, laid down the numerical series in order to make it easy to learn, remember, study and teach the Law. Such being the case, was the elder the very first to understand the Abhidhamma? Nay, it was the supreme Buddha who first understood the Abhidhamma...." It is very natural that many doubt the Abhidhamma. Even less than 300 hundred years after the Buddha died there was a sect called the Sautrantikas who believed only the Sutta and vinya were the original word of the Buddha. They said that there was no Tipitaka but only a Dvipitaka. (ti means three and dvi two). By the nature of the sasana the respect with which the Abhidhamma is held (and the understanding of it) will continue to diminish the further away from the parinibbana of the Buddha. Until finally the last section of the Abhidhamma, the Patthana will disapear and be heard no more until the next Buddha sasana. For now it is still available and I believe it well rewards those who contemplate it. We read in the Atthasalini how when the Buddha first contemplated the Patthana in the seventh week after his attainment of supreme enlightenment: "Rays of six colours -indigo, golden, red, white, tawny, and dazzling - issued from the Teacher's body, as he was contemplating the subtle and abstruse Law by his omniscience which had found such opportunity" when he "began to contemplate the twenty- four universal causal relations of condition, of presentation, and so on....". Robert 17028 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 6:40pm Subject: Abhidhamma2 --- Dear Jerry, I think the Abhidhamma should not be seen as different from any other aspect of the Dhamma. Some people will study it and cling to the words it is true. But I think it unlikely that its study leads to self view as the whole Abhidhama has only one flavour : that of anatta. What is more dangerous is that - like any rigorous subject -- those who gain some proficiency, no matter how superficial, may fall prey to conceit. Still if there is genuine investigation of the present moment, based on what is said in the Abhidhamma and the rest of the Tipitaka, then conceit should(but no guarantee) become more apparent - and thus gradually its ugly nature discerned. The Book of Analysis (Vibhanga,Ch 17, 832) gives a list of the objects on account of which pride and conceit can arise: "Pride of birth; pride of clan; pride of health; pride of youth; pride of life; pride of gain; pride of being honoured; pride of being respected; pride of prominence; pride of having adherents; pride of wealth; pride of appearance; pride of erudition; pride of intelligence; pride of being a knowledgeable authority; pride of being (a regular) alms collector; accomplishment; pride of popularity; pride of being moral; pride of jhana; pride of dexterity; pride of being tall; pride of (bodily) proportion; pride of form; pride of (bodily) perfection..." 'end quote Earlier today I quoted a sutta "In the same manner consciousness on account is eye and forms is eye consciousness. Consciousness on account of ear and sounds is ear consciousness." These dhammas need to be known. And visible object is arising now, as is the consciousness that experiences it- the only question is whether there is any direct insight into its actual nature or not. Is there sati or is there neglect. Or is there some sort of imitation sati that knows something about the characteristic of seeing but with the subtle idea that "I" made the sati arise? Only we ourselves can know and even then we may fool ourselves or overstimate our understanding. According to Sammohavinodani (commentary to Vibhanga Abhidhamma)p. 147 there are 60,000 methods by which the eighfold path can be penetrated. We have to find out for ourself what helps, what leads towards self-effacement . It's bound to be intellectual and unclear in the beginning, but perhaps gradually a little more understanding grows that is a little more refined and understands a more precisely for an instant only. In between there is thinking (not necessarily in words) and wondering and doubting, but these are all realities which are explained in the Abhidhamma and which should be known too. Then we may just get lost in the world of concepts and that's so normal I think- and conditioned to be that way. Metta Robert 17029 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 8:50pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hi James, You wrote to Jon: > Yes, I do write a lot of posts because they are like 'thinking outloud' to me. Since I think a lot, I write a lot. > And you wrote to Sarah: > Sorry to drag you through my growing pains, but I am sure there are some lurkers who have the same questions but are afraid to ask/comment.) > That's certainly true in my case, and if I don't share all your questions, I still learn from them and the replies. Unlike you, I have trouble writing (even though I think a lot). When I do write, I find it easier to offer answers than to ask questions. So, for the benefit of us lurkers, please continue the way you're going, with your mix of questions and answers. Sarah wrote; >> However, I believe the entire Teachings could be said to be about effective dialogue," >> to which you replied: > I agree ultimately, but not conventionally. I don't know of a sutta where he spelled it out in black-and-white. > Several months ago, a dsg member (I forget who), quoted a sutta which seemed to spell it out in black and white. It involved a group of novice monks who had been isolated for the duration of the rains retreat. (I suppose the relevance of this is that they didn't have a senior monk to instruct them). The Buddha asked them what they had done during that time and they replied that, on their own initiative, they had kept `noble silence.' He rebuked them, saying they had wasted a valuable opportunity for discussing the Dhamma. Kind regards, Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > James > > > > Thanks for writing. I've been following your many posts with > > interest. > (Thank you. It makes me smile when you write 'many posts'. > 17030 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 11:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hi James & Ken H, --- kenhowardau wrote: > > That's certainly true in my case, and if I don't share > all your questions, I still learn from them and the > replies. Unlike you, I have trouble writing (even though > I think a lot). When I do write, I find it easier to > offer answers than to ask questions. So, for the benefit > of us lurkers, please continue the way you're going, with > your mix of questions and answers. ..... ....there you go James - a green flag from the lurkers represented by Ken H;-) Actually, you do us all a BIG favour if you can find the key to unlock Ken’s draft folder and encourage him to talk more. He has many pearls of wisdom to share and I’m not joking here (for once). ..... > Several months ago, a dsg member (I forget who), quoted a > sutta which seemed to spell it out in black and white. > It involved a group of novice monks who had been isolated > for the duration of the rains retreat. ..... Thanks very much for this prompt. There may have been another more recent post about this, but I think you (James) will find these 2 of interest on this topic (it also relates nicely to our vinaya corner): From U.P. “Silence” 6445, 6572 Hope to hear you both talking together...... thanks Ken H for the suggestion. Sarah ===== 17031 From: James Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 11:26pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Dear `Lurker' (AKA Ken H.) J: Thank you for the letter. I am glad that you appreciate the questions I raise in my posts. I know that many people are hesitant to `go out on a limb', especially in a public setting, and there is really nothing wrong with that. All a matter of `affluents' (not to be confused with `affluence' J. I have always felt that meaningful dialogue is important to discovering the practicality of the dharma. As I wrote in my introduction to this group, "My outlook is pretty unique; I like to think about Buddhism in modern terms and how it applies to daily life; and I have been known to be a little shocking to inspire thought…" So everyone should see, I gave ample warning! But I also wrote in that introduction, "I know a lot about Buddhism but I have a lot to learn about life. I hope that this group will welcome me so that I may learn." I am not in this group to offer too many answers (except to children…who need them); I mainly offer questions. But you see, I don't think I need to offer any answers because when it comes to dharma we all have the answers within us…it just takes some `shocking' questions to bring it out. I am eager to read and know that sutta you refer to. If it was posted in this group, surely someone knows about it. I cannot do much at my end, but if you or someone else could find it, I think it would benefit us all to re-examine it. I know that it would benefit me. Metta, James PS. I composed this in Word and then saw Sarah's post. I knew she would come to the rescue. I am going to keep it as it is to reflect what I was thinking at the time. But, Ken H., if you are holding out on us all of your 'pearls of wisdom', I am not too 'well for that.' Seems those CLAMS always have the best loot! :-) Please help where you can. 17032 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 11:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Getting into Abhidhamma Dear Wendy & Christine,then James (& vinaya corner), --- Uan Chih Liu wrote: >.... I may one day come back to construct a > page of my own: "Abhidhamma for Dummies". ..... That would be great;-) Meanwhile, Chris, you are a marvel....as James put far more politely, some of us are still in snailmail or even seamail mode whilst others like yourself are exemplary example's of internet efficiency. Many thanks. (Now if that wasn't too demanding - I mean it came back so fast even though you're testing out the hell realms at work - then perhaps, just perhaps, you might consider doing the same for other topics in the U.P. while all the reading is fresh in your mind). Hmmm....talking about right communication, I'd better stop before this slips further into unwise speech;-( ***** Here are a few relevant reminders from the Vinaya for daily life (I’m quoting from the Sammohavinodani for now, sect 17): 1.“Unnahanaa (persuading) is going on tying (people) up thus: ‘Lay followers, formerly you ued to give first-fruit alms at such a time; why do you not do so now?’ until they say: ‘We shall give, venerable sir, we have had no opportunity’ and so on; “entangling” (ve.thanaa) is what is meant........” 2. “Ukkaacanaa (suggesting) is insinuating (kaacanaa) and sugesting by specifying thus: “That family alone understands me; if there is anything to be given there, they give it to me only;’ “pointing out” is what is meant........” 3. “Anuppiyabha.nitaa (“ingratiating chatter”) is endearing chatter repeated again and again without regard to whether it is in conformity with truth and dhamma.” 4. “Caatukamyataa (“flattery”) is speaking in a humble manner, always maintaining an attitude of inferiority.” 5. “Muggasuupyataa (“bean-soupery”) is a resemblance to bean soup. for just as when beans are being cooked only a few do not get cooked, the rest get cooked; so the person in whose speech only a little is true, the rest being false, is called “bean soup”; his state is “bean-soupery”." ***** James, I agreed with your apt comments about the rules and morality. Your points are well-taken and we shouldn’t try to imitate the monk’s life or set of rules. However, I think that by reflecting on the rules, the reasons for the rules and the meaning behind many of them, such as in these examples, we can learn more about sila in daily life and about our various mental states. Even ones like the rule you quoted about not speaking to someone holding an umbrella etc which seems quite irrelevant, can be helpful if we consider the purpose: there’s no use talking about dhamma to someone who is not interested to hear or at an inappropriate time. Thanks for your other comments too - maybe more by sea-mail later;-) Sarah ===== 17033 From: ven.yanatharo.bikkhu Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 11:57pm Subject: On my way. Dear Friends, Tomorrow very early I start my journey to North Carolina. This morning I broke my small toe in my right foot. So you are getting a very sore and limping monk. See you in the evening. Ven. Yanatharo 17034 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 5:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Dear Rob M & Larry, Actually, reviewing these references I gave before and then checking a few more afterwards, I’m not sure how rigidly we should view poximate causes and there may be variants in different contexts perhaps. What do you think? From my post a little while back: ***** "Immediate occasion (pada.t.thaana.m) means proximate cause. Thus wherever we speak of characteristics, etc, their mutual difference should be understood in this wise." Atthasalini transl PTS p84 ..... As I understand pada.t.thaana literally means 'footprint' from pada-foot. Now I understand better the use of 'footing' in the PTS Netti transl which you also have. 'footing' is translated from pada.t.thaana as in: " 'Investigate yourselves, launch out' are the footing for energy. (The words) 'Devote yourselves in the Enlightened One's Dispensation' are the footing for concentration. (The words) 'Scatter the armies of Mortality as does an elephant a hut of reeds' are the footing for understanding...."(Netti, 40 p65 in transl) ..... Also under the "Mode of conveying Footings"(Netti, 104 p140 in transl): " 'So let his cognizance be guarded': this is the footing for the three kinds of good conduct. 'Having for pasture right intention': this is the footing for quiet. 'Giving right view first place': this is the footing for insight. 'Through knowing rise and fall: this is the footing for the plane of seeing (as the path of Stream Entry). 'Transcending drowsing and lethargy a bhikkhu may': this is the footing for energy. 'Abandon all bad destinations': this is the footing for keeping in being (as the attainment of the three higher paths)." ***** new === Sammohavinodani (commentary to Vibhanga) examples: cruelty(vihimsa)- prox. cause: annoyance feeling (pleasure and pain)-prox.cause: contact (as in dep. orignination) enjoyment - prox.cause: desirable object also Netthi example: feeling - prox cause: contact (as above) (Btw, the Netthippakara.na is transl by B.Nanamoli as The Guide (PTS)and was written 2000 yrs ago as a guide for commentators. “It deals with scaffolding, not with architecture”(intro) and ‘tradition places the Guide as a product of the First council’.The intro on the history and authorship is very long & detailed) ***** Sarah ====== 17035 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 10:03am Subject: meditation subjects, vipaka, heartbase. Dear Sarah and all, The four meditation subjects on all occasions were only in the Tika, that is why Ven. Soma did not translate them. They are very fitting: At any time there can be recollection of the Buddha, since he taught about realities now. Metta: we are so often with other people, and it helps most of all to see them as conditioned nama and rupa. Prevents irritation and distress about unpleasant behaviour and also attachment. Mindfulness of Death: especially in the ultimate sense: birth and death at each moment, of nama and rupa now. The foulness of the body: it can appear time and again in our own body or other's body, when eating, chewing, etc. Thank you for your kind words Sarah. I feel Larry thinking already of the next question: < the state of being not captivated by the unreal, and the state of not running away from the real -- these, when practiced produce yogic power; and the ability to practice these is yogic skill.> Larry may ask: what is in Pali? I shall look at it, later on. I made a note. And thank you, Larry, for all your work with the Way, and your enthusiasm in studying and asking questions. As we read in the Suttas, this and considering, investigating, is so essential for the development of understanding. You helped us all to consider what we read. Meanwhile I found: abhuuta.m apakkhipanto bhuuta~nca anapanento yogasamattho hotiiti : abhuuta.m, not real.apakkhipanto: not enclosing, inserting. Bhuuta`nca, and the real, anapanento, not removing... Is the skill of the meditator. Thus, he translated it freely with: not running away. As to bare mindfulness: I heard meditation teachers use it, that is why I asked for the Pali on the Pali list where they also discussed choiceless awareness. They may not have time to answer me. Rob M wrote some posts on kamma with questions and a whole list. I thought of it but had no time to asnwer then. I believe that we have to be very careful in making conclusions, kamma and vipaka is the field of Buddhas. Is kusala with somanassa higher than with upekkha? But when we consider understanding with upekkha is that not higher than giving with pleasure, for example? But, I think that we should not measure at all, it depends on conditions what kind of kusala will arise. I saw one remark in your post: it seemed someone believed that each akusala citta is akusala kamma, bringing a result. I did not keep the post, sorry if I misunderstood this. Such a belief will make people distressed. Reading the news paper with akusala citta or laughing is not akusala kamma in the sense of an evil deed. There is akusala cetana with each akusala citta, but it does not always have the intensity of motivating a bad deed. So many cittas rooted in moha arise time and again, these are not akusala kamma. They are impure, but you do not harm others. When we read the Vinaya, we can learn many details about akusala citta and akusala kamma. Monks were scrupulous and thought they had committed a heavy transgression, and the Buddha asked whether they had the intention to do this or that. You also mentioned that there is a belief that one can make up for akusala kamma by kusala citta. Again, how can we measure. It depends on conditions what type of citta arises and best of all: understand whatever arises. If we think of making up, it seems that we can control vipaka in future. The Buddha taught Dhamma to help people, not with the aim to make them scrupulous or distressed. This reminds me of the passages where the Buddha spoke about rebirth in hell planes. I think about people's worries about the last javana cittas before the dying-consciousness. When the Buddha spoke about hell planes he explained about cause and effect. It can remind us not to waste our time, letting opportunities for developing understanding go by. When we are afraid there is dosa, we miss such opportunities and that was not the Buddha's aim of teaching us cause and effect. When we worry we miss the point of his teaching. Unhappy feeling and the heartbase: Vis. XIV, 128: Its proximate cause is invariably the heart-base. In the arupa-Brahma planes there is no unhappy feeling and also no heartbase, there is no rupa. But, as we read, it always needs a physical base, the heartbase. Somanassa and upekkha can arise in those planes, they do not need a base in that case. We read in the Dispeller I, Aggregates, feeling, about the feelings which are with base, and also: those with base and without base. This will solve the question. When compared with somanassa and upekkha, domanassa invariably needs a base, the heartbase. As to proximate cause: I have to correct what I said before, that it is always at the same time as the dhamma which is involved: rupa is weak at its arising moment and cannot condition nama, it has to arise before. By the way, Sarah, I also have in the same nice edition Patimokkha, the rule for Buddhist Monks. Same edition as The Entrance to the Vinaya. It may be available in the Mahamakut bookshop, opposite Wat Bovornives, Soi Phra Sumera. Nina. 17036 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 11:13am Subject: bare mindfulness Dear Larry, Rob Ed helped me to find the passage: >[Tika] "Arousing of Mindfulness". Here bare mindfulness is meant. >Therefore, the commentator speaks of "the things that make up the >condition connected with the Arousing of Mindfulness." These things are >energy and so forth, associated necessarily with mindfulness. Condition >[anga] = reason [karana].> Yasmaa satiyevettha satipa.t.thaana.m vuttaa, tasmaassa sampayuttaa dhammaa viiriyaadayo an.ganti aaha: "sampayogan.ga~ncassa dassetvaa" ti. An.ga-saddo cettha kaara.napariyaayo da.t.thabbo. Satiyevettha is: sati eva (ettha is: here), means: just mindfulness. No technical term. I shall continue later on. Nina. 17037 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 11:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Dear Sarah, I like your post on the Netti and now understand footing. I looked it up. op 19-11-2002 14:06 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > ***** > "Immediate occasion (pada.t.thaana.m) means proximate cause. Thus > wherever we speak of characteristics, etc, their mutual difference should > be understood in this wise." Atthasalini transl PTS p84 > ..... > As I understand pada.t.thaana literally means 'footprint' from pada-foot. > > Now I understand better the use of 'footing' in the PTS Netti transl which > you also have. 'footing' is translated from pada.t.thaana as in: 17038 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 11:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma1 Dear Rob K, I like your series on Abh, I never have enough of this subject. Very helpful. Nina. op 19-11-2002 03:28 schreef rjkjp1 op rjkjp1@y...: > > It may be that some or many people do not get serene joy from > considering the Abhidhamma - but certainly some do, and I can attest > to that. The Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis of ancient times also did: 17039 From: Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 4:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pali: sati sampajanna Hi Nina, I thought you left already. I have several comments on Way 24 that I was going to save until you got back. Should we discuss now? Larry 17040 From: Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 4:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Sarah, What"s the difference between pada.t.thaana.m (proximate cause) and anantarapaccaya (proximity condition). Does anantarapaccaya relate only to 'mental states'? (see guide 13 ch. VIII CMA) Larry 17041 From: Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 4:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Nina and all, I wonder if satiyevettha (just mindfulness) is what Ven. U Narada had in mind for "bare attention". Maybe someone familiar with Burmese could track this down. Can you make a distinction between satiyevettha and sukkha-vipassana? Here is a snippet from "The Heart of Buddhist Meditation" by Nyanaponika Thera: Bare attention is the clear and single-minded awareness of what actually happens *to* us and *in* us, at the successive moments of perception. It is called 'bare', because it attends just to the bare facts of a perception as either through the five physical senses or through the mind which, for Buddhist thought, constitutes the sixth sense. When attending to that sixfold sense impression, attention or mindfulness is kept to a bare registering of the facts observed, without reacting to them by deed, speech or by mental comment which may be one of self-reference (like, dislike, etc), judgement or reflection. If during the time, short or long, given to the practice of Bare Attention, any such comments arise in one's mind, they themselves are made objects of Bare Attention, and are neither repudiated nor pursued, but are dismissed, after a brief mental note has been made of them. L: This seems rather rigid and formal to me. I wonder where insight comes in. I may well be wrong, but I think Khun Sujin's objection to this is that it doesn't address or recognize the mind behind the discipline and it separates 'practice mind' from 'ordinary mind'. Possibly it misses the flavour of the word "lives" (viharati) in "a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body..." Any comments? Larry 17042 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 7:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Larry, I am jumping in to what I see as a valuable topic. Please forgive my profuse comments after being absent for so long. I can only pop in when I'm able these days, but I'm glad to see that these interesting questions are still brewing here at dsg. And hello to everyone. Comments below. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Nina and all, > > I wonder if satiyevettha (just mindfulness) is what Ven. U Narada had in > mind for "bare attention". ... > Bare attention is the clear and single-minded awareness of what actually > happens *to* us and *in* us, at the successive moments of perception. It > is called 'bare', because it attends just to the bare facts of a > perception as either through the five physical senses or through the > mind which, for Buddhist thought, constitutes the sixth sense. When > attending to that sixfold sense impression, attention or mindfulness is > kept to a bare registering of the facts observed, without reacting to > them by deed, speech or by mental comment which may be one of > self-reference (like, dislike, etc), judgement or reflection. If during > the time, short or long, given to the practice of Bare Attention, any > such comments arise in one's mind, they themselves are made objects of > Bare Attention, and are neither repudiated nor pursued, but are > dismissed, after a brief mental note has been made of them. > > L: This seems rather rigid and formal to me. What do you think is there to be more informal about, aside from perception and the working of the mind? With respect, and with a sense of 'devil's advocate', it 'feels' like this mechanical model may offend your sense of 'self'. Is it possible that there is some further romance beyond the mechanism of the kandhas that you are looking to include by being less clinical? Why not be this rigid? I know for myself that I would like to think there is something warmer and more personal going on in this collection of responses known as 'Robert' [Robert Ep. around here], but isn't this exactly the insistence on a subtle level that there is a 'self' with its own reality, personality and poetic attributes? If one were to be 'less rigid' as you propose, what kind of mindfulness description would seem preferable to you? I wonder where insight > comes in. I think that the 'bare attention' formulation above implies that insight comes from complete attention to 'what is', with a surgical precision. I don't see any difference between such precision and the idea of 'discernment', which means to see things as they are and in no other way [in other words, without delusion or ignorance]. of I may well be wrong, but I think Khun Sujin's objection to > this is that it doesn't address or recognize the mind behind the > discipline The 'mind behind the discipline' that you are looking for is the same exact mind that is included in the description you are questioning. After all, he does say that we are to pay attention to what takes place 'within and without' and describes the mental component as the traditional 'sixth sense' in Buddhism. If we observe the mind as well as the sensory content but do not react to it, this does not mean that we control the mind's initial 'natural' response, but that we steadily observe it, whatever it is. What if we smell rotten food and the response is disgust and aversion? We don't try to control the 'disgust' reaction, but we try not to react to the 'disgust' by generating more concept and explanation, but observe the disgust and see it for what it is. This merely stops the infinite regress of the mind - reacting to reaction to reaction and allows a space of basic discernment. Some may still feel this is tampering with the natural reaction of the mind, but I would think there has to be some interference, at least of the intention to discern what is happening, in order for mindfulness attention and insight upon its heels to take place. and it separates 'practice mind' from 'ordinary mind'. This idea that one can have 'only ordinary mind' as a Buddhist practitioner has always seemed very problematic to me. I have never seen the possiblity of somehow pretending that we are really observing the mind in complete naturalness and that somehow this is desireable or necessary. It is like walking on eggshells not to reveal ourselves to someone who already knows we're in the room. Once you are a Buddhist your observation of your 'natural mind' is as natural as a television interview. In these disputes about observing everyday mind vs. meditation with a specific object vs. the above 'natural attention', which lays out rules for observation, I would agree that each of them sets up a framework for a different 'skillful means' of coming to mindfulness and insight, but I will not agree that any of them are really truly natural, or could ever be. It would be fruitless to simply allow delusion to take its 'natural course' without any intervention to try to discern it, and it would be equally fruitless to try to force mindfulness or insight by desperately grasping at the ingredients of reality. If there is to be any success in the Buddhist endeavor to not only see reality but eventually to embody it with truth and wisdom, then one has to use skill, relaxation and insight and balance these ingredients according to one's level of advancement. Whatever framework one chooses to practice within, whether it be ordinary life-moments, concentrated or contemplative meditation, applied Dharma through Sutta study, or controlled non-reactive observation of the mind and senses, one must find the balance of ingredients that will lead to mindfulness, insight, wisdom and eventually enlightenment. These ingredients seem to include the practice of metta and sila, leading to kusala conditions, attention and mindfulness, discernment and insight, and enough samatha so that one can relax and allow the above to take place. All of these seem to be developed gradually by using all expedient means according to one's predisposition and what works for an individual. > Possibly it misses the flavour of the word "lives" (viharati) in "a > bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body..." Any comments? I think it is possible that the 'living' quality is often left out from a contemplation of the operation of the kandhas, but it is by no means a simple problem. Buddha himself seems to leave it out, and it is much more common that the practitioner will romanticize the operation of the kandhas by invoking this 'living quality' as an actual reality that operates independent of the kandhas, and what does this lead to? It is simply another reinstatement of the idea of a self, an entity, a being, or a person who really really does exist, once this messy business of the kandhas is cleared away. I know I tend to do this, and it is the trick of all of us to try to reinstate the ego through some warm and fuzzy form. That is why I think that the resistances and reactions that rise up around a 'cold' formulation that just makes the person a mechanical device to be observed are very very valuable to observe in their own right. Why do we care if the 'flavour of the word "lives" is left out'? It can only be because we still desparately want there to be a *someone* who lives and we don't want him snuffed out. The business of the 'self' is endlessly tricky. On the other hand, what if one is denying the 'self-factors' that arise in the mind by insisting on a 'non-reactive' observer, and by doing so suppress the sentient responses that indicate the desire for a self and its possessions? This kind of suppression will not lead to enlightenment because it will cover up the very material that needs to be discerned. So it seems to me that the observation of arising events in the senses and mind do need to be 'cold', but the *content* of the mind that is being observed needs to be 'open', allowing all the mushy and fuzzy content that pertains to the self-concept and self-feeling to come up and be discerned. The pitfalls of self-observation are many, but if we keep looking at the moment with a degree of calm and openness we should be able to get a sense of what is really happening, at least in accord with our current level of understanding, which is all we can ever have. Best, Robert Ep. 17043 From: James Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 8:52pm Subject: The 12-Steps to Buddhahood- Pt. 1 Hey All, Just a post of some of my current thinking. "This body, Magandiya, is a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction. And yet you say, with reference to this body, which is a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction: 'This is that freedom from disease, master Gotama. This is that Unbinding,' for you don't have the noble vision with which you would know freedom from disease and see Unbinding."… Majjhima Nikaya 75, Magandiya Sutta (To Magandiya) The Buddha understood that we all suffer from a very serious disease, the disease of Desire/Clinging. And like Magandiya from the above passage, we often think that we can rid ourselves of this disease with the very thing that is causing it: ourselves. However, it isn't possible to rid disease with something that is diseased. Viewing desire as a `mental disease', which afflicts us all but there exists a cure; I have directed my thinking toward modern psychological disease treatments. The most successful and tested model of psychological disease treatment in our modern world is the 12-Step Program of Alcoholics Anonymous. This program, which emphases the `Anonymous' nature of all people with the disease of alcoholism, in my opinion, can provide a model of Buddhist outlook and a context for systematic practice in line with that intended by the Buddha. I thought I might share my analysis, thinking, with the members of this group. This analysis is not meant as a `prescription' for everyone, just a possible avenue for individual approach to our shared current state of disease. (Note: Term Substitutions for original steps: `Desire' for `Alcohol'; `The Triple Gem' for `God'; `Reflection' for `Prayer') STEP ONE: WE ADMIT WE ARE POWERLESS OVER DESIRE- THAT OUR LIVES HAVE BECOME UNMANAGEABLE. We admit that desire is something that is controlling us; we are not able to control desire. We, our egos, are the cause of this desire so we realize that `we' are powerless to stop it. Every attempt to do so through struggle, asserting power, control, dominance, etc. only increases the severity of the desire. We have the disease of desire and we are not going to be able to `cure' ourselves of it. We surrender the struggle for control and self-blame concerning this disease. We accept `our' powerlessness in this situation. Additionally, we admit that desire is making us behave and think in ways that are counterproductive to true happiness. In the past, we could see this and knew this, but we were powerless to stop it. Our lives, as they currently are, are harmful, unwholesome, and detrimental to others and ourselves because of desire. The first and most important step is to admit the existence and the nature of the disease of desire that we have and the reality of how it impacts our lives. STEP TWO: COME TO BELIEVE THAT A POWER GREATER THAN OURSELVES CAN RESTORE US TO SANITY. Presently, those who suffer the disease of desire do not believe that anything other than `the self' can rid `the self' of it. This makes the disease continue. It isn't until one `comes to believe' that a power greater than `the self' exists and can rid `the self' of desire, that true healing begins. This belief will be sincere and profound and often doesn't occur until the disease of desire has gotten so severe that the person realizes that `the self' will not be able to cure it. It is at this point that the possibility of hope for a cure becomes real and not just imagined. STEP THREE: MAKE A DECISION TO TURN OUR WILL AND OUR LIVES OVER TO THE TRIPLE GEM, AS WE UNDERSTAND IT. To `Take Refuge in The Triple Gem' doesn't mean simply having an intellectual understanding of it as if it is a philosophy. Taking Refuge means that we surrender ourselves-body, mind, and karma-to the power of The Triple Gem. We accept the higher power of the combined wisdom, compassion, and knowledge of The Buddha, The Dharma, and The Sangha to guide us and protect us. This means that we `turn our will' over to The Triple Gem. We consciously throw away what `we' as diseased individuals want and crave. We replace our selfish desires with sincere adherence to The Triple Gem. We also turn our lives over to The Triple Gem. Our diseased selves no longer determine what we do, and whom we associate with; our lives are determined by the wisdom of The Triple Gem. We make the decision that our `I' should no longer exist. Our `I' is diseased and there is a higher state of being to replace it. STEP FOUR: MAKE A SEARCHING AND FEARLESS MORAL INVENTORY OF OURSELVES. We determine just where desire manifests itself in `the self'. We all have lived for years in denial of our desire disease. People who have also lived in denial of their disease have surrounded us. Denial has become a way of life and support for our desire. Denial is stopped. We cast a light on the true nature of our diseased `selves' to begin the work of transformation. This requires `deep searching' and `fearlessness'. We are, naturally, going to have to search deep and long for the hidden features of the disease. The nature of any disease is to hide and survive at all costs. This makes it a formidable foe. But with `fearlessness', the reality of our faults comes more easily to the surface. Before we practice Sila, the first five precepts, we search out and admit to ourselves where we haven't followed them and where we still don't. This takes searing honesty and courage. To be continued…. (Since I tend to bombard with new ideas before old ones have been digested, I am going to go slower with these particular posts. I will cover four steps with each post, until there are three posts covering all twelve steps.) Metta, James 17044 From: Star Kid Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 8:52pm Subject: Reply: Kom Dear Kom: Hi, I'm Philip. Thanks for writing to me. I have read your letter, and I agree with you that we cannot control over what will happen to us. I have a few questions I want to ask you. Even that I am a Christian, I am still interested in many other religions , such as Buddhism, Islam, Catholic, Hindu......Can you please tell me what is your religion, and tell me something about it? Thanks very much. Yours sincerely, Philip 17045 From: Star Kid Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 8:59pm Subject: Buddhism question( please reply) Dear guys: I'm Philip Chui, and I think I have introduced myself in the last letter I sent to you guys already. I have some questions about Buddhism: 1. Who is the god in Buddhism? How many forms of the god does your religion have?( In Christianity, we have three: The father, the son and the holy spirit ). 2. What is the belief in Buddhism? 3. When you die, where do you go, according to your religion? 4. How do you prove that Buddha is real? Thanks a lot for reading my letters. If you have any questions about my religion ( Christianity ), do not hestitate to tell me. Yours sincerely, Philip Chui 17046 From: Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 9:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Robert, Nice to see you again. Sorry, but I can't discuss this with you until you have read the commentary (and maybe some of our discussions) up to as far as we have studied. We have just touched on the first "covetousness and grief" in the sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html best wishes, Larry 17047 From: ajahn_paul Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:24am Subject: Re: Buddhism question( please reply) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > Dear guys: > > I'm Philip Chui, and I think I have introduced myself > in the last letter I sent to you guys already. I have > some questions about Buddhism: > > 1. Who is the god in Buddhism? How many forms of the > god does your religion have?( In Christianity, we have > three: The father, the son and the holy spirit ). i dont think we have a God.... we dont beleive there is anyone that create anything. > 2. What is the belief in Buddhism? This/that conditionality. This name for the causal principle the Buddha discovered on the night of his Awakening stresses the point that, for the purposes of ending suffering and stress, the processes of causality can be understood entirely in terms of forces and conditions that are experienced in the realm of direct experience, with no need to refer to forces operating outside of that realm. > 3. When you die, where do you go, according to your > religion? depands on the karma > 4. How do you prove that Buddha is real? mmm..... do u have any strong evidence that can prove God is real? ^^ 17048 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > What"s the difference between pada.t.thaana.m (proximate cause) and > anantarapaccaya (proximity condition). Does anantarapaccaya relate only > to 'mental states'? (see guide 13 ch. VIII CMA) ..... These are completely different terms even though the English translations make them sound similar and can cause confusion. As we have been discussing, padatthana (proximate cause/footing) can refer to a nama, a rupa, a group of namas or rupas or even some words (concepts) according to the Netthi. Anantara paccaya (proximity condition) and its twin, samanantara paccaya (contiguity condition) only apply to cittas and accompanying cetasikas. Anantara means ‘without interval’ and are the condition by which the preceding citta conditions the subsequent citta without a break. This is the way that mental states, knowlege and kamma are accumulated from moment to moment or citta to citta. I’ve just looked at the reference you’ve given which adds more detail. Nina’s book ‘Conditions’ gives more info too. http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Hope this clarifies. Sarah ====== 17049 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. James --- James wrote: > ... <> Before we go too far, I suppose we should make sure we're talking about the same thing. What do you understand by the term 'discursive thought', and where do your references come from? <> (James, I'm sure there's nothing new for you in what follows, but I always try to state things as simply as I can.) The terms 'wholesome' and 'unwholesome' are the terms usually used for the Pali 'kusala' and 'akusala'. For most purposes, the moments of consciousness experienced during our waking hours can be divided into 2 kinds. The actual moments of experience through the various sense-doors are one kind. These include all the moments of seeing and hearing that go on seemingly continuously. They are moments of resultant consciousness (vipaka citta). For each moment of sense-door experience, however, there are many, many other moments of consciousness that 'process' or think about the moment of sense-door experience (otherwise nothing would 'make sense'), and there are also many, many moments of thinking not directly related to presently experienced sense-impressions. These other moments of consciousness are either kusala or akusala in nature (they cannot be 'neutral'). The nature of a moment of consciousness is determined by the mental factors that accompany that moment. Generosity, loving-kindness, patience are examples of kusala mental states. Aversion and attachment are examples of akusala mental states. So the terms do have a very specific meaning as used by the Buddha. <<(Wow. This is probably the first time I have seen this position about discursive thought and awareness. I have felt it was probably true, but thougt that to make discursive thought the subject of awareness was much like 'playing with fire.' What do you think? And how are you able to do this without the discrusive thought interrupting awareness of discursive thought? I know this is a tough question. Sorry for the efforts on your part to explain to me, but I do appreciate it.)>> To my understanding, it is not possible to 'make' anything the subject of awareness, nor is it the case that any one dhamma is a 'better' object of awareness than any other dhamma. <<(Good, because you have raised probably more questions, at least in my mind, with your answers. But we can stop at any point if you like or feel I am not ready/able to understand at this point in my practice.)>> I'm quite happy to keep going. I'm not known for my prompt responses, so I hope you don't mind either some delay or rather brief replies, or more likely, replies that are both slow and brief ;-)) Jon 17050 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Howard I think your question is, Where do the latent tendencies hide when they are not manifesting? I don't know the answer to this ;-)). I don’t even know if the question is 'admissible' (I suspect not!). I haven't seen or heard this discussed anywhere, except for mention of the fact that the 'passing on' of previous experiences is possible because of the fully contiguous nature of succeeding moments of consciousness (i.e., 'no gap in between'). Other than that I can't be of any help, I'm afraid. Are you asking because you see it as something that needs to be known, or because you find it difficult to accept? Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and all) - > > I found the following post of yours in the Useful Posts > section of the > DSG Files, under "Accumulations": > ************************************* ... ... > ******************************************** > The notion of accumulations is an intuitively understandable > one. Yet > I am unclear as to specifics. From the Abhidhammic perspective, any > > mind-moment consists solely of an act of > citta/vi~n~nana/discernment together > with associated cetasikas, all involved with the same object of > experience. > For the accumulations to be found, they must lie among the > cetasikas. Exactly > where? The most likely would be, it seems to me, cetana. However, > during a > single mind-moment, can there be multiple cetanas operative? If > not, how is > the near-infinite collection of accumulations, existing and to be > "passed > on", accounted for? (Of course, nothing is passed on - currently > occurring > conditions are merely conditions for the arising of subsequent > conditions.) > > With metta, > Howard 17051 From: ajahn_paul Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 5:10am Subject: How do you prove that Buddha is real Hi all, im not trying to do anything to prove that Buddha is real,, i just want to tell a short story!!!! Once upon a time, in a very beautiful ocean, fish mommy and fish daughter were playing in front of their house, and they started a little chat..... *** d=daughter, m=mommy *** d: mom, can i ask u a question? m: of cause honey! go ahead. d: i heard my friends said, fish lives in the sea. m: so??? d: so, where is the sea,, can u take me there and have a look? And now,, i guess we all know where is Buddha,, and also the Dhamma! ^____^ 17052 From: James Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 5:45am Subject: Re: "what is awareness. Jon, By discursive thought, I mean analytical thinking, planning, deciding, etc., not sensory input processing or pure recollection. This definition I am using comes from common usage, not Buddhist scripture. I thought that that is what you meant by wholesome and unwholesome, but I was hoping for a more `nibbana based' and `non-nibbana based' type of definition. Often when you ask the simplest questions, that we all take for granted, the answers can be truly inspiring and lead in new directions. I have a hunch you have more insight to offer in this area, but you are a `tough nut to crack'. Simplicity is fantastic, but commonality is banal, at least to me. You write: To my understanding, it is not possible to 'make' anything the subject of awareness, nor is it the case that any one dhamma is a 'better' object of awareness than any other dhamma. This isn't my understanding, but I could be wrong. When the Buddha taught that we all must cultivate the Four Foundations of Mindfulness, I was assuming that this means we must be aware of reality in every moment by directing our attention to the four foundations. That does require `making' something the subject of awareness. What is it that usually gets in the way of doing that? My estimation is that discursive thought does. Discursive thought is most removed from reality and most subject to the whims of negative mind states, and positive mind states for that matter. I guess my questioning was leading to know how to use meta-cognition, thinking about thinking, as a foundation for mindfulness. But I see that I must learn more about how the Abhidhamma describes such processes. My thinking and terminology is based in my psychology, sociology, and learning theories education, and the Abhidhamma takes a different approach. We can continue this dialogue when I have established a better foundation in the vocabulary/approach commonly practiced in this forum. Metta, James 17053 From: James Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 6:40am Subject: Re: Consciousness and the heart base --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Group, > > I wonder if anyone has read "The Heart's Code: Tapping the Wisdom and > Power of Our Heart Energy: The New Findings About Cellular Memories > and Their Role in the Mind/Body/Spirit" by Paul Pearsall? > I haven't, but it seems possibly relevant to the post that TG made to > James. Christine, This post has fascinated me since you posted it. I have been reading about this particular book and its position ever since. I stayed up until 4:00 am in the morning the night you posted it! I was reading about the book, its author, and trying to get all of the information I could gather about heart transplants. I am still trying to get the book from a library and need to wait. With the holidays coming, no book buying for me right now. :-) I do want to read it and other related research, and maybe compare to the Abhidhamma's heart-base position (which I may contact you off-list for clarification if that is okay) and then post about it. It is a fascinating subject. I just wanted you to know that it wasn't a dead issue. I, for one, am very interested, but probably won't be able to respond for a while. Metta, James 17054 From: nidive Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 7:04am Subject: Hello ... Hi All, This is my first post to dhammastudygroup. Robert introduced me to this group. I am Singaporean, male, age 25, single. I am very interested in Theravada Buddhism, especially the Abhidhamma. To Nina van Gorkom, are you really the author of the excellent book Abhidhamma In Daily Life? It's a lovely book on Abhidhamma and its the first book that really explained what the Dhamma is really all about. I have read lots of explanations on the Dhamma and none could really satisfy me until I read this book. Many thanks to you, Nina. I made very much progress on the Dhamma after reading it. 17055 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/20/02 6:57:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Howard > > I think your question is, Where do the latent tendencies hide when > they are not manifesting? > -------------------------------------------- Howard: That is a way of putting it, though not quite how I would put it because it has a substantialist flavor to it. Perhaps closer to what I mean is "What functions/cetasikas participate in the mechanism we *call* accumulations?" (I would imagine that some cetasikas are direct participants, while others serve as necessary auxilliary conditions for manifestation of tendencies.) It seems to me that cetanas are central to this, and that they are likely quite complex in effect. If enough factors are involved, each of a number of types, then combinatorially it is feasible that the class of possible accumulations be huge. It seems to me that such would be required to explain the great diversity of possible inclinations among people. --------------------------------------------- > > I don't know the answer to this ;-)). I don’t even know if the > question is 'admissible' (I suspect not!). I haven't seen or heard > this discussed anywhere, except for mention of the fact that the > 'passing on' of previous experiences is possible because of the fully > contiguous nature of succeeding moments of consciousness (i.e., 'no > gap in between'). Other than that I can't be of any help, I'm > afraid. > > Are you asking because you see it as something that needs to be > known, or because you find it difficult to accept? > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: The former. It is easy for me to accept that our minds are conditioned and have "accumulations" (or tendencies to act and react in specific ways) which are "passed on". In fact, it is obviously so. I am merely interested in more precisely knowing the mechanism. I am a mathematician and scientist by trade, and I am interested in knowing the"how" of things. Abhidhamma is quite detailed on many matters, and this seems to be an exception. ------------------------------------------------- > > Jon > ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17056 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] How do you prove that Buddha is real Hi, ajahn_paul - In a message dated 11/20/02 8:11:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, ajahn_paul@y... writes: > > Hi all, > > im not trying to do anything to prove that Buddha is real,, i just > want to tell a short story!!!! > > Once upon a time, in a very beautiful ocean, fish mommy and fish > daughter were playing in front of their house, and they started a > little chat..... > > *** d=daughter, m=mommy *** > > d: mom, can i ask u a question? > m: of cause honey! go ahead. > d: i heard my friends said, fish lives in the sea. > m: so??? > d: so, where is the sea,, can u take me there and have a look? > > > And now,, i guess we all know where is Buddha,, and also the Dhamma! > ^____^ > > ======================== Excellent! A good story for grown-up kids as well as children. Nagarjuna, who said that samsara = nibbana, would like it too. We are all poor fish who just can't see what is right in front of us! As the Zen masters say, "Look! Look!" ;-) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17057 From: ajahn_paul Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 7:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] How do you prove that Buddha is real well... its kind of funny,, and also its a little bit upset that ppl who found they were lost, or they even didnt aware that they were lost! sometimes when we felt that we were lost,,, we may walking in the right path already. on the other hand,, some ppl would think that they were walking on the right path, unfortunately they were lost! :( --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, ajahn_paul - > > In a message dated 11/20/02 8:11:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, > ajahn_paul@y... writes: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > im not trying to do anything to prove that Buddha is real,, i just > > want to tell a short story!!!! > > > > Once upon a time, in a very beautiful ocean, fish mommy and fish > > daughter were playing in front of their house, and they started a > > little chat..... > > > > *** d=daughter, m=mommy *** > > > > d: mom, can i ask u a question? > > m: of cause honey! go ahead. > > d: i heard my friends said, fish lives in the sea. > > m: so??? > > d: so, where is the sea,, can u take me there and have a look? > > > > > > And now,, i guess we all know where is Buddha,, and also the Dhamma! > > ^____^ > > > > > ======================== > Excellent! A good story for grown-up kids as well as children. > Nagarjuna, who said that samsara = nibbana, would like it too. > We are all poor fish who just can't see what is right in front of us! > As the Zen masters say, "Look! Look!" ;-) > > With metta, > Howard 17058 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 7:56am Subject: Re: Hello ... Dear ndive,\ Really glad you made it here. I would never have guessed you were only 25 after our exchanges on Dhamma. Nina is a great help to so many of us for a long time. Best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > Hi All, > > This is my first post to dhammastudygroup. > > Robert introduced me to this group. > > I am Singaporean, male, age 25, single. > > I am very interested in Theravada Buddhism, especially the > Abhidhamma. > > To Nina van Gorkom, are you really the author of the excellent book > Abhidhamma In Daily Life? It's a lovely book on Abhidhamma and its > the first book that really explained what the Dhamma is really all > about. I have read lots of explanations on the Dhamma and none could > really satisfy me until I read this book. Many thanks to you, Nina. > I made very much progress on the Dhamma after reading it. 17059 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:07am Subject: Way 26, tadanga vinaya Dear Larry, you had a question about the following: I think it was about tadanga vinaya? I looked in Nyanatiloka: five kinds of pahaana, and two kinds are mundane. The tadanga is by insight: through the stages of insight, you can find these in the Vis. Eternity is overcome by realizing the arising and falling away of nama and rupa, etc. It is said in the sub Co. that here is pointed out the preliminary practice of the mundane Path. I liked your remark about Way 25, pointing out the courage needed: < Abandoning "the discontent rooted in bodily misery, the non-delight in the culture of body contemplation, and the desire to turn away from facing the real ugliness, suffering, impermanence and insubstantiality of the body" (and feeling, citta & dhamma) might necessitate a certain amount of bravery, if not fearlessness. This would relate to our previous threads on fear. Also it is interesting that anatta is counted as an undesirable.> N: We need to be reminded often of courage, courage to continue investigating what appears now. We should not mind our lack of progress, it is condiitoned. Anatta is counted as an undesirable. We like self so much and cling to it. We are afraid to lose self when we die. Remember A. Sompong's remark about fear of death to Rob K: without personality belief no fear of death. Nina. 17060 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:23am Subject: Re: Hello ... Hello ndive, Nice to see you here, welcome. I have enjoyed your posts in the past and I look forward to any contributions you may care to make to the discussions on dsg. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > Hi All, > > This is my first post to dhammastudygroup. > > Robert introduced me to this group. > > I am Singaporean, male, age 25, single. > > I am very interested in Theravada Buddhism, especially the > Abhidhamma. > > To Nina van Gorkom, are you really the author of the excellent book > Abhidhamma In Daily Life? It's a lovely book on Abhidhamma and its > the first book that really explained what the Dhamma is really all > about. I have read lots of explanations on the Dhamma and none could > really satisfy me until I read this book. Many thanks to you, Nina. > I made very much progress on the Dhamma after reading it. 17061 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:39am Subject: Re: Consciousness and the heart base Hello James, I'm glad my mention of the book was helpful - I haven't read the book yet and I would be interested in your thoughts on it at any time. I know it was written for popular consumption and so may lack a cerrtain rigour, but it states it includes the results of some recent research. So often the things in the Teachings that seem different to what 'modern' science declares as truth are not wrong - just waiting for science to catch up :), or at least use the same language. Even if the book disappoints in some way but serves as a jumping off point for further reading and reflection, and if it throws a new light on the truth of the Teachings, it is worthwhile. Newest is not always 'more true'. All we have to do is not close our minds. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > Dear Group, > > > > I wonder if anyone has read "The Heart's Code: Tapping the Wisdom > and > > Power of Our Heart Energy: The New Findings About Cellular > Memories > > and Their Role in the Mind/Body/Spirit" by Paul Pearsall? > > I haven't, but it seems possibly relevant to the post that TG made > to > > James. > > > Christine, > > This post has fascinated me since you posted it. I have been > reading about this particular book and its position ever since. I > stayed up until 4:00 am in the morning the night you posted it! I > was reading about the book, its author, and trying to get all of the > information I could gather about heart transplants. I am still > trying to get the book from a library and need to wait. With the > holidays coming, no book buying for me right now. :-) I do want to > read it and other related research, and maybe compare to the > Abhidhamma's heart-base position (which I may contact you off-list > for clarification if that is okay) and then post about it. It is a > fascinating subject. I just wanted you to know that it wasn't a > dead issue. I, for one, am very interested, but probably won't be > able to respond for a while. > > Metta, James 17062 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 11:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello ... Dear Nidive, wellcome to the group. Thank you for your kind words and I am glad my book could help you. It is good to discuss more about the Abhidhamma and exchange views. Best wishes Nina op 20-11-2002 16:04 schreef nidive op nidive@y...: > To Nina van Gorkom, are you really the author of the excellent book > Abhidhamma In Daily Life? 17063 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Sarah, Thanks for the info. Just to clarify, is every immediately preceding citta a proximity conditition (anantara paccaya) and every immediately preceding anything (dhamma or combination of dhammas) a proximate cause (padatthana)? Larry 17064 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:14pm Subject: Nama Rupa Hi all, I have been thinking for the last couple days about the meaning of "nama-rupa" and would like to write down some ideas. 1. The Sanskrit/Pali word "nama", the English word "name", the German word "Name", and the French word "Nom" all share the same root in the linguistic family of Indo-European languages. The Chinese translated "nama-rupa" as "ming-se", where "ming" means "name" in English, and "se" literally means "color". The compound word "nama- rupa" has been translated as "name-and-form" in some literature and "mentality-materiality" in other. Whether the word "nama" is translated as "name" or "mentality" in English, questions remain: what does it mean by "nama"? What does it mean by "rupa"? 2. Name is representation. Rupa is what is being represented. There are representations of representations. In other words, nama and rupa are relational. They are not two categories with some number of elements. 3. Representation of something is possible only when there is consciousness, and representations are representation through six modalities of senses (five modalities of bodily senses plus the modality of intellect.) I look forward to some discussion on the meaning of nama-rupa. Have a good day, Victor 17065 From: James Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:27pm Subject: Re: Buddhism question( please reply) Hi Star Kid! (AKA Philip) Your letter is very interesting. You have a lot of questions, and that is good. I am going to try to answer your questions after what you wrote. I also want to give you a few helpful hints about writing letters to people asking for things like information, especially adults. I am sure you won't mind. You are obviously a very clever and smart boy. Dear guys: (Philip, you can call your friends `guys', but you shouldn't do that with adults. You should address adults as "Dear Sirs or Madams; or Dear Members of DSG" I'm positive you didn't mean harm by addressing adults as `guys' and are being friendly, but showing the highest respect to adults and teachers is very important in life. It is the guidance and love of adults that will guarantee you a good future. I am sure you understand now and are clever enough to do this in the future- and teach your classmates the proper way also. I am counting on you to pass this on. :-). I'm Philip Chui, and I think I have introduced myself in the last letter I sent to you guys already. I have some questions about Buddhism: 1. Who is the god in Buddhism? How many forms of the god does your religion have?( In Christianity, we have three: The father, the son and the holy spirit ). (Philip, since you don't capitalize `God', I am assuming that you mean any kind of god and not just the one `true creator God'. Well, let me tell you Philip, by being Christian you are missing out on having a lot of gods! Buddhism has LOTS AND LOTS of gods…and lots of demons…and lots of ghosts!! And they are all very interesting too! They glow in the dark, don't have to eat food that much, and don't have to sleep for months at a time! They live in other worlds and, if you are a Buddha, you can travel to them with the power of your mind; much like a `transporter' in Star Trek, but with no machines! And depending on the type of Buddhist, especially Tibetan Buddhist, there are also a lot of enlightened Buddhas and other higher beings living in other worlds. But none have been as supreme as LORD BUDDHA, Siddhartha. He existed for eons and eons (American spelling ;-) to bring the ultimate and final truth to the world. To most Buddhists, he is the only Lord, king, and god…as you are thinking. But, and this is very important to understand Philip, all of the gods, devas, ghosts, demons, and silent Buddhas in Buddhism are no better than human beings. Yep, hard to understand but true. They were humans before being gods, and will probably be humans again. Actually, they are jealous of humans because humans can be Buddhas more easily and they can't.) 2. What is the belief in Buddhism? (The Lord Buddha taught the belief of Buddhism in his first sermon. This belief is called "The Four Noble Truths". They are: 1: We are all suffering, 2: This suffering is caused by us all wanting things to be what they aren't, 3: There is a way to stop this suffering, 4: The Eightfold Path, which is a way to see and accept things as they really are.) 3. When you die, where do you go, according to your religion? (If you are a regular person, you are reborn into a body with the same attributes you had when you died. If you are a Buddha and see things as they really are, you are not reborn but enter a state of existence called `Parinibbana'. I am not sure what that is like because I haven't been there. I have only read a few `brief postcards' sent from Buddhas who have seen it. It is supposed to be a great place! I want to go there one day. Maybe I will see you! ;- ) 4. How do you prove that Buddha is real? (We don't need to prove that the Buddha is real; after all, inside, we are all Buddhas. He said, "I am this", and we say, "Oh, I am that too!" So we know the Lord Buddha is real because we know that we are real. I know I am real anyway. Are you??? Hehehe…just kidding. I know you are real too. The Buddha is real because we are all real. Jesus was real too. And God is real also, in a certain view. The only thing that isn't real is ignorance of such things. May we all be freed of the `unreality' of ignorance.) Thanks a lot for reading my letters. If you have any questions about my religion ( Christianity ), do not hestitate to tell me. (I have one question Philip. Jesus said that a person `must be like a little child' to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Since you are a kid, I want to ask you, what do you think he meant by that?) Yours sincerely, Philip Chui Metta (Loving-Kindness), James 17066 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 7:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Thanks for the info. Just to clarify, is every immediately preceding > citta a proximity conditition (anantara paccaya) and every immediately > preceding anything (dhamma or combination of dhammas) a proximate cause > (padatthana)? > > Larry ___________________ Dera Larry, These are different terms and may be confusing if we try to compare them. Anatara paccaya is one of the 24 conditions explained in the Patthana. Padatthana is not one of the 24 . Although the English term 'proximate cause' may make us think that it arises prior to the object, in fact in many cases (eg Samadhi is the proximate cause of panna) it arises togther with it . Robert 17067 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 7:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Robert, Ah, I think I get it. Padatthana doesn't relate to time and causal sequence. As Sarah suggested it might be better to translate it as 'support' rather than 'proximate cause'. A footprint (padatthana) supports a foot, an eye supports eye consciousness, and samadhi supports panna. Btw, is there a specific proximity condition (anantara paccaya) for panna; something that is always the case, like contact (phassa) is always proximity condition for feeling (vedana)? Larry 17068 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 8:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The 12-Steps to Buddhahood- Pt. 1 Hi James, Your post is very interesting indeed (though I’m not sure about the subject heading). I’ve long been impressed by the work of AA and have had similar reflections to yours. As we know, with any addiction or illness, breaking through the denial barrier is a very important step. As you suggest -- and provide apt quotes for -- we all suffer from the diseas of desire/clinging and most of the time are in complete denial about its existence or its harm (or both) on various levels and look to others for support in our ignorance. Understanding the nature of phenomena, their existence when they arise as not-self (and not in anyone’s ‘control’) and ‘the power of the Triple Gem’ is the way. Thanks for sharing your insights on the cancers we prefer not to see;-) I think AA would be (should be) interested to receive a copy of the adapted steps for Buddhist AAs Sarah p.s 1. On the 'heart-to-heart' thread, did you look at the 'heart' posts in U.P. for more Tipitaka detail on haddaya vatthu (heart-base)? 2. Great post to Philip.....the sooner he learns the better;-) ====================================================== 17069 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 9:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama Rupa Hi Victor, The eye can't see. Eye consciousness arises dependent on an eye, but the eye is not a seer. Eye consciousness arises and subsides so quickly it can't be considered to be a seer either. So there is no seer, just eye and eye consciousness. If we don't understand that the eye is not a seer, it will be very difficult to understand that the body is not self. Hence it is important to discriminate between mentality and materiality (nama and rupa). That's the main point, imo. Larry 17070 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 9:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Larry & Rob Ep, Larry, a very relevant quote on the use of ‘bare attention’. Not being a ‘mathmatician by trade’ I’m also always happy to hear Rob’s comments whether upside down, back-to-front or in at the deep end;-). A few brief comments: 1.I find ‘bare attention’ to be quite illogical as a translation of sati and very confusing. Why not just ‘mindfulness’ or ‘awareness’? Attention immediately suggests a ‘doing’ or ‘noting’ which I think is misleading. After all, the goal as Rob suggests, is to understand the anatta-nature of all realities (i.e 4 foundations of mindfulness). Of course, as Rob suggests, it depends on the way we read and understnd these phrases or any translation of terms for that matter. 2. Larry, sukkha-vipassana (dry-insight) has an entirely different meaning and refers to one who has attained a stage of enlightenment without jhana. 3. The problem with phrases such as the ‘bare registering of the facts observed’ is its vagueness and lack of clarity about the paramattha dhammas which are the objects of sati and panna. Registering of facts can so easily be just ‘bare’ thinking without any understanding of dhammas at all. 4. “Without reacting” to them......surely it depends on conditions whether there is ‘reacting’ or not. Do we mind or care? Is there any understanding of the lobha or dosa when there is ‘reacting’? 5.L.. ..“it separates 'practice mind' from 'ordinary mind’.Possibly it misses the flavour of the word "lives" (viharati) in "a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body..." Any comments?” ..... My comment is just that the idea of self is very deep-rooted (as in when there is any selection of object) and so is the desire for results. And, yes, what about ‘mind’ at this moment or ‘body’ , or any other reality? 6.Rob Ep: “I don't see any difference between such precision and the idea of 'discernment', which means to see things as they are and in no other way [in other words, without delusion or ignorance].” ..... For most people, being aware of ‘the bare facts of a perception’ through one of the 6 doorways is not precise as I see it. What are the bare facts? We need to study and consider a lot about the various namas and rupas (as I’m very glad to see Victor is doing) or the 4 satipatthanas in order to know even theoretically what the ‘bare facts’ are. Think of all the discussions we’ve had on concepts and realities and on namas and rupas in the abhidhamma. We’re just scratching the surface, I believe. 7. Rob, I appreciate your comments about the rotten food, aversion and non-reacting. Rob: “but I would think there has to be some interference, at least of the intention to discern what is happening, in order for mindfulness attention and insight upon its heels to take place.” Again, I think the idea of self and the wishing for a result creeps in very craftily. Only sati can be aware of the mind-states at these times. 8. Rob: “All of these seem to be developed gradually by using all expedient means according to one's predisposition and what works for an individual.” ..... I agree about the value of seeing the benefit in all kinds of kusala and thereby they are ‘developed gradually.’ You raise many interesting and helpful points. As I was discussing with James, seeing the cancer of desire and ignorance of it at these times is the key, I think. ***** Thanks for the many helpful points in both your posts. I apologise if I’m stepping on any bare toes with these comments. Look forward to hearing more from you both or others. Sarah ===== 17071 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello ... Hi Nidive, Thanks for introducing yourself. You'll find others from Sing and Malaysia here too. Jon and I live in Hong Kong. I see you've also bumped into a few other friends as well;-) --- nidive wrote: >... I have read lots of explanations on the Dhamma and none could > really satisfy me until I read this book. Many thanks to you, Nina. > I made very much progress on the Dhamma after reading it. .... Same as I found exactly. Just a flimsy stencilled manuscript off a manual type-writer when I first read it, with lots of hand-written notes in the margins as I recall;-) Nidive, you may find it useful to access the search function for all posts (except the first ?months) at: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/ Also, you may wish to look at some of the Useful Posts when you have time or a particular topic in mind: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Look f/w to your contributions to any old or new threads. Thanks for joining (and to Rob K for the intro;-)) Sarah ===== 17072 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Sarah, Thanks for your comments. I just have a few additional points. I have no idea where the phrase "bare attention" originated. I'm assuming it was from Ven. U Narada or Mahasi Sayadaw, but it could be Nyanaponika Thera's. If it was originally Burmese we might look into translation issues. In any event, it seems to be a good fit for "just sati". The reason I brought up "sukkha vipassana" is that it is sometimes translated as "bare insight". In this case "bare" (or dry) refers to the absence of the "juice" of jhana. The "bare" in "bare attention" seems to refer to the avoidance of discursive thinking as James is discussing with Jon. However it might be clearer to think of this "bare" as the absence of akusala cetasikas which would certainly be the case whenever a citta arose with sati and especially when cultivating satipatthana. I agree with Rob that the rigorous discipline that Mahasi Sayadaw advocates is a skillful means that no doubt produces good results when conscientiously applied and understood. [I may be embellishing on Rob's thought a little here.] However, I don't think it is the only way to read the sutta and commentary. I would welcome any alternative views, particularly from K. Sujin if you get a chance to bring it up at your next meeting. An in-depth commentary from her would be nice. Also I'm going to post a few bits from Ven. Gunaratana. Larry 17073 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:41pm Subject: Sources of texts.... Hi James & All, You raised the question of sources of various texts. I would like to quote from Dhammapala (the ancient commentator who wrote most the commentaries not written by Buddhaghosa.) Here he is writing about the Netti (the Guide) which I was quoting from yesterday. This is contained in the intro and I thought you might find it of interest: ***** “If it is asked, he says,’How can it be known that the “Guide-Treatise” is what was uttered by a principal disciple and approved by the Buddha? (it can be answered that it is) because it is a text ; for there is no other criterion beyond a text, and any text not in contradiction (when examined) under the four Principal Appeals to Authority is the criterion. And the “Guide-Treatise” has, like the “Disclosure of the Pitakas” (Petakopadesa), come down (to us) by way of the unimpeachable succession of teachers.-If that is so, then why is its source not given? For a source is given in the cases of the Subha sutta, the Ananagana Sutta and Kaccayana Samyutta, etc, which were uttered by disciples. -That is not always so in the case of utterances; for no source is given in the cases of the Patisambhidamagga and the Niddesa or in the cases of the Dhammapada and the Buddhavamasa, so that is no criterion; and that is how it should be regarded here too. And then any source is itself always the utterance of the custodians of the Sutta and Vinaya, the Elders Upali and other principal disciples, and so that too is uttered by principal disciples. And anyway why this investigation about a source, since there is no one else to whom to ascribe it except the Elder. What needs investigating here is only the meaning (in order to see) that it does not conflict with the texts. Besides, as a method of detailing the meaning of the texts, this work has no more need of a separatate source than have the Patisambhidamagga or the Niddesa’....” Sarah ====== 17074 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:46pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Reply: Kom Dear Philip, > -----Original Message----- > From: Star Kid [mailto:starkidsclub@y...] > > > Dear Kom: > > Hi, I'm Philip. Thanks for writing to me. I have read > your letter, and I agree with you that we cannot > control over what will happen to us. > > I have a few questions I want to ask you. Even that I > am a Christian, I am still interested in many other > religions , such as Buddhism, Islam, Catholic, > Hindu......Can you please tell me what is your > religion, and tell me something about it? Thanks very > much. > I believe in the teachings of the Buddha, so that would make me a Buddhist. The Buddha teaches what goes on in our daily life. For example, you said you agreed that we cannot control what will happen to us. The Buddha teaches why this is so. When you see what you like, you are bound to be happy because of the seeing: this is because the habits of liking the thing that you see grows more as you keep liking the thing that you see. The happiness arises only because: 1) there is seeing, 2) there is the thing that you see, 3) because what you see had made you happy in the past. The Buddha also teaches about good things and bad things. He praises doing good things, like being kind to people, helping people who are in need, being joyful for other's good fortune, and to understand that things happen only because there are conditions for them to happen. He teaches the disadvantages of bad things, and praises not doing them. Bad things include killing, stealing, lying, saying bad words, saying things to break up people's friendship, saying non-useful things, sexual misconducts, and consuming things that cause one to be careless. The Buddha teaches that to gain the understanding of ourselves and to achieve true happiness that is not so temporary (like being happy because we see the thing that we like), we must develop wisdom to understand things in our daily life as they truly are. Through wisdom, we can become free from all the things that cause unhappiness. I hope this makes sense to you. If you don't understand anything, please ask. There are many kind people in this group that would be happy to help you if you don't understand anything I say. kom 17075 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 5:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama Rupa Hi, Larry (and Victor) - In a message dated 11/21/02 12:06:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hi Victor, > > The eye can't see. Eye consciousness arises dependent on an eye, but the > eye is not a seer. Eye consciousness arises and subsides so quickly it > can't be considered to be a seer either. So there is no seer, just eye > and eye consciousness. If we don't understand that the eye is not a > seer, it will be very difficult to understand that the body is not self. > Hence it is important to discriminate between mentality and materiality > (nama and rupa). That's the main point, imo. > > Larry > ========================= I agree that there is no seer - just seeing. And the seeing is an act of vi~n~nana or discerning. However, I don't have a clue what the relative speed of the discerning has to do with anything. Several people on this list frequently point out that mind-moments arise and pass very quickly (in comparison, I suppose, with rupas which supposedly remain [or are replicated] for up to 17 mind-moments - it must be in comparison with *something*, for duration is always relative). So what? Something not lasting for a long time means only that it doesn't last for a long time - nothing more. What if an act of visual consciousness lasted twice as long (again compared, I suppose, to rupas)? Would that make it a seer? Four times as long? Seventeen times as long? I believe that it is unimportant what is the relative duration of things. What is important is that they don't remain, and that they arise only in dependence on conditions, their creation and tentative existence completely dependent on similarly empty dhammas. What is important, as I see it, is that *nothing* whatsoever has any core or own-being, being nothing more than a dependent arising that does not remain. As one Zen master said: to see a glass properly is to see it as already broken. As the Buddha said hundreds of years earlier: whatever is of the nature to arise is of the nature to cease. (The speed is irrelevant.) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17076 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 6:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama Rupa Hi again, Larry, Victor, and all - One more point: I *am* aware that the Buddha pointed out that mind changes more quickly than material form, and thus if one were to take anything to be a self, it would be more sensible to choose material form than consciousness. He said this to dissuade people from making consciousness into a self, a very common tendency then, now, and always. (We can recall the time the Buddha questioned a monk on what he meant by consciousness, getting out of him that he thought that consciousness is some sort of entity that continues from lifetime to lifetime.) But the Buddha would not consider *anything* that failed to remain, regardless of how long it lasted, to be a self. Whatever is impermanent is not-self. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17077 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 11:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Larry, OK. I'm sure we'll all be raising points from discussions. Let me add a couple of quotes from K.Sujin in the meantime as translated by Nina in the Perfections (Energy ch) series recently in case they may help answer your qus: 1."The Buddha's followers in the past were the buddhist assembly at the time of the Buddha Gotama. We can see that it is not difficult for a result to materialize, but that the development of the right conditions leading to such a result is difficult. If at this moment there is not yet the cause that can bring its appropriate result, the result cannot arise, no matter how much one tries to hasten its arising. We should continue to apply energy with the development of understanding and we should be truthful with regard to it: we should find out whether we know the characteristics of realities that are appearing right now or not yet. This kind of understanding is not intellectual understanding which stems from listening, but it is of the level of satipatthåna. Satipatthåna is developed when sampajañña (paññå) arises together with sati and knows the characteristics of realities appearing at this moment as they are. Paññå develops gradually, time and again, so that one day the four noble Truths can be penetrated. When the time for enlightenment has come, this result is in accordance with the cause, and it will arise without difficulty. However, we should continue to be patient and to have energy and endeavour to develop understanding." ***** 2." 'And from what point of view , monks, should the controlling faculty of mindfulness be regarded? From that of the four applications of mindfulness.' Kusala citta cannot arise without sati cetasika, be it at the moment one performs dåna, or abstains from akusala. However, the characteristic of the controlling faculty of sati, the characteristic of its leadership, can be seen in the four applications of mindfulness*" (6. ***** footnote by Nina: "6. Sati of satipatthåna is mindful of nåma and rúpa which appear. The four Applications of Mindfulness, which are mindfulness of the Body, of Feeling, of Citta and of Dhammas, are actually all conditioned realities. They have been explained under the different aspects of the four Applications of Mindfulness. Sati of satipatthåna is sati of a level which is higher than sati of dåna or sati of síla, because when it is developed it leads to the eradication of defilements." ***** Sarah ====== 17078 From: James Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 0:10am Subject: Re: Sources of texts.... --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hi James & All, > > You raised the question of sources of various texts. I would like to quote > from Dhammapala (the ancient commentator who wrote most the commentaries > not written by Buddhaghosa.) Here he is writing about the Netti (the > Guide) which I was quoting from yesterday. This is contained in the intro > and I thought you might find it of interest: > > ***** > "If it is asked, he says,'How can it be known that the "Guide- Treatise" is > what was uttered by a principal disciple and approved by the Buddha? (it > can be answered that it is) because it is a text of a canonical text>; for there is no other criterion beyond a text, and > any text not in contradiction (when examined) under the four Principal > Appeals to Authority is the criterion. And the "Guide-Treatise" has, like > the "Disclosure of the Pitakas" (Petakopadesa), come down (to us) by way > of the unimpeachable succession of teachers.-If that is so, then why is > its source not given? For a source is given in the cases of the Subha > sutta, the Ananagana Sutta and Kaccayana Samyutta, etc, which were uttered > by disciples. > > -That is not always so in the case of utterances; for no source is given > in the cases of the Patisambhidamagga and the Niddesa or in the cases of > the Dhammapada and the Buddhavamasa, so that is no criterion; and that is > how it should be regarded here too. And then any source is itself always > the utterance of the custodians of the Sutta and Vinaya, the Elders Upali > and other principal disciples, and so that too is uttered by principal > disciples. And anyway why this investigation about a source, since there > is no one else to whom to ascribe it except the Elder. What > needs investigating here is only the meaning (in order to see) that it > does not conflict with the texts. Besides, as a method of detailing the > meaning of the texts, this work has no more need of a separatate source > than have the Patisambhidamagga or the Niddesa'...." > > Sarah > ====== Sarah, I believe Dhammapala is using faulty reasoning and an 'armchair historian' approach to Buddhist scholarship. First he argues that the Netti has to be from the same Arahants who recorded the Vinaya and Suttas, then he argues that it doesn't matter anyway as long as it matches the teachings of the Vinaya and Suttas. Huh? This is circular reasoning and not true scholarship. As far as the origination of the Abhidhamma, which you and I are in disagreement about, allow me to present my findings: From "Theravada Buddhism; A Chronology" Edited by John Bullitt http://www.accesstoinsight.org/history.html: 1 -544/-480 Parinibbana (Skt: Parinirvana; death and final release) of the Buddha, at Kusinara (now Kusinagar, India) (age 80). {1,3} During the rains retreat following the Buddha's Parinibbana, the First Council convenes at Rajagaha, India, during which 500 arahant bhikkhus, led by Ven. Mahakassapa, gather to recite the entire body of the Buddha's teachings. The recitation of the Vinaya by Ven. Upali becomes accepted as the Vinaya Pitaka; the recitation of the Dhamma by Ven. Ananda becomes established as the Sutta Pitaka. {1,4} 100 -444/-380 100 years after the Buddha's Parinibbana the Second Council convenes in Vesali to discuss controversial points of Vinaya. The first schism of the Sangha occurs, in which the Mahasanghika school parts ways with the traditionalist Sthaviravadins. At issue is the Mahasanghika's reluctance to accept the Suttas and the Vinaya as the final authority on the Buddha's teachings. This schism marks the first beginnings of what would later evolve into Mahayana Buddhism, which would come to dominate Buddhism in northern Asia (China, Tibet, Japan, Korea). {1} 294 -250 Third Council is convened by King Asoka at Pataliputra (India). Disputes on points of doctrine lead to further schisms, spawning the Sarvastivadin and Vibhajjavadin sects. The Abhidhamma Pitaka is recited at the Council, along with additional sections of the Khuddaka Nikaya. The modern Pali Tipitaka is now essentially complete, although some scholars have suggested that at least two parts of the extant Canon -- the Parivara in the Vinaya, and the Apadana in the Sutta -- may date from a later period. {1, 4} Sources {1} The Buddhist Religion: A Historical Introduction (fourth edition) by R.H. Robinson & W.L. Johnson (Belmont, California: Wadsworth, 1996) {4} Beginnings: the Pali Suttas by Samanera Bodhesako (Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1984) James: If the Abhidhamma Pitaka were the direct teachings of the Buddha, or from his Chief Disciple, it would not have taken 294 years after the death of the Buddha to recite it. Most `accepted' and `unbiased' scholarship points to its being a later addition to the canon, under the encouragement and guidance of King Asoka. Now, compare true history with how some change history to fit personal agendas. This is an example of one Buddhist scholar who blatantly presents the history of the Tipitaka in a misleading way: This is from "The Buddha and His Teachings" by Ven. Nârada: http://theravada.net/general/dhamma/tipitaka_overview.html "This First Council compiled and arranged in its present form the Pali Tipitaka, which represents the entire body of the Buddha's Teaching. Two other Councils of Arahants were held 100 and 236 years later respectively, again to rehearse the Word of the Buddha because attempts were being made to pollute the pure Teaching. About 83 B.C., during the reign of the pious Siæhala King Vatta Gamani Abhaya, a Council of Arahants was held, and the Tipiöaka was, for the first time in the history of Buddhism, committed to writing at Aluvihâra in Ceylon. Thanks to the indefatigable efforts of those noble and foresighted Arahants, there is no room either now or in the future for higher critics or progressive scholars to adulterate the pure Teaching." James: But I guess Ven. Narada adulterating history is okay because this chronology is very inaccurate by acceptable scholarship. Ven. Narada knows this and later clarifies his earlier claim in regards to the Abhidhamma being recorded at the First Council: "According to some scholars Abhidhamma is not a teaching of the Buddha, but is a later elaboration of scholastic monks. Tradition, however, attributes the nucleus of the Abhidhamma to the Buddha Himself…. Whoever the great author or authors may have been, it has to be admitted that the Abhidhamma must be the product of an intellectual genius comparable only to the Buddha." James: This is faulty reasoning and a type of `Trying to Have Your Cake and Eat it Too." The Abhidhamma either is a direct teaching of the Buddha or it is not. It cannot be seen or accepted as being both. From my research, and intuition also, I conclude that the Abhidhamma is not a direct teaching of the Buddha. It is a later work of scholarship by bhikkhu scholars who had not been taught by the Lord Buddha in person. Metta, James 17079 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 0:12am Subject: Scrambled & Ultimate Hi Rob M, I’ve got a few of your posts in front of me this time (some of which Nina touched on). As usual, you raise important and challenging points: 1. vipaka cittas ================= In post 16905, some of the comments were a bit confused. Azita raised the right qus and I agree with your follow-up post 16969 (Azita, I also really liked your post to Chris on sleep and dreaming). Seeing (as vipaka citta) always has exactly the same characteristics and performs the same function regardless of the visible object seen at any time or whether it is kusala/akusala vipaka. As you also go on to say, there are many different conditioning factors at any time (inc. the object and eyebase), but there is only one ‘seed’ or ‘kamma’ for each vipaka.Kus kamma -> kus vipaka and vice versa. 2. With and without wrong view =============================== In post 16899 you were discussing kammic weight and we’ve discussed this. You were looking for a ref in K.Milinda. I think there are many references to the greater danger or ‘weight’ of ‘with wrong view’.I was just trying to find one quickly that I came across yest. in Sammohavinodani, but can’t see it now either;-( But again, perhaps it’s hard to generalise? Let’s post the refs when we find them. 3. Ultimate and ultimate ======================== You suggested to James that “we can say that the Buddha’s Dhamma is not “ultimate” because ther are many things left out.” This is one use of the word as we use it conventionally;-). You go on to discuss ‘ultimate realities’ and suggest these are either mentioned; 1)phenomenologically 2) analytically as in “the analysis of the five aggregates”. You say this is a small percentage of “ultimate” and the “remainder is primarily in the realm of ‘science’” Briefly: I agree that the Buddha’s Teachings are concerned with the direct experience and understanding of those ‘ultimate realities’ which can be known and lead to the goal of the eradication of all defilements and realization of nibbana. The khandhas are no more nor less than the very namas and rupas arising and falling away at this moment and therefore are the very ‘ultimate realities to be known’, as being discussed in the Satipatthana Sutta. The Buddha taught about all ‘ultimate realities’ as it will depend entirely on conditions and accumulations what will be known and experienced. I don’t think there is any use or meaning of ultimate other than that applied to ‘paramattha dhammas’. Other aspects which we conventionally might think of as ‘ultimate truths’ are concepts. These include scientific ‘facts’ such as brains, atoms, quantum physics and the like.In other words, these are all ‘sammuti sacca’ (conventional truths, however scientifically proved). Just because there isn’t any understanding or experience of say, the rupas out in the garden, doesn’t mean the ‘ultimate realities’ are any less real, even though they are unknown to ‘our’ cittas. By understanding the characteristic of a reality, say hardness or sound, when it is experienced, it can be known as an element, no self at all. Gradually by understanding its nature, it becomes apparent that other hardness or sounds must have this same nature even if they are not being experienced at this instant. This is how saddha (confidence) in the Teachings and in those ultimate realities not experienced develops. Well that’s my perspective for now. Look f/w to more of yours as always. Sarah ===== 17080 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 2:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Dear Larry, I depart on Nov 26, back Dec 13. I was so silent because I had to finish the perfection of patience. Kom helped me enormously, sometimes daily, with all the high and royal words in the Co. which does not exist in English. It was a difficult and very long chapter, I will put it on when back. I thought you were silent because of letting it sink in. Speaking of accumulations, I heard a good reminder on tape: A. Sujin said that if we accumulate patience from now on we may become more partient in speech, say, in ten years, or, the next life, or after many lives. Isn't that a good one? Courage and good cheer! I may have little time to answer questions at length now, I may save them. Bare mindfulness: see below. op 20-11-2002 01:58 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w... > > I wonder if satiyevettha (just mindfulness) is what Ven. U Narada had in > mind for "bare attention". Maybe someone familiar with Burmese could > track this down. Can you make a distinction between satiyevettha and > sukkha-vipassana? >N: the word is not satiyevettha, it is *sati*. That is all. Satiyevettha is a conglomeration of small words stuck together, a sandhi, which we have to analyse: satiyaa, which can mean: of, for, by, with reference to sati. the ev: eva, thus, indeed. etttha: here. When stuck together vocals are elided and you get one long word. I have to look at the context whether it is : sati (nominative) + eva, thus not: satiyaa. Thus, he translated sati with: bare mindfulness, which is very free, isn't it? Moreover I find it a loaded term, and I doubt whether there is a Pali equivalent. I like to be careful and check whether such a term is based on the scriptures and old commentaries. I will not go into the article you quoted for the same reason. Nina. 17081 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 4:44am Subject: Re: Scrambled & Ultimate Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > 2. With and without wrong view > =============================== > In post 16899 you were discussing kammic weight and we've discussed this. > You were looking for a ref in K.Milinda. I think there are many references > to the greater danger or `weight' of `with wrong view'.I was just trying > to find one quickly that I came across yest. in Sammohavinodani, but can't > see it now either;-( But again, perhaps it's hard to generalise? Let's > post the refs when we find them. ===== A few weeks ago, we met in HK and I passed to you a copy of Abhidhamma class notes prepared by Sayadaw U Silananda. On page 23 of those class notes, there is a quote from Milinda's Questions: King Milinda: "Revered Nagasena, for whom is the greater demerit: he who does an evil deed knowingly, or he who does an evil deed unknowingly? Elder Nagasena: "His is the greater demerit, sire, who does an evil deed unknowingly." Milinda: "Well then, revered Nagasena, do we doubly punish that royal son of ours or the chief minister who does an evil deed unknowingly?" Nagasena: "What do you think about this, sire? if one (man) should unknowingly take hold of a red-hot ball of iron, aglow, aflame, ablaze and another should take hold of it knowingly, which would be the more severely burnt?" Milinda: "He who took hold of it unknowingly, revered sir, would be the more severely burnt." Nagasena: "Even so, sire, the greater demerit is his who does an evil deed unknowingly." Milinda: "You are dexterous, revered Nagasena." Sayadaw U Silananda sates that this is taken from Milinda's Questions, Vol I, pp. 116-7. I checked these pages in my PTS version of Vol I of Milinda's Questions but did not find it. Maybe you might have better luck tracking it down. ===== > > 3. Ultimate and ultimate > ======================== > Just because there isn't any understanding or experience of say, the rupas > out in the garden, doesn't mean the `ultimate realities' are any less > real, even though they are unknown to `our' cittas. > > By understanding the characteristic of a reality, say hardness or sound, > when it is experienced, it can be known as an element, no self at all. > Gradually by understanding its nature, it becomes apparent that other > hardness or sounds must have this same nature even if they are not being > experienced at this instant. This is how saddha (confidence) in the > Teachings and in those ultimate realities not experienced develops. ===== I'm not sure that I agree. Consider the classic question, "If a tree falls in the forest, but there is none to hear it, is there a sound?" We all know that the Abhidhamma depends upon very specific meanings for words, and that these specific meanings are sometimes different from "conventional" or "scientific" usage. Let us consider the Abhidhamma definition of the rupa called "sound". The rupa "sound" has the characteristic of striking the ear, the function of being the object of auditory cognition and the manifestation of being the field or object of auditory cognition. From this strict definition, I conclude that the rupa sound only exists when there is an ear to hear it. Does something come into existence when a tree falls in the forest, but there is none to hear it? Perhaps, but whatever comes into existence is not of interest to the Abhidhamma; it is not the rupa "sound" because it does not fit the characteristic / function / manifestation. If we take a "scientific" definition of sound (something like "localized incidence of rapidly changing air pressure, typically caused by a vibrating object"), then there is "sound" even if there is no ear to hear it. The Abhidhamma and science have different definitions for the word "sound" because they have different purposes. Trying to expand the Abhidhamma definition of sound and say that it can be used as a scientific definition of sound is an Aristotlean approach that I have a problem with. Ethics is outside the scope of science (scientific ethics are incredibly important, but there is nothing inherently ethical about science). We don't look to science to give us answers to ethical questions. In a similar way, we shouldn't try to apply or extend ethics (i.e. Abhdidhamma) to answer "scientific" questions. Does a falling tree make a sound when there is no ear to hear? I think that the Abhidhamma answer is "Mu!!" (the Zen answer to the koan, "Does a dog have a Buddha-nature?") It doesn't matter; it is outside the scope of definition; you must un-ask the question. Comments? Metta, Rob M :-) 17082 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 4:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Scrambled & Ultimate Hi Rob M, --- robmoult wrote: > Hi Sarah, > Sayadaw U Silananda sates that this is taken from Milinda's > Questions, Vol I, pp. 116-7. I checked these pages in my PTS version > of Vol I of Milinda's Questions but did not find it. Maybe you > might have better luck tracking it down. ..... I can just help here v.quickly. The page no is to the IB Horner transl in the Sacred Books series (red cover). It is in ch 3, the cutting off of Perplexity, 7th Division, vii (or 84 in the Pali). You know I was looking at it in the papers you gave us yest and I think it might have been this and not sth in the Sammohavinodani that I had in mind - no wonder I couldn't find it there;-) We can both sleep well now. Sarah ====== 17083 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 5:08am Subject: question if another person misunderstands us, on the misunderstanding builds more and scolds us, how should we handle the situation? what thoughts should we have towards that person? ~meththa ranil 17084 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 5:22am Subject: Re: question Hi Ranil, You analyze the situation, "Conditions arose and some vipaka ripened; the result of some past kamma. This is why I have heard these words. Though my past conditioning limits my choices, I still have "free will"; I can choose how to respond to this situation. If I choose to react negatively, I will have to suffer in the future. Reacting with dosa is like picking up a red-hot iron rod to hit somebody; I hurt myself first before getting a chance to hurt the other person." You examine your feelings, "I feel hurt. However, I understand that the words themselves did not hurt me. It was the emotions that I added onto the words that caused the hurt. The hurt comes from my pride, my conceit, my ego and perhaps, my arrogance. The hurt comes from me and by noting that the source of the emotions, I take away their power." You think about your acquaintance, "This comment shows that my acquaintance has dosa. They will suffer the results of this dosa according to the workings of their own kamma. I cannot allow their weakness to influence me and cause me to create bad kamma for myself. I must react to this situation with metta to benefit both myself and my acquaintance." Ranil, does this make sense? We haven't chatted before; are all these terms familiar to you? Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "ranil gunawardena" wrote: > > if another person misunderstands us, > on the misunderstanding builds more and scolds us, > how should we handle the situation? > what thoughts should we have towards that person? > > ~meththa > ranil > > 17085 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 5:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Larry --- LBIDD@w... wrote: ... ... > Hi Jon, > > I think you are making this too difficult. What to do is > anupassana. > "Anupassana" = "look at". So, look at something. Sounds simple, I agree. But I think there are one or two things further you need to explain. For example: 1. What is it that is looked at? 2. How is the looking done? Is it like normal looking, that is, deliberate and directed? 3. I assume this particular kind of looking at would have to be wholesome/kusala. How is this achieved; how do we know if the looking is the kusala kind, and not the akusala kind? Jon 17086 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 5:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] How do you prove that Buddha is real Dear Ahan Paul, I agree with you for the Dhamma. But Buddha is a human who lived with us for 45 years (total 80 years) and attained pari-nibbana. ~with meththa ranil >From: "ajahn_paul" >Subject: [dsg] How do you prove that Buddha is real >Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 13:10:16 -0000 > >Hi all, > >im not trying to do anything to prove that Buddha is real,, i just >want to tell a short story!!!! > >Once upon a time, in a very beautiful ocean, fish mommy and fish >daughter were playing in front of their house, and they started a >little chat..... > >*** d=daughter, m=mommy *** > >d: mom, can i ask u a question? >m: of cause honey! go ahead. >d: i heard my friends said, fish lives in the sea. >m: so??? >d: so, where is the sea,, can u take me there and have a look? > > >And now,, i guess we all know where is Buddha,, and also the Dhamma! >^____^ > 17087 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 5:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. James --- James wrote: > Jon, > > By discursive thought, I mean analytical thinking, planning, > deciding, etc., not sensory input processing or pure recollection. > This definition I am using comes from common usage, not Buddhist > scripture. ... ... > This isn't my understanding, but I could be wrong. When the Buddha > taught that we all must cultivate the Four Foundations of > Mindfulness, I was assuming that this means we must be aware of > reality in every moment by directing our attention to the four > foundations. That does require `making' something the subject of > awareness. What is it that usually gets in the way of doing that? > My estimation is that discursive thought does. Discursive thought > is most removed from reality and most subject to the whims of > negative mind states, and positive mind states for that matter. I > guess my questioning was leading to know how to use meta-cognition, > thinking about thinking, as a foundation for mindfulness. But I see > that I must learn more about how the Abhidhamma describes such > processes. My thinking and terminology is based in my psychology, > sociology, and learning theories education, and the Abhidhamma takes > a different approach. We can continue this dialogue when I have > established a better foundation in the vocabulary/approach commonly > practiced in this forum. (I'm sorry if I've given the impression that discussion can only be conducted here on the basis of the vocabulary/approach of the Abhidhamma. There is no such rule or convention. People on this list are free, indeed encouraged, to discuss dhamma using whatever terminology they are comfortable with.) About discursive thought (the conventional kind you describe – analysing, planning, deciding, etc). There is nothing inherently unwholesome about it. It may be kusala or akusala, depending on the accompanying mental factors at the particular time. To my way of thinking, the fact that for us it is mostly unwholesome simply reflects our strong accumulated tendencies of unwholesomeness. The enlightened person still thinks discursively and, except in the case of the arahant, will do so with akusala mind-states at times, but no doubt with much less that for us. You mention the Four Foundations of Mindfulness. That sutta (the Satipatthana Sutta) makes no mention of discursive thought as the 'baddie', that I know of. In fact, I don't think there are any baddies mentioned at all. Its overwhelming message is to show how *any* dhamma, kusala or akusala, can be object of mindfulness and understanding, no matter where we are or what we are doing. To my understanding, the reason this is mentioned is not so much to tell us that we must strive for awareness at every moment by directing our attention to one of the 4 Foundations, as to disabuse us of the notion we all hold to so strongly that awareness can only arise, or will be much more likely to arise, by striving in a certain way, or if and when certain external circumstances are in place. Jon 17088 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 5:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - ... ... << That is a way of putting it, though not quite how I would put it because it has a substantialist flavor to it. Perhaps closer to what I mean is "What functions/cetasikas participate in the mechanism we *call* accumulations?" (I would imagine that some cetasikas are direct participants, while others serve as necessary auxilliary conditions for manifestation of tendencies.) It seems to me that cetanas are central to this, and that they are likely quite complex in effect. If enough factors are involved, each of a number of types, then combinatorially it is feasible that the class of possible accumulations be huge. It seems to me that such would be required to explain the great diversity of possible inclinations among people.>> You are suggesting I think that some cetasikas have the function of, or some particular role to play in, 'accumulating' whatever it is that gets accumulated. I've not come across this notion before. It was my understanding that, for example, panna cetasika accumulates as panna cetasika and that it does so because this is the nature of things. Sorry, but I'm not able to add anything further. Maybe others can. Jon 17089 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 6:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhism question( please reply) Dear Philip Chui, I'd like to add to what Paul said. > > I'm Philip Chui, and I think I have introduced myself > > in the last letter I sent to you guys already. I have > > some questions about Buddhism: > > 2. What is the belief in Buddhism? There is no "belief" in Buddhism. Buddhism only says. We are to understand or try to understand. What Buddhism says, - Every thing is changing - Therefore there is nothing which we could cling on to for help or say is mine. (here help is permanent help) - And due to above we always will have unsatisfaction at the end How to try to understand, Unlike in "god" based religions "praying" in Buddhism will take you nowhere. In Buddhism you have get on with your "practice". what to practice, first practice virtue (good words and good actions) then concentration (good concentration) then wisdom (dont go showing magic to everyone once you get some wisdom) Once you practice wisdom you will understand the sayings of Buddhism. This is called "sandiththico" - a quality of buddism - you will see results. And unlike "god" based religions, in Buddhism you dont have wait until you die to get the highest goal. You can achieve it in "this" life itself - that is end all suffering. > > 3. When you die, where do you go, according to your > > religion? like paul said depends on the karma. but to add to it, depends on the last thought. so a man in the next life can be a mosquito. same applies to any being - even heavenly bodies - if you die with thoughts with greed, hatred or foolishness you will not get a better next life. (but always the suitable life for your last thought). > > 4. How do you prove that Buddha is real? Several ways answer this question. 1. how do you prove that your mother and father are actually your real mother and father. as for nowadays you may have been a child who have been adopted... or some others eggs placed in your mothers womb. 2. learn a little about history 3. learn the Buddha dhamma do you will really see Buddha. Now that you are having access to Buddha dhamma have an open and fearless mind (I say this as Christians fear of the commandment telling not to worship other gods) not having anger but friendliness, being happy of the happiness of others... ~may all understand reality and end all unsatisfaction - permanently! in friendliness, ranil 17090 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 7:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Hi Howard / Jon, In my recent Abhidhamma course, the professor mentioned that cetana plays a dual role in kusala / akusala cittas: - Creating kamma - Creating accumulations It makes sense to me that accumulations can only be created by kammicly active cittas. On page 44 of Nina's book, "Cetasikas", it says in the Chapter on Cetana, "The cetana which accompanies kusala citta and akusala citta has, in addition to coordinating, another task to perform: `willing' or `activity of kamma'.[1]" The footnote on this page says, "[1] Ayuhana which means `striving' or pursuing, is translated in the English text of the Atthasåliní as conation, and in the english text of the Visuddhimagga as acumulation." On page 49 of this book (still the Cetana chapter), Nina says, "We have accumulated different degrees of kusala kamma and akusala kamma and they are capable of producing their appropriate results when there is opportunity for it. We may be inclined to think that the term "accumulation" only pertains to kamma, but not only kamma is accumulated, also tendencies to kusala and akusala are accumulated. When one steals, akusala kamma is accumulated which is capable of producing vipaka later on. However vipaka is not the only effect of this unwholesome deed. Also the tendency to stealing is accumulated and thus there are conditions that one steals again." In brief, my professor and Nina seem to agree that cetana creates tendencies (accumulations) as well as creating kamma. I don't know the textual source, but I suspect that it is out there somewhere :-) Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > ... ... > << That is a way of putting it, though not quite how I would > put it because it has a substantialist flavor to it. Perhaps closer > to what I mean is "What functions/cetasikas participate in the > mechanism we *call* accumulations?" (I would imagine that some > cetasikas are direct participants, while others serve as necessary > auxilliary conditions for manifestation of tendencies.) It seems to > me that cetanas are central to this, and that they are likely quite > complex in effect. If enough factors are involved, each of a number > of types, then combinatorially it is feasible that the class of > possible accumulations be huge. It seems to me that such would be > required to explain the great diversity of possible inclinations > among people.>> > > You are suggesting I think that some cetasikas have the function of, > or some particular role to play in, 'accumulating' whatever it is > that gets accumulated. I've not come across this notion before. It > was my understanding that, for example, panna cetasika accumulates as > panna cetasika and that it does so because this is the nature of > things. > > Sorry, but I'm not able to add anything further. Maybe others can. > > Jon 17091 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 10:03am Subject: It crumbles away, Way 25 Dear Larry, Way 25: <"In this world." In just this body. Here the body [kaya] is the world [loka], in the sense of a thing crumbling. As covetousness and grief are abandoned in feeling, consciousness, and mental objects, too, the Vibhanga says: "Even the five aggregates of clinging are the world."> N:It crumbles away: lujjanapalujjana,t.thena, in the sense of crumbling away. Remember Kindred Sayings on Sense, Ch 3, §82: The world. It crumbles away. What crumbles away: the eye... objects... eye-consciousness... Very meaningful: when the whole is taken apart by pa~n~naa, dissolved into elements, realities can be seen as they are. Lujjati and loko are associated in meaning. We can begin now: whatever appears can be object of awareness. That is satipatthana. As to satiyeva, the y is just inserted between sati and eva:< sati is indeed here called satipatthana> is the tr.. I am still studying this passage. Nina. 17092 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 0:29pm Subject: Re: Nama Rupa Hi Larry, Thank you for responding. I am interested to see how people understand what it means by the word "nama-rupa". Have a good day, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Victor, > > The eye can't see. Eye consciousness arises dependent on an eye, but the > eye is not a seer. Eye consciousness arises and subsides so quickly it > can't be considered to be a seer either. So there is no seer, just eye > and eye consciousness. If we don't understand that the eye is not a > seer, it will be very difficult to understand that the body is not self. > Hence it is important to discriminate between mentality and materiality > (nama and rupa). That's the main point, imo. > > Larry 17093 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 0:58pm Subject: Re: Nama Rupa Hello Victor, Good to 'read' you again. :-) My understanding of the meaning of the words 'nama' and 'rupa' are that 'nama' is mental phenomena and 'rupa' is physical phenomena. 'Nama' experiences something. 'Rupa' does not experience anything. So therefore, 'rupa' is not just what seems solid matter, but is also things like 'sound'. 'Nama-rupa' are the mental phenomena plus the physical phenomena in a interdependent combination that need each other in order to exist as the alleged being conventionally known as Christine. (sorry about the word 'being' Victor :-) not meaning to stir up old discussions :-)) For more precise (though not particularly comprehensible to me) meanings, put 'nama' or 'rupa' in the search engine at: http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/index.html Or go to Nyanatiloka's dictionary (which I can understand) at: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm Victor, what is your everyday conversational understanding of the terms, as used within Buddhism? metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi Larry, > > Thank you for responding. I am interested to see how people > understand what it means by the word "nama-rupa". > > Have a good day, > Victor > 17094 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 1:40pm Subject: Re: Nama Rupa 4. Being conscious of something is being conscious of it's representation. 5. When consciousness ceases, represenation/nama and represented/rupa cease to be. 6. Ignorance conditions taints, which in turn conditions ignorance. Why and how does ignorance condition consciousness? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi all, > > I have been thinking for the last couple days about the meaning > of "nama-rupa" and would like to write down some ideas. > > 1. The Sanskrit/Pali word "nama", the English word "name", the German > word "Name", and the French word "Nom" all share the same root in the > linguistic family of Indo-European languages. The Chinese > translated "nama-rupa" as "ming-se", where "ming" means "name" in > English, and "se" literally means "color". The compound word "nama- > rupa" has been translated as "name-and-form" in some literature > and "mentality-materiality" in other. Whether the word "nama" is > translated as "name" or "mentality" in English, questions remain: > what does it mean by "nama"? What does it mean by "rupa"? > > 2. Name is representation. Rupa is what is being represented. There > are representations of representations. In other words, nama and > rupa are relational. They are not two categories with some number of > elements. > > 3. Representation of something is possible only when there is > consciousness, and representations are representation through six > modalities of senses (five modalities of bodily senses plus the > modality of intellect.) > > I look forward to some discussion on the meaning of nama-rupa. > > Have a good day, > Victor 17095 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 2:16pm Subject: Re: Nama Rupa Hi Victor, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > 6. Ignorance conditions taints, which in turn conditions ignorance. > Why and how does ignorance condition consciousness? > You have asked a very complex question. The brief answer is as follows: - Taints (asavas) condition ignorance (avijja) - Ignorance (avijja) conditions kammic formations (sankhara) - Kammic formations (sankhara) condition consciousness (vinnana) Ignorance is moha concommitant with 12 akusala cittas. Sankhara is cetana in the 8 kamavacara kusala cittas & 5 rupavacara kusala cittas (merit), cetana in the 12 akusala cittas (demerit) and cetana in the 4 arupavacara kusala cittas (imperturbable). In the case of formations of merit, avijja can condition sankhara through object condition or natural decisive support condition. In the case of formations of demerit, avijja can condition sankhara through the following conditions: root, object, object predominance / decisive support, proximity / contiguity, co- nascence, mutuality, support, natural decisive support, repetition, association, presence / non-disappearance and absence / disappearance. In the case of the formations of the imperturbable, avijja conditions sankhara only through natural decisive support condition. Consciousness are the 32 lokiya vipaka cittas. Sankhara conditions consciousness through asynchronous kamma condition and through natural decisive support condition. This has been extracted from Visuddhimagga XVII 102, 103, 104, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181. If you want definitions of the various conditions listed above, see my most recently updated class notes (pages 171-178). This is available on-line in the "Files" section of DSG. I suspect that this is more than you really wanted to know, but I would be pleased to explore the details with you. Metta, Rob M :-) 17096 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 2:18pm Subject: Re: Nama Rupa Hello Christine, Thank you. It's been a while since I posted in DSG. However, I have been following the messages, and I have always enjoy reading yours. I understand the meaning of the word "nama" as the meaning of the word "name". I understand the word "name" as designation of something or someone. I see designation, in its broader sense, as representation. I see rupa as something being represented. This is how I am understanding the words "nama" and "rupa" in the context of the Buddhist literature. Have a good day, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello Victor, > > Good to 'read' you again. :-) > My understanding of the meaning of the words 'nama' and 'rupa' are > that 'nama' is mental phenomena and 'rupa' is physical > phenomena. 'Nama' experiences something. 'Rupa' does not experience > anything. So therefore, 'rupa' is not just what seems solid matter, > but is also things like 'sound'. 'Nama-rupa' are the mental phenomena > plus the physical phenomena in a interdependent combination that need > each other in order to exist as the alleged being conventionally > known as Christine. (sorry about the word 'being' Victor :-) not > meaning to stir up old discussions :-)) > > For more precise (though not particularly comprehensible to me) > meanings, put 'nama' or 'rupa' in the search engine at: > http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/index.html > Or go to Nyanatiloka's dictionary (which I can understand) at: > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm > > Victor, what is your everyday conversational understanding of the > terms, as used within Buddhism? > > metta, > Christine > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > > Hi Larry, > > > > Thank you for responding. I am interested to see how people > > understand what it means by the word "nama-rupa". > > > > Have a good day, > > Victor > > 17097 From: nidive Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:53pm Subject: What is Space? Hi All, Can anybody explain what is space in the context of the Abhidhamma? I read this link below: http://www.samatha.demon.co.uk/publications/abhidhammapapers/ch4_1.ht ml It says: ------------------------------------------- The first group is that of the five elements of rupa. Rupa is usually translated as 'matter', but in its most general sense it is also useful to translate it as 'the world' - the principle that our experience is 'of' or 'in' a world. The existence of the world is the functioning of four basic principles, the so-called primary elements, whose symbolic names are earth, water, fire and air (or breath). The world, as it exists, is extension (earth), cohesion (water), heat (fire) and motion (air). These four elements exist in a primary sense; the fifth, space, does not. It is the field of action of the four elements, dependent for its existence on them but not existing in the same way as them. In terms of a diagram, the five elements can be drawn as a pyramid. The basis is formed by the four primary elements, which define and limit. Space can be the point either above or below, depending on how it is viewed. In other words, it underpins the other four, or goes beyond them. --------------------------------------------- So does space exist? Or is it only my own imagination? Or ... please comment. 17098 From: Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama Rupa Hi Howard, What I was referring to, rather crypticly, was that the body seems to last a long time. So even though it doesn't last forever, many people think of it as a temporary self that usually lasts for 70 or 80 years. However, since the body isn't conscious it can't be a self. Consciousness, on the other hand, flies by so quickly there really isn't anything to identify with if you observe it carefully. This is a different consideration than the relative speeds of nama and rupa in citta process. Larry 17099 From: Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 4:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Sarah, Thanks for the quotations, much appreciated. It occurred to me that K Sujin might say "bare mindfulness" means sati does not have a concept for an object. We have discussed this so much maybe we don't need to go into it again beyond acknowledging that this is her position and not too different from Nyanaponika Thera. Larry 17100 From: James Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 4:18pm Subject: Wholesome vs. Unwholesome vs. Nosome Hey All, I have again begun study of the Abhidhamma and I am hung up on something. Nina Van Gorkom writes in "Buddhism in Daily Life" http://www.abhidhamma.org/buddhism_in_daily_life.htm: "Nina: The situation is not hopeless. Wisdom, the understanding of reality, can condition one to have more wholesome mental states and to do good deeds. There is no "self" who can suppress one's bad inclinations; there is no "self" who can force one to do good deeds. Everybody can verify this in daily life. For example, if we tell ourselves: "today I will be very kind to everybody", can we prevent ourselves from suddenly saying an unkind word? Most of the time it has happened before we realize it. If we are able to suppress our anger for a while we are inclined to think that there is a "self" who can suppress anger. In reality there are at that moment cittas which are not conditioned by anger, but which arise from other conditions. Afterwards there will be anger again because anger is not really eradicated by suppression. Only wisdom, seeing things as they are, can very gradually eradicate everything which is unwholesome in us." This position appears to be in contradiction to most of the Buddha's teachings in regards to Sila. The Buddha said that we CAN do good deeds, cultivate proper mental states, and that such behavior will then naturally lead to the `natural awareness' independent of such `outside guidelines'. In other words, following the mundane Eightfold path will lead to the natural following of the transcendent Eightfold path. The above position seems to be putting `The cart before the horse.' It seems to be encouraging one to have the mind of a Buddha without the proper groundwork first. For example, in the Anusota Sutta (With the Flow), http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-005.html it is stated that there are four kinds of people in the world: Those who go with the flow, those who go against the flow, those who stand fast in the flow, and those who have transcended the flow. Those who go with the flow fall prey to evil deeds; those who go against the flow do good deeds even if it "though it may be with pain, even though it may be with sorrow, even though he may be crying, his face in tears, he lives the holy life that is perfect & pure"; those who stand fast in the flow is one who has removed the first set of five fetters; and those who have gone past the flow have done so by ending mental fermentations and discernments, and are therefore enlightened. The sutta says that one who makes the choice will be the first type of person, and then the second, and then the third, and finally the fourth. According to this, one can change behavior and `accumulations' by surrendering to the teachings of the Buddha. And it suggests that one moves through stages. The above quote by Nina suggests that one is either enlightened or not, there is nothing in-between which can be determined by the practice of sila. Is this a contradiction in the approach of the Abhidhamma and the teachings of the Buddha, or am I missing something? Just trying to understand the position of the Abhidhamma. Metta, James 17101 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 4:22pm Subject: Re: What is Space? Hi, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > Hi All, > > Can anybody explain what is space in the context of the Abhidhamma? > Rupas always arise in groups (kalapas) which consist of at least eight rupas (the eight inseparable rupas). Our body consists of different groups of rupa and these groups are delimited by the rupa space. Space is the rupa that separates or limits; the infinitesimal space between the groups of rupa. It is "untouched by the four great Elements." Space-element has the characteristic of delimiting material objects, the function of showing their boundaries, the manifestation of showing their limits, state of being untouched by the four great elements and of being their holes and openings as manifestation, the separated objects as proximate cause. It is that of which in the separated groups we say "this is above, this is below, this is across." Space delimits the groups of rupa which are produced by kamma, citta, temperature and nutrition so that they are separate from each other. If there were no space in between the different groups of rupa, these groups would all be connected, not distinct from each other. Space comes into being whenever the groups of rupa are produced by the four factors and therefore it is regarded as originating from these four factors. Metta, Rob M :-) 17102 From: Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 4:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Nina, I think I will try to cultivate a little patience and wait until Dec. to discuss Way 24. As for "bare mindfulness", I re-read the passage in light of calling the words "just mindfulness" and I don't think this term refers to what Nyanaponika Thera is calling "bare attention". Rather, I think "just mindfulness" means "pointing out the things that make up the condition connected with [just] satipatthana [not jhana or other factors necessary for the abandoning of defilements or attainment of nibbana]..." In other words satipatthana needs energy, clear comprehension, and mindfulness and because the commentary was talking about just mindfulness, no mention was made of factors of jhana such as initial application, sustained application, interest, joy and one-pointedness. Here's the passage in question: Way 25: After the pointing out of the things that make up the condition connected with the Arousing of Mindfulness through body-contemplation, there is the pointing out of the things that make up the condition which should be abandoned in this practice with the words, "having overcome, in this world, covetousness and grief" = Vineyya loke abhijjhadomanassam. [Tika] "Arousing of Mindfulness". Here bare mindfulness is meant. Therefore, the commentator speaks of "the things that make up the condition connected with the Arousing of Mindfulness." These things are energy and so forth, associated necessarily with mindfulness. Condition [anga] = reason [karana]. [T] "Mindfulness" denotes concentration, too, here on account of the inclusion of mindfulness in the aggregate of concentration [samadhikkhandha]. [T] Or since the exposition is on mindfulness, and as neither the abandoning of defilements nor the attainment of Nibbana is wrought by mindfulness alone, and as mindfulness does not also occur separately, the pointing out "the things that make up the condition connected with the Arousing of Mindfulness" is like the pointing out of the condition connected with absorption [jhana]. Condition [anga] is a synonym for constituent [avayava]. Initial application, sustained application, interest, joy and one-pointedness of mind are together with absorption, as energy and the other qualities are with mindfulness. Larry 17103 From: Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 5:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Hi Jon, Let's see how long it takes to transform a simple proposition into a thousand knots. Here are your questions and my best guesses: Larry: Hi Jon, I think you are making this too difficult. What to do is anupassana. "Anupassana" = "look at". So, look at something. Jon: Sounds simple, I agree. But I think there are one or two things further you need to explain. For example: 1. What is it that is looked at? L: Already a problem. I see 2 choices: 1) Since you are obviously a keen witted theoretical type you should practice dhammanupassana and look at dhammas. 2) or you could look at any of the 4 'foundations' objects. 2. How is the looking done? Is it like normal looking, that is, deliberate and directed? L: Look with energy, clear comprehension, and mindfulness. (I'm still working out what this means.) 3. I assume this particular kind of looking at would have to be wholesome/kusala. How is this achieved; how do we know if the looking is the kusala kind, and not the akusala kind? L: This is a really good question. How do we recognize sati sampajanna? I don't have a ready answer but I am conducting research as we speak. How would you answer these questions? Larry 17104 From: rjchacko Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 10:49pm Subject: dependent origination question I have a question about dependent origination, and I'm hoping someone here can help me to answer it. I'm trying to compare some ideas in evolutionary psychology to Buddhism. Evolutionary psychologists claim that men and women have different strategies for reproduction and so they have different sexual impulses. So they conclude men have strong sex drives and will tend to want to mate with as many partners as possible, while women will want to be selective about their partners. Evolutionary psychologists also have other theories about behavior where humans are assumed to have certain innate impulses that can't be attributed to culture. It seems though that this would contradict the idea of dependent origination. The first limb of the chain is ignorance, so the cause for a sex drive (or any other acquisitive impulse) is wrong views and therefore any difference in male-female behavior is due to culture rather than some innate biological nature. Is this a correct application of dependent origination? Thanks. 17105 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 11:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Scrambled & Ultimate Hi Rob M (& James), --- robmoult wrote: > I'm not sure that I agree. Consider the classic question, "If a tree > falls in the forest, but there is none to hear it, is there a sound?" > > We all know that the Abhidhamma depends upon very specific meanings > for words, and that these specific meanings are sometimes different > from "conventional" or "scientific" usage. Let us consider the > Abhidhamma definition of the rupa called "sound". The rupa "sound" > has the characteristic of striking the ear, the function of being > the object of auditory cognition and the manifestation of being the > field or object of auditory cognition. From this strict definition, > I conclude that the rupa sound only exists when there is an ear to > hear it. ..... Would you say the same about all rupas -- i.e if there is no experience of them they don’t exist? What about the elements that make up the ‘tree’? Do they only arise and fall away if they are seen or touched? (As we both agree, in terms of objects of awareness, if they are not experienced they can’t be known). Not just in the Abhidhamma, but also in the suttas, we read about the various internal and external elements.In the Simile of the Greater Elephant’s footprint (MN28), we read about the great earth and the waters in the great oceans, all in terms of elements. We read about the fire element which burns up towns and countries and the air element sweeps away the same. We also read suttas which describe how, regardless of whether we hear the Buddha’s Teachings, all the possessions and what we hold dear, still just consist of these 28 rupas. ..... > Does something come into existence when a tree falls in the forest, > but there is none to hear it? Perhaps, but whatever comes into > existence is not of interest to the Abhidhamma; it is not the > rupa "sound" because it does not fit the characteristic / function / > manifestation. >if there is no ear to hear it. ..... Just to clarify what I know you know: Kalapas (inseparable groups) of rupas are produced by citta, utu (temperature), kamma and oja (nutritive essence). In the case of sound, it can originate from citta (when we speak, for example) or from temperature as in the case of the rock falling or waterfall. ..... > The Abhidhamma and science have different definitions for the > word "sound" because they have different purposes. ..... Ok, let’s stick to the Abhidhamma definition of sound. I don’t think anyone is suggesting any dhammas should or can be used for scientific definitions (at least I’m not;-)) Earlier I quoted from the Dhammasangani, the first book of the Abhidhamma (my caps for the word MAY): ***** “Here is one extract from the Dhammasangani, first book of the Abhidhamma (p170) on sound: ..... “What is that (material) form which is the sphere of sound? That sound which is derived from the four Great Phenomena, is invisible and reacting, such as the sound of drums, of tabors, of chank-shells, of tom-toms, of singing of music; clashing sounds, manual sounds, the noise of people, the sound of the concussion of substances, of wind, of water, sounds human and other than human, or whatever other sound there is, derived from the Great phenomena, invisible and reacting - such a sound, invisible and reacting, as, by the ear, invisible and reacting, one has heard, hears, will, or MAY hear... ....in consequence of which sound and depending on the ear, there has arisen, arises, will, or MAY arise auditory contact...and...born of that auditory contact, a feeling....(or)a perception...(or)volition,,,(or)auditory cognition.....”” ***** Note: on account of the sound, depending on ear-sense(i.e whether there is any hearing consciousness), there does, will or MAY be contact. As you know from your study of conditions, visible object or sound are conditions (by object condition) for consciousness to arise, but not the other way round. ..... e> Ethics is outside the scope of science (scientific ethics are > incredibly important, but there is nothing inherently ethical about > science). We don't look to science to give us answers to ethical > questions. In a similar way, we shouldn't try to apply or extend > ethics (i.e. Abhdidhamma) to answer "scientific" questions. > > Does a falling tree make a sound when there is no ear to hear? I > think that the Abhidhamma answer is "Mu!!" ..... I’d like to add one more quote from the Dhammasangani(653). Here we read about rupas which are the objects of grasping on account of the result of kamma to experience them. These are followed by rupas not grasped at, due to no vipaka cittas to experience them (as I read this passage): “What is that (material) form which is grasped at (upaadi.n.na.m)? The spheres of sight, hearing, smell, taste, body-sensibility, femininity, masculinity, life, or whatever form there exists through karma having been wrought, whether it be in the spheres of visible forms, odours, tastes, or the tangible;....- this is that (material) form, or odily nutriment - that is that form which is grasped at. What is that (material) form which is not grasped at? the sphere of sound, bodily and vocal intimation , lightness, plasticity and wieldiness of (material) form, its decay and impermanence, of whatever other (material) form exists which is not due to karma having been wrought, whether it be in the sphere of visible forms, smells, tastes, or the tangible;....- this is that form which is not grasped at.” ***** As I said at the outstart: “I agree that the Buddha’s Teachings are concerned with the direct experience and understanding of those ‘ultimate realities’ which can be known and lead to the goal of the eradication of all defilements and realization of nibbana.” James questioned the ‘omniscience’ of the Buddha’s knowledge, which I see fully reflected in the Abhidhamma, so I’d like to just sign off with a couple of short quotes from Anguttara Nikaya, (B.Bodhi transl): 1. (Bk of One’s,8) “Monks, there is one person arising in the world who is unique, without a peer, without counterpart, incomparable, unequalled, matchless, unrivalled, the best of humans. Who is that one person? It is the Tathagata...... Monks, the manifestation of one person is the manifestation of great vision, of great light, of great radiance; it is the manifestation of the six things unsurpassed; the realization of the four analytical knowledges; the penetration of various elements, of the diversity of elements........” 2. (Bk of four’s, 54) “Monks, the world is fully understood by the Tathagata; the Tathagata is released from the world. The origin of the world is fully understood by the Tathagata; the origin of the world is abandoned by the Tathagata. The cessation of the world is..... the path to the cessation of the world is.... Monks, in the world with its devas, Mara and Brahma, in this generation with its ascetics and brahmins, devas and humans, whatever is sen, heard, sensed and cognized, attained, searched into, pondered over by the mind - all that is fully understood by the Tathagata. That is why he is called the Tathagata.” ************** Sarah ======= 17106 From: rahula_80 Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 0:13am Subject: Re: Citta and Vinnana Hi, > " Bhikkhus as to that which is called Citta and Mano and Vinnana- > the uninstructed worldling is unable to experiance revulsion > (nibbinditum) towards it.For what reason? Because for a long time > this has been held to > by him,appropriated and grasped thus:'This is mine,This I am ,This > is > my Atta' It would be better,Bhikkhus for the uninstructed worldling > to take as atta this body composed of the 4 great elements rather > than the citta. For what reason? Because this body composed of the 4 > great elements is seen > standing for one year,for two years,for three,four ,five or ten > years,for 20,30 40 or 50 years,for 100 years, or even longer. But > that which is called > Citta and Mano and Vinnana arises as one thing and ceases as another > by day and night. > Samyutta 12:61:Translation by Bhikkhu Bodhi Actually Shakya Aryanatta have commented on this passage: 1. This passage does not call the citta vinnana. 2. Of course the defiled mind (Citta) changed every second. However, "citta is originally pure" MN 1.36 3. Dirty water changes every second in quality.However the dirt in the water is separable from the water. MN 1.36 Suppose, followers, that a piece of cloth was defiled and filthily stained; and then a clothes-dyer went to dip it in some stain or other-be it blue, yellow, red or pink, it would appear unclean and of an impure appearance. How is that so? Because, followers being impure, so too that cloth. Just so also, followers is ones consciousness when defiled and filthily stained that one expects destinations hither of great woe. Suppose, followers, that a piece of cloth was purified and bright; and then a clothes-dyer went to dip it in some stain or other-be it blue, yellow, red or pink, it would still appear clean and of a pure appearance. How is that so? Because, followers being pure, so too that cloth. Just so also, followers is ones citta when purified and bright one expects destinations hither of heavenly-bliss. 4. AN 1.282 "amata'ya dha'tuya' cittam upasam.harati'"ti" .."He gathers the consciousness (Citta)inside the immortal realm" 5. "all Jhanic samadhi (i.e. The 8fold path) is for the purposes of Adhicitta" DN 1.37?..Adhicitta (transmundane [purification of] Citta) 6. And what about vinnana? SN 3.61 "The Aryan Eightfold Path is making cessation of Vinnana (and other khandas)"that being sammaditthi." This person really make me confuse. I hope someone could clear my confusion. Rahula 17107 From: rahula_80 Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 0:17am Subject: Nibbana Hi, Is Nibbana inside or outside "the all"? Sabba Sutta "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak." "As you say, lord," the monks responded. The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. [1] Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." --------- Rahula 17108 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 0:57am Subject: letter from Kimmy Hi James, Thanks for your reply as well as the story. It is very meaningful and teaches me somemore things about Buddhism. At this moment, i now that the things i need to do is obey my parents, study hard with my acedemic and also treat everyone as good as i can, because we have to treasure all the things we have got. By the way, I know that in Chistianality, committing suicide is a silly way to end our life and God won't forgive for this. However, I would like to know how Buddha thinks of committing suicide? Can you tell me? Kimmy 17109 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 1:05am Subject: Joannes letter to Kiana Hi Kiana (Miss Silly!) =D, I am Joanne Lam, I think you should remember me fromyour Saturday class a few weeks ago. Well I sure do remember you. I hope Jan feels alot better about Mr. Walsh Till now after a while. I think its just common sense why people try to kill themself. (not exactly but...) Because maybe theirparents are being mean or scolding them alot or maybethey are too stressed about work! You never know, I think they are just crazy. Dont ever try it, if youhave any problems with homework or you stressed about something. Always talk to your parents. They can always help you out! Or talk to the manager or somebody that can help you. =P Of course, everybody wants peace in Life, that is why everybody tries to save people. Unless maybe the gangster people that wants to kill people, they wont save others. I wonder why life is alwayz unfair?? By the way, i guess i better stop now, i hope you understand what i wrote~* Joanne Lam P.S. James: I really enjoy your poem again and again...=D 17110 From: robmoult Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 1:17am Subject: Re: dependent origination question Hi, Let me take a stab. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjchacko" wrote: > I have a question about dependent origination, and I'm hoping someone > here can help me to answer it. > > I'm trying to compare some ideas in evolutionary psychology to > Buddhism. > > Evolutionary psychologists claim that men and women have different > strategies for reproduction and so they have different sexual > impulses. So they conclude men have strong sex drives and will tend to > want to mate with as many partners as possible, while women will want > to be selective about their partners. Evolutionary psychologists also > have other theories about behavior where humans are assumed to have > certain innate impulses that can't be attributed to culture. > > It seems though that this would contradict the idea of dependent > origination. The first limb of the chain is ignorance, so the cause > for a sex drive (or any other acquisitive impulse) is wrong views and > therefore any difference in male-female behavior is due to culture > rather than some innate biological nature. Is this a correct > application of dependent origination? > > Thanks. Interesting concept, trying to link evolutionary psychology to Buddhism. Here are two points to consider: - The elements of dependent origination are often shown in a circle to emphasize the fact that there is no "first cause" - Ignorance is conditioned by the taints (asavas); which are delusion, greed (including lust) and wrong view Here is a deeper question: Why should there be a link between evolutionary psychology and dependent origination? Dependent origination shows us how to escape endless rounds of rebirth. It has an ethical focus; it is not intended to be a "scientific model". I would be interested in your comments. Metta, Rob M :-) 17111 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 1:39am Subject: Joannes letter to James Hi James, My name is Joanne Lam. This is my first time writing to you. I'm sure you have heard of me before in otheremails. Well, I am born in Hong Kong but I speakEnglish quite well I guess..=S (EcK) I also speakCantonese, a little bit Japanese but not too good. I'm not trying to be mean but I think Philip is quitea show off... I am also studying in Hong KongInternational School, 7th grade. What does that mean?It means I know Philip! I dont know him really well,but I know him at least...hehe. I find your lettersvery funny and intersting. Will you ever wonder why life is always so unfair?Good things happen to bad people and Bad things alwayzhappens to kind-hearted people! SIGH~* I guess thatslife, we cant control anything, how sad. =( mmm..Can you tell me a little bit about the life of abuddha? Thankz... I guess I better stop now.. Write back soon! Joanne Lam P.S. Your poems are indeed very interesting!!! =D 17112 From: Sarah Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 5:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Larry & All, I'm getting increasingly busy with life (as Rob Ep would say), so may have to sign off after this post until I get back from our trip and try not to be tempted to reply to others for now;-(. You wrote "It occurred to me that K .Sujin might say 'bare mindfulness' means sati does not have a concept for an object." This sounds a lot more like what Larry would say than K.Sujin;-) She'd be much more likely to ask what you mean by 'bare mindfulness' or what sati is aware of, followed by several more probing questions to any responses. (e.g. What is nama? What is seeing? Is there awareness of seeing now? and so on….) Btw, I liked your little summary on nama and rupa to Victor……and also Rob M's explanations on space and other topics…..keep it up;-) By way of a parting gift to you and Rob M, I'd like to give you one more quote from the Netti (167)p.49 on proximate cause (which I missed before) and gives 'tranquillity is the footing for pleasure (sukha)'. I haven't got your other qu to Rob K in front of me, but I should think this will cover that too. I rather think it hits the jackpot;-) (I'm skipping the first few 'footings' which would need some checking of terms). Enjoy! "……The state of having previously performed merit is the footing for living in befitting places. Living in befitting places is the footing for waiting on true men. Waiting on true men is the footing for right disposition in self-guidance (see A.ii 32). Right disposition in self-guidance is the footing for the kinds of virtue. The kinds of virtue are the footing for gladness. Gladness is the footing for tranquillity. Tranquillity is the footing for pleasure. Pleasure is the footing for concentration. Concentration is the footing for knowing and seeing how (things) are. Knowing and seeing how (things) are is the footing for dispassion. Dispassion is the footing for fading of lust. Fading of lust is the footing for deliverance. Deliverance is the footing for knowing and seeing of deliverance. In this way all kinds of general-support, all kinds of conditions, are a footing." ***** I'll look f/w to reading all posts, even if I don't have time to write much if anything for about 10days. Sarah p.s James- thx for your post and interest in the Abhidhamma history - I hope others respond and you read your homework carefully which I gave you 'til I can get back to you;-) ============================ 17113 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:00am Subject: Re: Citta and Vinnana Dear Rahula The Visuddhimagga XIV (82) : "The words vinnana, citta and mano are one in meaning" This is also clear form the sutta I gave. Citta is pure in this sense because it is quite different from cetasikas. That is why the Buddha gave so many details: he taught us the five khandhas where sankhara khanda includes those defilements that taint citta. As we see from the quotes you give: some people wil search high and low for the slightest phrase they can grasp onto as somwhere permanent their 'self' can reside. It is natural because everyone has accumulated selfview to some degree. However, our job is to attentuate self-view: it can only happen during a Buddhasasana. Robert --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rahula_80" wrote: > Hi, > > > " Bhikkhus as to that which is called Citta and Mano and Vinnana- > > the uninstructed worldling is unable to experiance revulsion > > (nibbinditum) towards it.For what reason? Because for a long time > > this has been held to > > by him,appropriated and grasped thus:'This is mine,This I am ,This > > is > > my Atta' It would be better,Bhikkhus for the uninstructed worldling > > to take as atta this body composed of the 4 great elements rather > > than the citta. For what reason? Because this body composed of the > 4 > > great elements is seen > > standing for one year,for two years,for three,four ,five or ten > > years,for 20,30 40 or 50 years,for 100 years, or even longer. But > > that which is called > > Citta and Mano and Vinnana arises as one thing and ceases as > another > > by day and night. > > Samyutta 12:61:Translation by Bhikkhu Bodhi > > Actually Shakya Aryanatta have commented on this passage: > > 1. This passage does not call the citta vinnana. > > 2. Of course the defiled mind (Citta) changed every second. > However, "citta is originally pure" MN 1.36 > > 3. Dirty water changes every second in quality.However the dirt in > the water is separable from the water. > > > MN 1.36 Suppose, followers, that a piece of cloth was defiled and > filthily stained; and then a clothes-dyer went to dip it in some stain > or other-be it blue, yellow, red or pink, it would appear unclean and > of an impure appearance. How is that so? Because, followers being > impure, so too that cloth. Just so also, followers is ones > consciousness when defiled and filthily stained that one expects > destinations hither of great woe. Suppose, followers, that a piece of > cloth was purified and bright; and then a clothes-dyer went to dip it > in some stain or other-be it blue, yellow, red or pink, it would still > appear clean and of a pure appearance. How is that so? Because, > followers being pure, so too that cloth. Just so also, followers is > ones citta when purified and bright one expects destinations hither of > heavenly-bliss. > > > 4. AN 1.282 "amata'ya dha'tuya' cittam upasam.harati'"ti" .."He > gathers the consciousness (Citta)inside the immortal realm" > > 5. "all Jhanic samadhi (i.e. The 8fold path) is for the purposes of > Adhicitta" DN 1.37?..Adhicitta (transmundane [purification of] > Citta) > > 6. And what about vinnana? > > SN 3.61 "The Aryan Eightfold Path is making cessation of Vinnana (and > other khandas)"that being sammaditthi." > > > > This person really make me confuse. I hope someone could clear my > confusion. > > Rahula 17114 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:04am Subject: Re: Nibbana --- Dear Rahula, This sutta is explained in reasonable detail in the commentary, Bhikku Bodhi gives some terse notes in his translation of the Samyutta Nikaya. Do you have it.? robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rahula_80" wrote: > Hi, > > Is Nibbana inside or outside "the all"? > > Sabba Sutta > > "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I > will speak." > "As you say, lord," the monks responded. > > The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & > sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, > intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. [1] Anyone who > would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if > questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, > would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. > Why? Because it lies beyond range." > > --------- > > Rahula 17115 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Rob M (and Howard) Thanks for coming in with these interesting comments about the function of cetana (intention). If we're talking about accumulated tendencies to do good and bad deeds, then I agree that cetana plays a large part. However, as I said in my original post (the one Howard refers to), it's not only these kinds of tendencies that are accumulated and passed on from one moment of consciousness to the next. As I understand it, all the mental factors that make up each moment of consciousness are passed on and so, in a sense, 'accumulate'. Take sanna (memory/perception), for example. This also accumulates. Any explanation of the 'passing on' phenomenon should also take account of 'non-kammic' mental factors such as this. While I agree with the general thrust of your comments regarding cetana, I don't think they explain the 'how' of it, which is Howard's particular area of interest. Jon --- robmoult wrote: > Hi Howard / Jon, In my recent Abhidhamma course, the professor mentioned that cetana plays a dual role in kusala / akusala cittas: - Creating kamma - Creating accumulations It makes sense to me that accumulations can only be created by kammicly active cittas. On page 44 of Nina's book, "Cetasikas", it says in the Chapter on Cetana, "The cetana which accompanies kusala citta and akusala citta has, in addition to coordinating, another task to perform: `willing' or `activity of kamma'.[1]" The footnote on this page says, "[1] Ayuhana which means `striving' or pursuing, is translated in the English text of the Atthasåliní as conation, and in the english text of the Visuddhimagga as acumulation." On page 49 of this book (still the Cetana chapter), Nina says, "We have accumulated different degrees of kusala kamma and akusala kamma and they are capable of producing their appropriate results when there is opportunity for it. We may be inclined to think that the term "accumulation" only pertains to kamma, but not only kamma is accumulated, also tendencies to kusala and akusala are accumulated. When one steals, akusala kamma is accumulated which is capable of producing vipaka later on. However vipaka is not the only effect of this unwholesome deed. Also the tendency to stealing is accumulated and thus there are conditions that one steals again." In brief, my professor and Nina seem to agree that cetana creates tendencies (accumulations) as well as creating kamma. I don't know the textual source, but I suspect that it is out there somewhere :-) Metta, Rob M :-) 17116 From: James Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 7:21am Subject: Re: letter from Kimmy --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > > Hi James, > > Thanks for your reply as well as the story. It is very > meaningful and teaches me somemore things about > Buddhism. > > At this moment, i now that the things i need to do is > obey my parents, study hard with my acedemic and also > treat everyone as good as i can, because we have to > treasure all the things we have got. > > By the way, I know that in Chistianality, committing > suicide is a silly way to end our life and God won't > forgive for this. However, I would like to know how > Buddha thinks of committing suicide? Can you tell me? > > Kimmy Dear Star Kid Kimmy, Wow, you ask a tough question! I will try my best to answer it. First of all, I way to make a few comments about your suggestion that God won't forgive someone who commits suicide. Humans cannot know the mind of God and shouldn't try. Humans should see those who want to commit suicide and encourage them with kind words, not with threats of getting in trouble with God. Threatening them will only make them feel worse. Don't you feel worse when someone says you're going to get in trouble with your teacher or parents? Are they usually right? Do they usually know what they are talking about? Hmmmm...not usually ;-) Look at it this way: Life is kinda like a test, and God has (or is) the answer sheet. He isn't going to give the answers and it is no use trying to guess the answers. Humans just have to look at each problem and work it out, and find the answer through individual effort. God isn't going to give anyone the answers. Some people want to quit the test and walk away from life; we should encourage them to continue. And when we get done with the test, when we die, it isn't important how many answers we got right and how many we got wrong, the important thing is how hard we tried. Doing our absolute best will get us all a GOLD STAR! Okay, now you want to know how the Buddha looked at suicide. The plain answer, which I will further explain, is that the Buddha saw suicide as a craving in relation to self-existence; this craving comes in the form of aversion but is no different than craving for self-existence to continue. Confused? Don't worry, most adults are confused about this subject too because it is very deep and complicated. Let me use an example to help you understand. Let's say you have two girls: Patty and Dominique. Patty is a very popular girl and she just thinks she's just `The Bomb'! She wears all the best clothes, goes to all the best parties, has the most handsome boyfriend, hangs out with only popular people, and is really stuck on herself. Everyday Patty looks at herself in the mirror and thinks, "Patty, you are better than everyone else! No one is as good as you! I am so glad that I am Patty!" Hmmm…pretty sad isn't it? Well, Dominique is very similar, but in the opposite way. Dominique doesn't like to have too many friends and really hates herself and her life. She wears all black, hangs out with a few people getting high or drinking and talking bad about everyone, doesn't do her work in school and disrespects authorities, she has a boyfriend but she insults him and calls him `Pizza Face', and she thinks about committing suicide on a daily basis. Everyday Dominique looks in the mirror and thinks, "Dominique, you really suck! I really hate your stinking guts! You are so worthless, ugly and stupid. I wish you would just die already!" Hmmm…that's pretty sad too, isn't it? So Kimmy, can you see that there is little difference between Patty and Dominique because they both look at themselves in the wrong way? They see themselves as objects, as possessions, as things that they should either love or hate. But that is the wrong way for people to see themselves. We are not objects for love or hate, we are just people living. Who are you? Who am I? Well, that is one of the big questions on the test of life. I am still working on that problem and I am sure you are too. However, the very important thing is to know a wrong answer when you see one. Patty and Dominique found the wrong answer and stopped there. Make sure you don't do that in your life. Take care Kimmy and thanks for writing. I am glad that you are obeying your parents, teachers and studying hard. You get a GOLD STAR from me, Star Kid! Love, James 17117 From: nidive Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 7:43am Subject: Re: What is Space? Thank you robmoult, for your excellent reply. 17118 From: James Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 8:28am Subject: Re: Joannes letter to James --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > > Hi James, > > My name is Joanne Lam. This is my first time writing > to you. I'm sure you have heard of me before in > otheremails. Well, I am born in Hong Kong but I > speakEnglish quite well I guess..=S (EcK) I also > speakCantonese, a little bit Japanese but not too > good. > > I'm not trying to be mean but I think Philip is quitea > show off... I am also studying in Hong > KongInternational School, 7th grade. What does that > mean?It means I know Philip! I dont know him really > well,but I know him at least...hehe. I find your > lettersvery funny and intersting. > > Will you ever wonder why life is always so unfair?Good > things happen to bad people and Bad things > alwayzhappens to kind-hearted people! SIGH~* I guess > thatslife, we cant control anything, how sad. =( > > mmm..Can you tell me a little bit about the life of > abuddha? Thankz... > > I guess I better stop now.. Write back soon! > > Joanne Lam > > P.S. Your poems are indeed very interesting!!! =D Hi Star Kid Joanne: Thank you for your letter. Others may have written about you but I don't remember. It is nice to get a letter in person though. It's good that you are learning so many languages. Keep up those studies and you will go far in life! Joanne, about Philip, I know that you are not trying to be mean, but you should try to be more positive in the words you say. Judging people isn't good, but trying to understand them is. I think you want to understand Philip. Well, Joanne, you have written to the right person because it is going to shock you to hear this, but I think I am very much like Philip! When I was in school, practically everyone thought I was a show off too. And now that I am an adult, practically everyone still thinks I am a show off! :-) Does Philip get into a lot of trouble? Me too! Does Philip ask a lot of questions? Me too! Does Philip challenge authority? Me too! Does Philip talk about things no one else even thinks of? Me too! Is Philip hard to understand most of the time? Me too! And honestly, is Philip someone you really like, but also really don't like, and are not sure why you feel either way? Most people feel that way about me too. Why are Philip and I that way? Answer: Because we `walk to the beat of a different drummer'. When everyone else goes right, we go left, but we still get to where everyone else gets… and sometimes before they do. Some people just don't think or act like the crowd, but that doesn't mean they don't want to be accepted by the crowd. Philip probably feels bad that many people reject him, like you have shown in this letter, so he acts out even more, gets angry and lashes out at people, or goes to extremes to get people's attention and acceptance. I know this because I have done all of these things, and still do to a great extent. Old habits die hard. Try to understand that Philip is different and accept him…he will be the most loyal, fascinating, and funny friend you could have. Joanne, about the rest of your letter, I don't have much to say. I don't know what the life of a Buddha is like because I am not a Buddha, yet. I would think it would be very much like being different from everyone else, but not caring about that and handling the situation more wisely. At least I hope so. Take care Joanne and keep studying. Give Philip this letter and try to get along. We all need friends. Love, James _______________________________________________________________ 17119 From: Uan Chih Liu Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 9:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependent origination question Hi rjchacko and Rob M, rjchacko said > > Evolutionary psychologists claim that men and women have different > > strategies for reproduction and so they have different sexual > > impulses. So they conclude men have strong sex drives and will > tend to > > want to mate with as many partners as possible, while women will > want > > to be selective about their partners. Evolutionary psychologists > also > > have other theories about behavior where humans are assumed to have > > certain innate impulses that can't be attributed to culture. Perhaps we can think deeper, what is "innate impulses" and what is "strategies for reproduction"? What so called "impulses" and subconscious "strategies" may simply be manifestation of "accumulation", that eventually can be traced back to "self view", which leads to "protection of self", which leads to "protection of my family", which leads to "protection of my tribe"? There were many posts about Buddhism vs. science. The whole basis for science is a very rigid methodology for explaining phenomenons involving formulating hypothesis, collection of data, and testing based on "concrete" and "measurable" data. Because the data has to be "measurable", it's bound to lag behind "truth" spoken through philosophy and religion. However, I believe science and all would "eventually" converge, after all, they are all describing the same reality. Ethical focus of Buddhism came natually after the realization of the "ultimate reality". Same thing, people can derive natural ethical consequences even just from learning from science, though not as profound because science lags so much behind (given its rigid methodology as explained above). with metta, Wendy ----- Original Message ----- From: "robmoult" Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 1:17 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: dependent origination question > Hi, > > Let me take a stab. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjchacko" wrote: > > I have a question about dependent origination, and I'm hoping > someone > > here can help me to answer it. > > > > I'm trying to compare some ideas in evolutionary psychology to > > Buddhism. > > > > Evolutionary psychologists claim that men and women have different > > strategies for reproduction and so they have different sexual > > impulses. So they conclude men have strong sex drives and will > tend to > > want to mate with as many partners as possible, while women will > want > > to be selective about their partners. Evolutionary psychologists > also > > have other theories about behavior where humans are assumed to have > > certain innate impulses that can't be attributed to culture. > > > > It seems though that this would contradict the idea of dependent > > origination. The first limb of the chain is ignorance, so the cause > > for a sex drive (or any other acquisitive impulse) is wrong views > and > > therefore any difference in male-female behavior is due to culture > > rather than some innate biological nature. Is this a correct > > application of dependent origination? > > > > Thanks. > > Interesting concept, trying to link evolutionary psychology to > Buddhism. > > Here are two points to consider: > - The elements of dependent origination are often shown in a circle > to emphasize the fact that there is no "first cause" > - Ignorance is conditioned by the taints (asavas); which are > delusion, greed (including lust) and wrong view > > Here is a deeper question: Why should there be a link between > evolutionary psychology and dependent origination? Dependent > origination shows us how to escape endless rounds of rebirth. It has > an ethical focus; it is not intended to be a "scientific model". > > I would be interested in your comments. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17120 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 10:00am Subject: Hi Rob Ep and Victor Dear friends, It is too strange: I was thinking of Rob Ep, missing his dialogues and then he emerged. I was, the next day, thinking of Victor, not heard from him for a long time, and then he appeared. Victor, I really appreciate your interest in nama and rupa, such an essential subject, yes, *the* subject. I cannot go into it for long because Tuesday I depart for Thailand, where nama and rupa will be our daily subject of discussion. In short: I believe we can give many definitions, but we shall still not know nama and rupa as they really are. Best of all is verifying the different characteristics of nama and rupa at this moment. Sound appears now: does sound know anything? It does not, it is rupa. When sound appears there must also be hearing. Does hearing experiences something? It does, it experiences sound, therefore, hearing is nama, it experiences something. There may be pleasant feeling or unpleasant feeling. Feeling experiences, it is nama. There are many moments of thinking in a day. Thinking is nama, it experiences. Now we can appreciate the many suttas dealing with all the objects appearing through the six doors, they can remind us directly of nama and rupa appearing now. I am sorry to miss your dialogues about all this next week, Nina. 17121 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 10:26am Subject: Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) Hello Robert and all, Thank you, Robert, for responding. Instead of asking why and how does ignorance condition consciousness? My question should be: Why and how does sankhara condition consciousness? To me the idea of "sankhara" is perhaps one of the most difficult to comprehend. It's been translated as "mental formation". However, I am not yet able to see the connection between sankhara and consciousness. Have a good day, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > > 6. Ignorance conditions taints, which in turn conditions > ignorance. > > Why and how does ignorance condition consciousness? > > > > You have asked a very complex question. The brief answer is as > follows: > - Taints (asavas) condition ignorance (avijja) > - Ignorance (avijja) conditions kammic formations (sankhara) > - Kammic formations (sankhara) condition consciousness (vinnana) > > Ignorance is moha concommitant with 12 akusala cittas. > > Sankhara is cetana in the 8 kamavacara kusala cittas & 5 rupavacara > kusala cittas (merit), cetana in the 12 akusala cittas (demerit) and > cetana in the 4 arupavacara kusala cittas (imperturbable). > > In the case of formations of merit, avijja can condition sankhara > through object condition or natural decisive support condition. > > In the case of formations of demerit, avijja can condition sankhara > through the following conditions: root, object, object > predominance / decisive support, proximity / contiguity, co- > nascence, mutuality, support, natural decisive support, repetition, > association, presence / non-disappearance and absence / > disappearance. > > In the case of the formations of the imperturbable, avijja > conditions sankhara only through natural decisive support condition. > > Consciousness are the 32 lokiya vipaka cittas. > > Sankhara conditions consciousness through asynchronous kamma > condition and through natural decisive support condition. > > This has been extracted from Visuddhimagga XVII 102, 103, 104, 177, > 178, 179, 180, 181. > > If you want definitions of the various conditions listed above, see > my most recently updated class notes (pages 171-178). This is > available on-line in the "Files" section of DSG. > > I suspect that this is more than you really wanted to know, but I > would be pleased to explore the details with you. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17122 From: kenhowardau Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 0:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama Rupa Hi Howard, Needless to say, what we Buddhists are trying to understand is that the all important being we call ourselves is, in reality, nothing more than the five khandhas of the present moment. So in the seen, there is only the seen; in the heard, there is only the heard and so on. What our thinking minds tell us it that the object we see is the same object we hear, touch or taste and smell. Our thinking minds also tell us that the being who sees is the same being who hears, touches, tastes, smells and thinks. But our thinking minds take time to come up with this wrong view the world. By the time thinking has taken place, the realities that see and are seen, have been and gone. So, our objective is to realise that reality is fleeting and that conceptualising is comparatively slow. This could be why, as Larry says, it is the speed of citta that prevents it from being identified with the illusory being who sees, hears, smells, tastes and thinks. May I suggest that when we liken the present reality to a bubble, a mirage or a coreless plantain, the objective is to see that it is devoid of the concepts we think about. The actual dhammas are the `all' (of the Loka Sutta), so they are not devoid of their own substance. What the `plantain trunk' is devoid of is the illusory conceptual core that thinking ascribes to it (over the course of time). So I think you may be placing too much stress on the impermanence and emptiness of dhammas in your explanation of anatta. (You may be emptying out the baby with the bath water.) I think it would be quite in order to say, for example, that citta `sees' or `is the observer of' it's object. We could even say that the five khandhas are the self, provided we recognise that the self lives and dies in the space of one moment. In other words, the anatta characteristic does not mean that dhammas are empty of absolute reality, it means they are empty of conceptual reality. Kind regards Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > ========================= > I agree that there is no seer - just seeing. And the seeing is an act > of vi~n~nana or discerning. However, I don't have a clue what the relative > speed of the discerning has to do with anything. > Several people on this list frequently point out that mind- moments > arise and pass very quickly (in comparison, I suppose, with rupas which > supposedly remain [or are replicated] for up to 17 mind-moments - it must be > in comparison with *something*, for duration is always relative). So what? > Something not lasting for a long time means only that it doesn't last for a > long time - nothing more. What if an act of visual consciousness lasted twice > as long (again compared, I suppose, to rupas)? Would that make it a seer? > Four times as long? Seventeen times as long? > I believe that it is unimportant what is the relative duration of > things. What is important is that they don't remain, and that they arise only > in dependence on conditions, their creation and tentative existence > completely dependent on similarly empty dhammas. What is important, as I see > it, is that *nothing* whatsoever has any core or own-being, being nothing > more than a dependent arising that does not remain. > As one Zen master said: to see a glass properly is to see it as > already broken. As the Buddha said hundreds of years earlier: whatever is of > the nature to arise is of the nature to cease. (The speed is irrelevant.) > > With metta, > Howard 17123 From: rjchacko Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 9:14am Subject: Re: dependent origination question --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi, > > Let me take a stab. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjchacko" wrote: > > I have a question about dependent origination, and I'm hoping > someone > > here can help me to answer it. > > > > I'm trying to compare some ideas in evolutionary psychology to > > Buddhism. > > > > Evolutionary psychologists claim that men and women have different > > strategies for reproduction and so they have different sexual > > impulses. So they conclude men have strong sex drives and will > tend to > > want to mate with as many partners as possible, while women will > want > > to be selective about their partners. Evolutionary psychologists > also > > have other theories about behavior where humans are assumed to have > > certain innate impulses that can't be attributed to culture. > > > > It seems though that this would contradict the idea of dependent > > origination. The first limb of the chain is ignorance, so the cause > > for a sex drive (or any other acquisitive impulse) is wrong views > and > > therefore any difference in male-female behavior is due to culture > > rather than some innate biological nature. Is this a correct > > application of dependent origination? > > > > Thanks. > > Interesting concept, trying to link evolutionary psychology to > Buddhism. > > Here are two points to consider: > - The elements of dependent origination are often shown in a circle > to emphasize the fact that there is no "first cause" > - Ignorance is conditioned by the taints (asavas); which are > delusion, greed (including lust) and wrong view > > Here is a deeper question: Why should there be a link between > evolutionary psychology and dependent origination? Dependent > origination shows us how to escape endless rounds of rebirth. It has > an ethical focus; it is not intended to be a "scientific model". > > I would be interested in your comments. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) I'm comparing the two because I see both as forms of psychology. They have different approaches to the same subject, but there ought to be points of correspondence. As I understand it dependent origination can also be considered the relationship between a stream of moments in a single person and is not necessarily limited to being an explanation about previous and future lives. Dependent origination also explains the arising of the concept of self, which is something that happens in this life. I originally started thinking about this in terms of the five hindrances. According to Buddhist tradition as one progresses towards nibbana, one eliminates the five hindrances. (Here's a point I'm unclear about: In the four foundations of mindfulness the hindrances are one of the dhammas that can be contemplated. But unwholesome consciousnesses are also part of the third foundation right? So is contemplating the hindrances basically about characterizing certain consciousnesses as hindrances?) Anyway according to evolutionary psychologists human brains are "designed" to seek out sex in certain ways according to whether you are male or female. So it seems to me that would correspond to some process which causes lustful consciousnesses to arise under conditions that are conducive to your genders' reproductive strategy. But then it sounds like according to the evolutionary psychologist the hindrance of sensual desire can't be removed because it's "hard wired" into the brain. In other words they are asserting lustful consciousnesses are conditioned only by perception of the external situation. On the other hand in Buddhism lustful consciousness is not determined only by perception. In general I think the idea behind evolutionary psychology makes sense, but I think that many of the applications of it are only just so stories meant to explain away some cultural conventions. The whole mating strategy thing is contradicted when you go and actually observe mating habits outside of familiar cultures. For example in Tibet, before the Chinese invaded polyandry was common, and even though it's illegal now it still happens. But the whole idea of one woman seeking multiple partners is completely backwards if you buy the evolutionary psychologists explanation of human nature. In other applications of evolutionary psychology or psychobiology differences in human behavior are reduced to some "gene". Some people have more "IQ" because of a gene, some people are more prone to violence because of a gene, etc. Differences are reduced to essences. It seems to me that when one starts to invoke the existence of essences to explain one's own behavior(e.g. "I don't want to settle down with one girl because I'm a guy.") that there is a lack of understanding of dependent origination. But in trying to apply the idea of dependent origination in this case I find that I don't really understand it so I thought I'd look for some help in trying to elaborate on that idea. 17124 From: Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 3:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Sarah, Thanks for the good quotation on the footings. My question to Robert was what is the proximate condition (anantara paccaya) for panna (wisdom). Samadhi is the footing for wisdom, is it also the proximate condition? I'm going to drop my inquiry into "bare mindfulness'. I think it is as Nina said, a non-technical term that is best understood in the context we have (Way 25) as "just mindfulness" without the special significance I was attributing to it. However, I would like to look more into "bare attention" as described by Nyanaponika Thera. If there are any Mahasi yogis in this group maybe they have some insight into what this term is in reference to in the Satipatthana Sutta. My first thought is it may relate to the phrase "contemplate the body in the body". I'm a little surprised that you think "satipatthana cannot have a concept for an object" is not a view advocated by K. Sujin. I believe both you and Kom have argued for this and I assumed you got it from her. I did yoke this idea with "bare mindfulness". Maybe that was what you were objecting to. Looking forward to clarification. Larry 17125 From: James Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:24pm Subject: Re: dependent origination question Dependent Origination explains the cause of human existence-birth- suffering; Evolutionary Psychology explains the details of that human existence over a certain time period. They cannot be compared on an equal footing because they are not similar. To use an analogy, doing so is like trying to compare an apple tree to the apple it produces. They are linked in a certain way, but still very dissimilar. I believe, what you are driving at, is that you would like to know how one can `transcend' clinging (or which sexual desire is one form) in the mental sphere so as to cease existence-birth- suffering. Most people mistakenly look at the traditional chain of events, beginning with ignorance, and believe that all one needs to do is eliminate ignorance and the process will be ended and one will become enlightened. WRONG! The Abhidhamma also takes this approach by supporting the idea that if one `knows' the arising and falling of Nama/Rupa, that will naturally lead to a direct knowledge of Nibbana. Wrong again. The Buddha spelled out the transcendent path in a little recognized, but highly important sutta, the Upanisa Sutta. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel277.html Allow me to summarize the traditional Dependent Origination steps: Ignorance (avijja)= Kamma formations (sankhara)= Consciousness (viññana)= Mentality-materiality (namarupa)= Sixfold sense base (salayatana)= Contact (phassa)= Feeling (vedana)= Craving (tanha)= Clinging (upadana)= Existence (bhava)= Birth (jati)= Suffering (dukkha) So, one would assume that since the cause is ignorance, that removal of that cause will make the whole chain fall, like a line of dominoes. But, it doesn't work that way. Surprisingly, what one needs to cultivate first isn't knowledge of nama/rupa, but FAITH. These are the Transcendent Dependent Origination steps that the LORD BUDDHA taught: Faith (saddha)= Joy (pamojja)= Rapture (piti)= Tranquillity (passaddhi)= Happiness (sukha)= Concentration (samadhi)= Knowledge and vision of things as they are (yathabhutañanadassana)= Disenchantment (nibbida)= Dispassion (viraga)= Emancipation (vimutti)= Knowledge of destruction of the cankers (asavakkhaye ñana) So, there you have it. Metta, James 17126 From: Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 1:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" In a message dated 11/20/2002 7:19:42 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > Howard: > That is a way of putting it, though not quite how I would put it > because it has a substantialist flavor to it. Perhaps closer to what I mean > is "What functions/cetasikas participate in the mechanism we *call* > accumulations?" (I would imagine that some cetasikas are direct > participants, > while others serve as necessary auxilliary conditions for manifestation of > tendencies.) It seems to me that cetanas are central to this, and that they > are likely quite complex in effect. If enough factors are involved, each of > a > number of types, then combinatorially it is feasible that the class of > possible accumulations be huge. It seems to me that such would be required > to > explain the great diversity of possible inclinations among people. > Hi Howard I believe the "accumulations" act as roots somewhat like the roots of plants. The accumulations perhaps are "hidden" beneath the surface (of experiences) like roots are "hidden" underground (out of view). Abhidhamma states (and I agree on this point) that we are not capable of experiencing the "pure" water element (coalescence element). The coalescence element is an "inward movement." I believe karma roots us to "continued becoming" primarily through a coalescing force...hence we can't experience it with our normal perceptive abilities. I quite suspect (as you) the cetasika combinations are extremely complex and dynamic; so I try to look at it from a "principle" standpoint...I suspect craving is primarily a "coalescing type activity" and that the accumulation processes revolve around that. This is a slightly different approach than I think you're taking but thought you might find it interesting. I believe the Buddha said that only he could fully understand karma and that anyone else would go mad trying to figure it out. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha......... TG 17127 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:27pm Subject: Jan's letter Dear Ms Christine Forsyth, I really enjoyed reading your letter! Your dog Rusty seems like a really nice dog. I was just wondering what type of dog is he? eg: retriver, terrier, bull dog. Well, im alos going to get a dog which is an Iggy(italian greyhound) I have a dog in Thailand called Spike which is an Yorkie/ Shizu. Last last week, I read a book called Chicken soup for the pet lovers soul. Its a very good book so i just wanted to mention it. I was also wondering if do you have any intersting facts about Buddhism that you can tell me? Thanks for your letter! Jan 17128 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:52pm Subject: Show Off Hi Philip I am your sister Janet! I have read your first letter and I think it's very bad, you can do it better because your such a show off! Anyway, I am going to tell Mum about your letter! (Ha! Ha!) Work well soon! Janet Chui: 8 years old. My hobbies are: playing table tennis and reading. What is Buddhism? What help us? Please write to me. Janet. 17129 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:58pm Subject: My letter to ...... Dear James, It's me again, Janice! Thank you for the poem! Somehow I always enjoy your poems as they are extremely happy. I shall definitely send your condolences to Mrs.. Walsh-Till when I come across her again. Of course, I shall keep smiling and study hard everyday. And Thank you for answering my question about the buddha. In fact, the poem you sent me about Sarah Cynthia Sylvia Stout by Shel Silverstein, I have heard and recited this poem to my class last year. However, I think this poem is very hilarious and it teaches us that we have to finish something right away. In Philip's letter, I agree the with the way that he writes something to an adult or teacher and to a friend. James, do you know how many Gods, Demons, and Ghosts are there in the Buddha religion ? (Approximately) By the way, what does 'Metta'mean ? I hope you could send me more funny poems! Please write back soon! Thank you ! Janice Chung 17130 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:58pm Subject: Re: Nama Rupa - 7 --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > 4. Being conscious of something is being conscious of it's > representation. > > 5. When consciousness ceases, represenation/nama and represented/rupa > cease to be. > > 6. Ignorance conditions taints, which in turn conditions ignorance. > Why and how does ignorance condition consciousness? > 7. Every mental phenomenon is a representation of something. 17131 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 7:47pm Subject: Re: Jan's letter Hi Jan, Thank you for your letter and for asking about Rusty. Rusty is a Great Dane/Alsatian. So he is very large like a Great Dane, and has their gentle nature, but is not as heavy. He is really intelligent like an Alsatian. He is nine years old. I am a little sad about Rusty at the moment. He twisted his back right knee very badly, and had to have an operation at the Veterinary hospital. He is staying in boarding kennels right now because he has to be kept still in a small space. He has to stay there until after Christmas. I really miss him. One of the things I like about Buddhism is that the Buddha often talked about animals and insects, and said that every living and breathing creature wants to be happy and safe. He taught us to be gentle and kind to all beings, not just humans. As you own Spike and are getting an Iggy, you will notice that animals have different personalities, just like people - and can feel happy or frightened, just like people. That book sounds interesting - I'll keep a look-out for it at the Bookshop. Thanks for mentioning it. metta (loving-kindness) from Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > > Dear Ms Christine Forsyth, > > I really enjoyed reading your letter! > > Your dog Rusty seems like a really nice dog. I was > just wondering what type of dog is he? eg: retriver, > terrier, bull dog. > > Well, im alos going to get a dog which is an > Iggy(italian greyhound) > > I have a dog in Thailand called Spike which is an > Yorkie/ Shizu. > > Last last week, I read a book called Chicken soup for > the pet lovers soul. Its a very good book so i just > wanted to mention it. > > I was also wondering if do you have any intersting > facts about Buddhism that you can tell me? > > Thanks for your letter! > > Jan 17132 From: rahula_80 Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 7:52pm Subject: Re: Nibbana Hi, > This sutta is explained in reasonable detail in the commentary, Bhikku > Bodhi gives some terse notes in his translation of the Samyutta Nikaya. > Do you have it.? No. 17133 From: rahula_80 Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 7:56pm Subject: Re: Citta and Vinnana Hi, > The Visuddhimagga XIV (82) : "The words vinnana, citta and mano > are one in meaning" Shakya Aryanatta said Visudhimagga are latter commentarial literature. And he does accept it as an authority on Buddhism. He only accepts the Pali Canon (without the Abhidhama) and the Commentarries. 17134 From: James Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 9:24pm Subject: Re: My letter to ...... --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > > Dear James, > > It's me again, Janice! Thank you for the > poem! Somehow I always enjoy your poems as they are > extremely happy. I shall definitely send your > condolences to Mrs.. Walsh-Till when I come across her > again. Of course, I shall keep smiling and study hard > everyday. And Thank you for answering my question > about the buddha. > > In fact, the poem you sent me about Sarah > Cynthia Sylvia Stout by Shel Silverstein, I have heard > and recited this poem to my class last year. However, > I think this poem is very hilarious and it teaches us > that we have to finish something right away. > > In Philip's letter, I agree the with the way > that he writes something to an adult or teacher and to > a friend. James, do you know how many Gods, Demons, > and Ghosts are there in the Buddha religion ? > (Approximately) By the way, what does 'Metta'mean ? > > I hope you could send me more funny poems! > Please write back soon! > Thank you ! > Janice Chung Hi Star Kid Janice, I am glad that you liked the poems. Since you asked, I have put some more for you at the end of this letter. I hope you like them. Now, to answer your questions. You ask two very interesting questions. I am going to answer your last question first, because it will take less time. You ask what is `Metta'? Metta is a Pali word which is usually translated as "Loving-Kindness". What does that mean? Well, you know that we can all feel different kinds of love, right? We have one type for parents, one for siblings, one for friends, one for pets, one for teachers, etc., etc., etc. Well, imagine that you put all of those different types of love together in a great big pile, and you squeezed all of them together really, really tight! The juice that would come out would be: METTA! :-) You also ask how many god, demons, and ghosts there are in other dimensions/realms, according to Buddhism. Well, that is a very tricky question and you will get different answers depending on the type of Buddhist you ask. Since I am a Theravada Buddhist, I will answer according to that type. I don't know how many entities exist exactly in all of the other realms; gosh, I don't even know how many people are on the planet Earth right now! :-) All I can tell you is that there are 31 Planes of Existence in Theravada Buddhism. Does that mean that there are 31 different planets? No, that means there are 31 different ENTIRE UNIVERSES! All in the same space as our universe but made of different materials so we don't see each other. It is only with a very sharp, wise mind that one is able to see them. Like some people can see ghosts and some people can't… that kind of thing. Now, I know you are going to want to know what these different universes are like, so I will just tell you now. They are broken up into three different categories: No Material, Fine Material, and Large Material. They are called in the No Material Universes: Neither-perception-nor- non-perception, Nothingness, Infinite Consciousness, Infinite Space (These gods/entities have no bodies, only minds). In the Fine Material Universes they are called: Peerless devas, Clear-sighted devas, Beautiful devas, Untroubled devas, Devas not Falling Away, Unconscious beings, Very Fruitful devas, Devas of Refulgent Glory, Devas of Unbounded Glory, Devas of Limited Glory, Devas of Streaming Radiance, Devas of Unbounded Radiance, Devas of Limited Radiance, Great Brahmas, Ministers of Brahma, and Retinue of Brahma. In the Large Material Universes they are called: Devas Wielding Power over the Creation of Others, Devas Delighting in Creation, Contented devas, Yama devas, The Thirty-three Gods, Devas of the Four Great Kings, Human beings, Asuras, Hungry Shades/Ghosts, Animals, Hell So Jan, I really couldn't know how many gods, demons, and ghosts existed in all of these different places. But I hope this helps some! Keep smiling! Metta, James My Sister's Always on the Phone by Bruce Lansky My sister's always on the phone. I never see her study. She doesn't do her homework, which is why her grades are cruddy. My sister's always on the phone, but I don't think that's cool. My sister is so popular she's flunking out of school. ******* My Dog Chewed Up My Homework by Bruce Lansky I'm glad to say my homework's done. I finished it last night. I've got it right here in this box. It's not a pretty sight. My dog chewed up my homework. He slobbered on it, too. So now my homework's ripped to shreds and full of slimy goo. It isn't much to look at, but I brought it anyway. I'm going to dump it on your desk if I don't get an A. ******* No More Flies in the School Kitchen by Bruce Lansky There were lots of flies in the kitchen. The cook didn't know what to do. The principal made an inspection. He swatted some flies with his shoe. Now there are no flies in the kitchen. The cook's in a very good mood. The flies are not quite so delighted. They died after eating the food. ******* Mary Had Some Bubble Gum by Anonymous Mary had some bubble gum, she chewed it long and slow, and everywhere that Mary went her gum was sure to go. She chewed the gum in school one day, which was against the rule. The teacher took her pack away and chewed it after school. 17135 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 11:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependent origination question Hi, rj. --- rjchacko wrote: Welcome to the list from me. I've been following this thread. I'm reminded of a recent discussion here about science and Buddhism. The conclusion that people seemed to come to was that each was talking about 'realities' from a different perspective and that there was little or no overlap between the two. So I'm wondering if we are likely to find the situation any different when making a comparison between Buddhism and psychology (this of course does not mean that making the comparison is not a useful exercise). <> I think the apparent similarities are likely to be only at fairly superficial level. For example, both deal a lot with the mind, but the understanding of what ‘the mind’ is surely quite different. In any event, the Dhamma is not limited to a study of the mind and behaviour (which is how I would 'define' psychology -- purely a layman's view, of course!) but to an understanding on a far broader scope. <> I think this is right, but it's a lot easier to see in the context of different lifetimes than successive mind-moments! <> Yes, unwholesome consciousness falls under both the third and fourth foundations. But as I understand it, all dhammas falling under the first three foundations also fall under the fourth. For example, the basic phenomena that comprise the body fall under the first of the five aggregates (khandhas) in the fourth foundation (as well as under the first foundation) and feelings fall under the second of the five aggregates in the fourth foundation (as well as under the second foundation). So I would regard the division of the basic phenomena into the four foundations as a classification made to help us grasp the teaching better. This being so, it is not a matter of 'practising' one foundation or another, but of realising that all basic phenomena are potentially an object of awareness. … … <> There are many useful textual sources But expect to spend some time on it! Dependent origination is one of those things that we're told can be comprehended only by those of highly developed understanding. So we shouldn't be surprised if we don't manage to crack at right away. In any event, since dependent origination is essentially a description of the relationship between different dhammas that arise in our daily lives, the best way to have a deeper understanding of it is to develop understanding of those basic phenomena arising at the present moment. Without the development of satipatthana we will never 'get it' at any real depth. My views, anyway. Jon 17136 From: rjchacko Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 1:41am Subject: [dsg] Re: dependent origination question Jon, Thanks for the welcome. <> When I compare satipatthana and psychology I see a lot of overlap. A student of satipatthana meditates to observe the relationship between mentality and materiality. A student of psychology also studies the relationship between mentality and materiality. The difference lies in the approach. A yogi takes advantage of his sentience to note the dynamics of his mind. A psychologist applies tests, surveys, PET scans, etc. to his experimental subjects. One approaches the mind from the inside, and the other approaches it from the outside. When a psychologist throws out a hypothesis it should be possible to recast it in a way that we can think about it from an internal point of view and see if that makes sense. So, for example, with the mating strategy hypothesis recasting the idea in terms of internal experience, we would say that the hypothesis is that lustful consciousnesses are determined only by perception of potential mating partners. We can now examine our experience to see if this makes sense. Does it? Does it makes sense in terms of dependent origination? What does psychology have to offer? I think that it could explain things like the mechanism behind what makes certain feelings pleasant or unpleasant. What makes certain sensations pleasant or unpleasant is not explained, but it's not relevant to understanding suffering. The external approach could also help to refine teaching methods in Buddhism. Also Buddhism doesn't seem to have anything to offer to people who have organic defects like schizophrenia. On the other hand Buddhism has a complete theory of the dynamics of the mind. An external approach could someday show the neural correlates of those dynamics, but while interesting that proabably wouldn't offer much practical advantage (perhaps as a diagnostic tool?). <> Well, I'm actually skeptical about different lifetimes myself, but even if I were to grant that, it I think it would still be more important to understand dependent arising in terms of succesive mind moments, because this is how one would comprehend anatta. Dependent origination is the middle way of rejecting both an inherently existing self, and nihilism. I think also that it is important to apply the idea of dependent origination to many ideas that are part of the "conventional wisdom." A lot of the pop science we hear on tv and read in the paper are just rationalizations of certain cultural conventions using scientific jargon. Since the scientific approach has, for good reason, earned a lot of trust using scientific jargon can lend an air of truth to questionable theories. More often though many conventions are just tacitly accepted in public discourse, e.g. after 9/11 questions like "why do 'they' hate 'us'?" I think this can present a lot of difficulties for the lay practitioner who is constantly exposed to popular culture and uses its terms to communicate and think about the world. <> I agree that it is important to actually see dependent origination "on the fly", but I think it's also useful to have a philosophical grasp on the idea. It easier to recognize something, if you know what it looks like. <> Thanks. The fourth foundation always confused me because of the apparent redundance. It makes more sense to me now to see that the dhammas are insights about the other three foundations. -Ranjit 17137 From: robmoult Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 7:43am Subject: Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) Hi Victor, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Why and how does sankhara condition consciousness? The definition of "sankhara" in Nyanatiloka's "Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines" starts, "This term has, according to its context, different shades of meaning, which should be carefully distinguished...." It then proceeds to give multiple definitions. You are probably familiar with the term "sankhara" as applied as one of the five aggregates. In this case, it means all of the cetasikas minus feeling and perception. The definition of "sankhara" when used as part of dependent origination is quite different. In dependent origination, "sankhara" is the 29 rebirth-producing cetana which fall into three classes: - Formations of merit (punnabhisankhara): cetana in the 8 maha kusala cittas and cetana in the 5 rupavacara cittas - Formations of demerit (apunnabhisankhara): cetana in the 12 akusala cittas - Formations of the imperturbable (anenjabhisankhara): cetana in the 4 arupavacara cittas In short, sankhara represents the 29 types of kamma (kamma = cetana) associated with the 17 lokiya kusala cittas and the 12 akusala cittas. Just as sankhara has a unique definition when used as part of dependent origination, so too does consciousness (vinnana) have a unique definition when used as part of dependent origination. As part of dependent orgination, consciousness means the 32 lokiya vipaka cittas. You have probably seen the diagram of dependent origination which shows sankhara as the last of the "past period (kala)" and vinnana as the first of the "present period". Most of the focus when describing the link between sankhara and vinnana is on how at the time of rebirth (patisandhi-kala), the 11 akusala cetanas (excluding uddhacca-cetana) and the 17 lokiya kusala cetanas (excluding the two abhinna-cetanas) condition the arising of the 19 rebirth consciousnesses. However, dependent origination does not have to extend over three lives and during a lifetime (pavatti-kala) the 12 akusala cetanas (including uddhacca-cetana) and the 17 lokiya kusala cetanas (excluding the two abhinna-cetanas) condition the arising of vipaka cittas which arise in the thought process as follows: - Formations of merit: 8 mahakusala cetanas and 5 rupavacara cetanas condition the arising of 8 kusala vipaka cittas (5 sense consciousness, receiving, 2 investigating), 8 mahakusala vipaka cittas (here the mahakusala vipaka cittas play a role of registration cittas, not patisandhi cittas) and 5 rupavacara vipaka cittas - Formations of demerit: 12 akusala cetanas condition the arising of 7 akusala vipaka cittas (5 sense consciousness, receiving, investigating) - Formations of the imperturbable: 4 arupavacara cetanas condition the arising of 4 arupavacara vipaka cittas All of the conditioning between sankhara and vinnana is according to asychronous kamma condition and natural decisive support condition In simple words, the second link in dependent origination tells us that kamma conditions vipaka; it is kamma that conditions our rebirth citta (which is vipaka) and it is kamma that conditions our sense door consciousness, receiving, investigating and registration cittas. Everything that happens to us is a result of our kamma. Our current situation is a result of our kamma. What we do in our current situation is not determined by our past kamma ("free will?") and what we do in our current situation creates new kamma for us. Victor, does this help? Metta, Rob M :-) 17138 From: nidive Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 8:07am Subject: Fear of Rupas I have been contemplating about rupas these few days. When I begin to contemplate on space as coming into existence depending on the four great elements, a strange kind of fear arises within (me) for a short moment. This happened very strongly once, but it still does occur (less strongly) if I concentrate the mind on the impermanence of rupas. It's hard to describe, but the fear seems to be that the rupas are 'dangerous', that the rupas are 'unreal', not to be taken as they really are. It seems that the 'comfort zone' that I see the physical world as 'real' has been violated. Does anybody have this kind of fear as well? Please share your experience. 17139 From: James Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 1:36pm Subject: Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > It's hard to describe, but the fear seems to be that the rupas > are 'dangerous', that the rupas are 'unreal', not to be taken as > they really are. It seems that the 'comfort zone' that I see the > physical world as 'real' has been violated. > > Does anybody have this kind of fear as well? Please share your > experience. Hello Fellow Traveler, Yes, I also share your fear and hesitation when contemplating Rupa, and I posted distinctly in message 16795 of this group. Here are some of the highlights of what I wrote, which I still stand by: "Actually, I wish that I could forget what I have garnered from my reading about the Abhidhamma thus far. Maybe time will help me to forget? This is going to sound radical, but I think it is a dangerous work…" Obviously, I share your fear of the concept of Rupa as presented in the Abhidhamma. I believe that you and I probably do what many don't do: we contemplate with our whole being, not just our brains. When you contemplate Rupa with your whole being, a fear distinctly hair-raising naturally arises. Is this a hindrance? No, we know a hindrance when we experience one. A hindrance is like a pesky fly- this kind of fear is profound and deep and not shakable. When I experienced it, it reminded me of Star Wars and being drawn to the `Dark Side' of the Force. That is strong reason for fear and why I was hesitant to proceed with studies of Rupa. But I did and,now finished, I have still come to the same conclusion: The contemplation of Rupa, outside of that experienced within the body (which is still Nama), is dangerous and should be avoided. Frankly, I am convinced that the Buddha did not teach the Abhidhamma and, having an extensive knowledge of his teachings, I am sure he would not approve of it for the majority of practitioners (I believe it attracts and could be suited to those who have been re-born from the non-material realms where they were all mind and no body. `Matter' is a novelty to this type of individual and therefore `enlightening'. To the rest of us, it is dangerous and can result in rebirth in an animal or hell realm…the lowest of the sensual realms). Allow me to quote further of what I wrote: "Mostly I am going on intuition and deduction for this evaluation, since I didn't finish my studies of it and never intend to…But its biggest fault, in my estimation, is the assertion of 'Rupa', or matter, and how knowledge of such will lead to insight. This goes contrary to what the Buddha taught. The Buddha taught that it is from the mind that we create our world and it is through control and taming of the mind that we will find liberation. Knowing the various 'dhammas' of matter has little to do with that. Basically, as the Buddha said, it is all Nama. Anything other than that is purely speculative and doesn't lead to liberation…" Trust your instincts and they won't fail you. I feel your fear also. I believe it is a good fear and neither of us should ignore it. Metta, James Ps. obviously, in this group that is very Abhidhamma oriented, I will respond to the postings of the children but not much more. My other posts are being ignored anyway- but those intoxicated with `Rupa'. 17140 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 2:08pm Subject: Re: Fear of Rupas Hello nidive, l hope many of those who really understand the Abhidhamma and the meanings of the terms used will discuss the matter with you. I admire the fact that you are asking questions and seeking to understand. This will always guard you against falling into the trap of drawing ill-informed conclusions from premature, partial, and misunderstood information. I am just a beginner myself, having studied Abhidhamma for only a year or so. Please, take a great deal of time, there is no need to hurry. Understanding grows very slowly, ignorance is hard to disperse, especially when we don't see it as it is, or even that we have it. Don't be fearful, all will be well as you slowly develop understanding. Those I learn Abhidhamma from are some of the most intelligent, peaceful, joyful, equanimous, and ethical people I know. To borrow from another religion, "By their fruits you will know them". Many of us will be in Bangkok over the next week or so, but I look forward to your contributions to many discussions over the coming months. It is really good to have someone who can articulate questions and we all learn from the discussions that follow. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > I have been contemplating about rupas these few days. When I begin > to contemplate on space as coming into existence depending on the > four great elements, a strange kind of fear arises within (me) for a > short moment. This happened very strongly once, but it still does > occur (less strongly) if I concentrate the mind on the impermanence > of rupas. > > It's hard to describe, but the fear seems to be that the rupas > are 'dangerous', that the rupas are 'unreal', not to be taken as > they really are. It seems that the 'comfort zone' that I see the > physical world as 'real' has been violated. > > Does anybody have this kind of fear as well? Please share your > experience. 17141 From: azita gill Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 7:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Fear of Rupas --- nidive wrote: > I have been contemplating about rupas these few > days. > > It's hard to describe, but the fear seems to be that > the rupas > are 'dangerous', that the rupas are 'unreal', not to > be taken as > they really are. It seems that the 'comfort zone' > that I see the > physical world as 'real' has been violated. > > Does anybody have this kind of fear as well? Please > share your > experience. > > dear nidive, rupas aren't dangerous, they are just rupas and they are very real - it is our thinking that makes them fearful, dangerous. Once the understanding grows and knows these namas and rupas for what they really are: impermanent, not self and therefore unsatisfactory', that fear may fall away also. > However, to be honest, 'my'comfort zone feels pretty unsafe most of the time too. I think when we start learnning about the Dhamma, all the ideas that we have about our life get tossed around and chewed up and you kinda feel like a refugee. Here's something that I find useful: < 'I am the owner of my actions[kamma], heir of my actions. I am born of my actions. I am related to my actions and I have my actions as refuge. Whatever I do, good or evil, of that I will be the heir". < from the Anguttara-Nikaya. < the above reflections are not meant to creat morbidity but are meant to arouse in us a sense of urgency and wisdom to live more meaningfully and to strive for the true liberation of Nibbana. > Hope this helps. < Azita > 17142 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 7:40pm Subject: Re: Fear of Rupas --- Dear ndive, Fear comes about because of the clinging to self. If there is sati there cannot be fear at the same time. And sati can take fear as an object. Because for so long there has been the accumulation of clinging to self then it can happen that when contemplating in a way that seems to challenge this deeply rooted grasping fear can arise. This fear is simply the kilesa -defilements. At these times we can see how dangerous and pitiful is the idea of self. It is a barrier that has to be crossed so that understanding can become firm to see that there is no self- either in rupa or nama. Then the contemplation of impermanence will evoke calm. But it all happens gradually, not by forcing. The world of concepts(such as 'physical world', self, ) that we have clung to for a long time is not real, while namas and rupas are real but fleeting and unsubstantial, unworthy of clinging to. Seeing this correctly takes a long time. I think it cannot be hurried. Robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > I have been contemplating about rupas these few days. When I begin > to contemplate on space as coming into existence depending on the > four great elements, a strange kind of fear arises within (me) for a > short moment. This happened very strongly once, but it still does > occur (less strongly) if I concentrate the mind on the impermanence > of rupas. > > It's hard to describe, but the fear seems to be that the rupas > are 'dangerous', that the rupas are 'unreal', not to be taken as > they really are. It seems that the 'comfort zone' that I see the > physical world as 'real' has been violated. > > Does anybody have this kind of fear as well? Please share your > experience. 17143 From: Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 5:26pm Subject: Re: dependent origination question This may be useful; just happened upon this after catching up on some posts. The site is Mahayana but it contains interesting arguments/positions on many issues connecting the Dhamma and science. On the issue at hand: "Evolutionary Psychology Getting into the state of being satisfied sets the instinctive alarm bells ringing. If you think you can drop out of the evolutionary race, then all the habituation of hundreds of millions of years of evolution will tell you not to. Our genes drive us along paths of action which appear to minimise suffering, but in many cases increase it. Greed and acquisitiveness are natural reactions designed to increase the survival of our genes, and decrease the chances of our competitors. But after a certain point, the more you've got, the more you've got to lose, (even if it is just losing face) and so the more you've got to worry about. These instinctive strivings and attachments for things which are ultimately only going to cause us worry and unhappiness are known in Buddhist philosophy as innate delusions (as distinct from intellectually formed delusions such as memes). The innate delusions are considerably more difficult to overcome than intellectually formed delusions, however it is one of the fundamental tenets of Buddhism that they can eventually be brought into the light of day and removed. To quote Richard Dawkins 'We are built as gene machines and cultured as meme machines, but we have the power to turn against our creators. We, alone on earth, can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish replicators.' [Dawkins 1989] The Buddhist technique of rebellion against the selfish replicators, at any rate in the form of innate delusions, is to reduce the power of the forces which drive us by recognising them for what they are. This is traditionally performed by a mixture of analytical thought and meditation, and involves the recognition of four truths of biological existence: (1) The first step is to recognise the inevitability of dukkha - the sense of unsatisfactoriness and the certainty of death and the ultimate loss of everything, which haunts all sentient beings even in the absence of manifest suffering. (2) The second is to recognise that the origins of these futile strivings result from our biologically conditioned evolutionary history. If we want to stop being the puppets of our genes and memes we need to clearly understand why we're attached to these particular strings. (3) The third step is to realise that it needn't be like this. This is perhaps the most difficult one for a materialist. It involves realising that the root mind is non-physical and that it can escape from the eternal evolutionary treadmill. (4) The fourth step is adopting a liberating technology that stabilises the root mind and protects it against uncontrolled attachment to further striving, suffering, biological rebirths." Brain and mind - Mahayana Buddhism and argument… metta, stephen 17144 From: James Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 11:18pm Subject: Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > I have been contemplating about rupas these few days. When I begin > to contemplate on space as coming into existence depending on the > four great elements, a strange kind of fear arises within (me) for a > short moment. This happened very strongly once, but it still does > occur (less strongly) if I concentrate the mind on the impermanence > of rupas. > > It's hard to describe, but the fear seems to be that the rupas > are 'dangerous', that the rupas are 'unreal', not to be taken as > they really are. It seems that the 'comfort zone' that I see the > physical world as 'real' has been violated. > > Does anybody have this kind of fear as well? Please share your > experience. Hey Traveler, I have read the other responses to this e-mail and I want to make a few comments. Where in this e-mail do you say that your fear is a result of seeing the non-self (anatta) of rupa? I don't see that at all in this letter. You say that the contemplation of rupa, outside of the body, brings a feeling of fear. It makes you feel that the world you once knew has become something this is 'unreal' and uncomfortable. I don't see where you talk about rupa within yourself at all. Why do members assume they know your feelings more than you do? Why is it that members what to tell you what you are feeling? Did you ask for them to tell you what they think you are feeling? I don't see that question here. You ask, very plainly, 'Has anyone else had this type of fear before?". The answers should be either yes or no, with some details. But notice how people respond by telling you what and how you should be feeling. You don't have to, but I would view any input such as that as being suspect. Additionally, the path of the Buddha is never supposed to be fearful to the extent that it makes everyday reality uncomfortable. That is not what the Buddha said about the dharma. The dharma is beautiful in the beginning, beautiful in the middle, and beautiful in the end. The Buddha said that the wise person upon hearing the dharma will immediately put it into practice and experience great results. It is not supposed to be painful or upsetting. I am reading responses to your letter that are describing the dharma as if it is like a bathtub full of scolding hot water which we all just need to 'ease into'. What? That is odd thinking. The dharma is beautiful, peaceful, and serene...never painful or fearful. Granted, it may be difficult to see and practice, but that is because it is sublime...not because it is torture. As the Buddha said, if it feels like you need to ease into something which is painful, it is not the dharma...it is something which should be avoided. Again, I believe you should listen to your insticts; other people cannot tell you what you feel. Only you know what you feel and what is the right thing to do. Metta, James 17145 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 11:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependent origination question Ranjit --- rjchacko wrote: > Jon, ... ... <> Thank you for these interesting comments on the similarities between psychology and the teachings. You have obviously given a lot of thought to this area, and I can see you have a high regard for psychology. I'm sure that regard is well placed (I daren't say otherwise, being married to a psychology major!). I look forward to your further sharing with us. However I would just like to give a word of caution about trying to rationalize the teachings with another discipline or body of knowledge. I'm sure that someone interested in, say, medicine, law, physics or business, could likewise draw parallels with the teachings, and restate the hypotheses postulated in those disciplines in terms of the teachings. But I think it's undeniable that enlightenment can be attained without a knowledge of any other discipline (since the teachings are complete within themselves). So while different individuals may find knowledge gained from other sources useful in their study of teachings, it could never be said that that knowledge was a prerequisite for enlightenment. <> It is tempting to regard dependent origination as a hypothesis that can be tested against or applied to different scenarios. However, I think this misses the point somewhat. It is true, as you suggest, that a firm intellectual understanding of dependent origination is helpful to one's development of insight. But there may be a danger in taking dependent origination and applying it elsewhere, in that if our grasp of it is merely at the intellectual level (and even then, shaky ;-)), we will be applying a concept that is tainted with our ignorance and misconceptions about the true nature of things. This cannot bring any useful outcome, and may only serve to reinforce that ignorance and misconceptions. To my reading of the teachings, the 'work' to be done is to better understand as it truly is the presently arising reality, from which will gradually emerge a clearer understanding of these deeper aspects of the teachings. (I see a similar danger as regards the characteristics of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness or non self. Rather than trying to see them in things/in our life, they should be regarded as attributes that will emerge as an outcome of the development of insight into basic phenomena (dhammas), as described in the Satipatthana Sutta.) <> Well, I'm not saying this is wrong, but it's not what I thought I was saying! I simply meant to say that the dhammas of the first 3 foundations are all mentioned twice, because the fourth catches everything. I am not aware of anything in the commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta that indicates any difference is intended between, say, feeling as an object of satipatthana under the second foundation and feeling as an object under the fourth foundation (although I remember seeing someting in the Visuddhimagga that seems to suggest otherwise). Thanks again for your extensive comments. Jon 17146 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 11:58pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) Dear Robert M, This post is excellent. You definitely motivated me to get out all the digits for counting. BTW, do you have some kind of class notes related to Dependent Origination with the explanation of the Abhidhamma? If you have one, it would be great. Khun O. (a lurking DSG person) is always interested in hearing about this topics... kom > -----Original Message----- > From: robmoult [mailto:rob.moult@j...] > Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 7:44 AM > Subject: [dsg] Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) > > > Hi Victor, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" > wrote: > > Why and how does sankhara condition consciousness? > > The definition of "sankhara" in Nyanatiloka's > "Manual of Buddhist > Terms and Doctrines" starts, "This term has, > according to its > context, different shades of meaning, which > should be carefully > distinguished...." It then proceeds to give > multiple definitions. 17147 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 0:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas James --- James wrote: > ... ... > "…But its > biggest fault, in my estimation, is the assertion of 'Rupa', or > matter, and how knowledge of such will lead to insight. This goes > contrary to what the Buddha taught. The Buddha taught that it is > from the mind that we create our world and it is through control and > taming of the mind that we will find liberation. Knowing the > various 'dhammas' of matter has little to do with that. Basically, > as the Buddha said, it is all Nama. Anything other than that is > purely speculative and doesn't lead to liberation…" ... > Metta, James > > Ps. obviously, in this group that is very Abhidhamma oriented, I > will respond to the postings of the children but not much more. My > other posts are being ignored anyway- but those intoxicated > with `Rupa'. An interesting hypothesis! Just to clarify, are you suggesting that the Buddha didn't teach rupas as forming part of 'the world' as we know it, or that he didn't teach insight of rupas as necessary for enlightenment? Jon (intoxicated, but prepared to listen) 17148 From: nidive Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 0:25am Subject: Re: Fear of Rupas Hi James, You are right. I didn't comtemplate about rupas inside of the body. It's the contemplation of rupas outside of the body that brings that feeling of fear. This fear doesn't arise so 'naturally' that it makes everyday living uncomfortable. It's only when the mind starts contemplating about impermanence of rupas, then that fear arises. When that fear arises, a sense that rupas are 'dangerous', 'trickery', 'unreal without substance' arises. If I don't contemplate, that 'comfort zone' is still there. Nevertheless, the knowledge of rupas as 'dangerous', as 'trickery', as 'unreal without substance', is still etched in the mind. 17149 From: Star Kid Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 3:09am Subject: Hi Everyone Dear Everybody, Hi! My name is Sandy Lee and I'm 10 years old. I come from Hong Kong, but my mum is malaysian and my dad's from Hong Kong. My first language is Chinese then English. I disagree with the terrorist's attack especially and hope it can come to peace. I'm also sad about Jan's teacher, Mr Wash-till too, and hope Jan can see him again in his future. Life and death-What happens after death? Is there life after death? Does the spirit live on? Will the spirit reincarnate to another form of life? Would we be able to recognise the people who reincarnated to another form? What do Buddhists believe? Do Buddists pray all the tme? I hope to hear from you soon. Sandy 17150 From: Star Kid Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 3:12am Subject: A Letter For Charles Dear Charles, Hi I'm Janet, I have read your letter. I think your letter is good but a bit long. I go to Marymount Primary School. I'm 8 years old. I was born in Hong Kong. You speak French, don't you? My brother is called Philip. He goes to Hong Kong International School. It's really sad for Jan about the dead. I think it is good for not cutting the trees because we need alot of fresh air to breathe. Do you know about Buddhist? Please write to me. Good Luck, Janet Chui 17152 From: Star Kid Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 3:16am Subject: About Me And My Thoughts Dear Robert, I hope your children learn English fast because it has a lot of grammer and learn it well because my sister took the test for a good school in England and she only just past. How old are your two children? What Boarding School do yo want them to go to? What do your children think about Buddhism and do they like it? From Charles C.B (C.B. is my signature) 17153 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 4:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. James --- James wrote: > Jon, ... > I thought that that is what you meant by wholesome and unwholesome, > but I was hoping for a more `nibbana based' and `non-nibbana based' > type of definition. I think I know what you mean, but I believe it would not be correct to define kusala/akusala in terms of leading to/not leading to nibbana. Although all kusala is support for the development of insight, only insight itself leads to nibbana and escape from existence. The develoment of other forms of kusala (dana, sila and samatha), in and of themselves, do not; in fact, they add to the round of existence. That's why the emphasis on this list tends to be on satipatthana and the other aspects of the teachings that are the essence of the Buddha's teachings. Jon 17154 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 5:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Larry You ask: <> Well, first, I would need to go back to the starting point, which was: <> My version would be: "Anupassana" = "seeing (directly)". So, the questions become: Q1. What is to be seen? A1. Any presently arising reality (i.e., any of the dhammas covered in the 4 foundations/arousings). Q2. How does this seeing occur? A2. Like any other form of kusala, it can only occur if the right conditions for its arising having been developed. Q3. How does one know if awareness is being developed? A3. By knowing as much as possible about it, its objects, its function and so on, so that it can be recognized; and by seeing over time that there is a better understanding of the realities at A1 and their characteristics. Jon (trying to keep it simple) --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Jon, > > Let's see how long it takes to transform a simple proposition into > a > thousand knots. Here are your questions and my best guesses: > > Larry: Hi Jon, I think you are making this too difficult. What to > do is > anupassana. > "Anupassana" = "look at". So, look at something. > > Jon: Sounds simple, I agree. But I think there are one or two > things > further you need to explain. For example: > > 1. What is it that is looked at? > > L: Already a problem. I see 2 choices: 1) Since you are obviously a > keen > witted theoretical type you should practice dhammanupassana and > look at > dhammas. 2) or you could look at any of the 4 'foundations' > objects. > > 2. How is the looking done? Is it like normal looking, that is, > deliberate and directed? > > L: Look with energy, clear comprehension, and mindfulness. (I'm > still > working out what this means.) > > 3. I assume this particular kind of looking at would have to be > wholesome/kusala. How is this achieved; how do we know if the > looking is > the kusala kind, and not the akusala kind? > > L: This is a really good question. How do we recognize sati > sampajanna? > I don't have a ready answer but I am conducting research as we > speak. > > How would you answer these questions? > > Larry 17155 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 6:57am Subject: Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) Hello Robert and all, Thank you, Robert, for responding. I am going to write some thoughts down. 1. Dependent origination represents a pattern. 2. The following sequence of numbers also represents a pattern. 4 2 8 5 7 1 4 2 8 5 7 1 4 2 8 5 7 1 4 2 8 5 7 1 .... What is the number that comes after 1? My question "why and how does sankhara condition consciousness?" is like asking "why and how the number 4 comes after the number 1?" when told that 4 comes after 1 without seeing the pattern directly in the number sequence myself. Seeing the pattern is through observation and inductive reasoning. Seeing the pattern of Dependent Origination is required a mind that is well concentrated. Have a good day, Victor PS. For those who are interested to know how I got the sequence of numbers above, try divide 3 by 7 with a calculator or by hand. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > > Why and how does sankhara condition consciousness? > > The definition of "sankhara" in Nyanatiloka's "Manual of Buddhist > Terms and Doctrines" starts, "This term has, according to its > context, different shades of meaning, which should be carefully > distinguished...." It then proceeds to give multiple definitions. > > You are probably familiar with the term "sankhara" as applied as one > of the five aggregates. In this case, it means all of the cetasikas > minus feeling and perception. > > The definition of "sankhara" when used as part of dependent > origination is quite different. In dependent origination, "sankhara" > is the 29 rebirth-producing cetana which fall into three classes: > - Formations of merit (punnabhisankhara): cetana in the 8 maha > kusala cittas and cetana in the 5 rupavacara cittas > - Formations of demerit (apunnabhisankhara): cetana in the 12 > akusala cittas > - Formations of the imperturbable (anenjabhisankhara): cetana in the > 4 arupavacara cittas > > In short, sankhara represents the 29 types of kamma (kamma = cetana) > associated with the 17 lokiya kusala cittas and the 12 akusala > cittas. > > Just as sankhara has a unique definition when used as part of > dependent origination, so too does consciousness (vinnana) have a > unique definition when used as part of dependent origination. As > part of dependent orgination, consciousness means the 32 lokiya > vipaka cittas. > > You have probably seen the diagram of dependent origination which > shows sankhara as the last of the "past period (kala)" and vinnana > as the first of the "present period". Most of the focus when > describing the link between sankhara and vinnana is on how at the > time of rebirth (patisandhi-kala), the 11 akusala cetanas (excluding > uddhacca-cetana) and the 17 lokiya kusala cetanas (excluding the two > abhinna-cetanas) condition the arising of the 19 rebirth > consciousnesses. However, dependent origination does not have to > extend over three lives and during a lifetime (pavatti-kala) the 12 > akusala cetanas (including uddhacca-cetana) and the 17 lokiya kusala > cetanas (excluding the two abhinna-cetanas) condition the arising of > vipaka cittas which arise in the thought process as follows: > - Formations of merit: 8 mahakusala cetanas and 5 rupavacara cetanas > condition the arising of 8 kusala vipaka cittas (5 sense > consciousness, receiving, 2 investigating), 8 mahakusala vipaka > cittas (here the mahakusala vipaka cittas play a role of > registration cittas, not patisandhi cittas) and 5 rupavacara vipaka > cittas > - Formations of demerit: 12 akusala cetanas condition the arising of > 7 akusala vipaka cittas (5 sense consciousness, receiving, > investigating) > - Formations of the imperturbable: 4 arupavacara cetanas condition > the arising of 4 arupavacara vipaka cittas > > All of the conditioning between sankhara and vinnana is according to > asychronous kamma condition and natural decisive support condition > > In simple words, the second link in dependent origination tells us > that kamma conditions vipaka; it is kamma that conditions our > rebirth citta (which is vipaka) and it is kamma that conditions our > sense door consciousness, receiving, investigating and registration > cittas. Everything that happens to us is a result of our kamma. Our > current situation is a result of our kamma. What we do in our > current situation is not determined by our past kamma ("free will?") > and what we do in our current situation creates new kamma for us. > > Victor, does this help? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17156 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:05am Subject: Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) > Seeing the pattern of Dependent Origination is required a mind that > is well concentrated. Seeing the pattern of Dependent Origination requirs a mind that is well concentrated. 17157 From: James Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 8:14am Subject: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > James > An interesting hypothesis! Just to clarify, are you suggesting that > the Buddha didn't teach rupas as forming part of 'the world' as we > know it, or that he didn't teach insight of rupas as necessary for > enlightenment? > > Jon > (intoxicated, but prepared to listen) Jon, First, I apologize for the `intoxicated with rupa' comment. I didn't mean it as insulting…just an interesting phrase. Now, allow me to clarify my position. By all acceptable historical scholarship, it should be accepted that the Lord Buddha did not teach the Abhidhamma Pitaka. It wasn't recited at the First Council, or the Second Council, it was recited until the Third Council-almost 300 years after the Buddha died. Considering that human life spans run 70 to 80 years, the Abhidhamma was composed by `Third Generation' bhikkhus. My hypothesis is that it was probably composed in reaction to the schisms within the Sangha that originated at the Second Council. Those opposed to the rigidity of the Suttas and Vinaya broke away and started to create their own teachings, which had been supposedly `hidden until the time was right' (Later becoming Mahayana Buddhism); so why couldn't those who supported the suttas and Vinaya do the same? Why couldn't they create their own teachings which had been `taught from a Heaven Realm' that further supported the rigidity of the suttas and Vinaya? Get it? Fight fire with fire. This is speculative on my part, but it would logically explain the origination and purpose of the Abhidhamma. One thing is certain to me, however, the Lord Buddha didn't teach it. It's position of Rupa/Nama and the various `dhammas classifications' are not found in the Sutta Pitaka. The Buddha taught that it is worthwhile to observe the Four Great Elements in the material world so that the bhikkhu could more readily see them in the body. In the Sutta Pitaka the Buddha doesn't use any phrases like `Color Rupa, Eye Consciousness, Sound Rupa, Ear Consciousness, etc.' He teaches about the four elements which one can experience in the body with ONE Consciousness that discerns differences, and is itself changing. He didn't expound on rupa outside of the body because, I would think, knowledge of such doesn't lead to insight. He taught dukkha and anatta in terms of human perception/existence, not in terms of inanimate objects. He wasn't trying to be a scientist per se; he only spoke of those things leading to enlightenment. Frankly, I don't think that most of those who practice meditation and mindfulness are really doing what the Abhidhamma suggests, even if they want to. They are not viewing the world as broken up into a lot of various dhammas. They may think they are, but it is unlikely that they really are. When you really do contemplate the transient nature of rupa outside of the body, fear and apprehension naturally arises. I have felt this again and again. Why? Because what that person is doing is forcing the mind to run contrary to its natural functioning. The purpose of the mind's consciousness is to put sensory input together into a coherent whole, forcing the mind to separate its 'wholistic view of the world' will, in essence, `break down' the purpose of the mind. That is a bad thing and why fear arises. The Buddha taught that the processes of the mind shouldn't be `reversed' or `halted'; they should be `transcended'. And seeing their `unsatisfactory' nature will allow one to transcend them. Tampering with the natural functioning of the mind is not a good idea, and it very dangerous in my opinion. I hope this post answers your questions. These are my opinions and no one has to agree. Everyone should decide for themselves after careful and unbiased consideration...just as I believe I have done. Metta, James 17158 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 9:01am Subject: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas Hi James and all, I don't think the Buddha taught Abhidhamma as well. I see much of Abhidhamma Pitaka as metaphyscial work of later composition. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > James > > An interesting hypothesis! Just to clarify, are you suggesting > that > > the Buddha didn't teach rupas as forming part of 'the world' as we > > know it, or that he didn't teach insight of rupas as necessary for > > enlightenment? > > > > Jon > > (intoxicated, but prepared to listen) > > Jon, > > First, I apologize for the `intoxicated with rupa' comment. I > didn't mean it as insulting…just an interesting phrase. > Now, allow me to clarify my position. > > By all acceptable historical scholarship, it should be accepted that > the Lord Buddha did not teach the Abhidhamma Pitaka. It wasn't > recited at the First Council, or the Second Council, it was recited > until the Third Council-almost 300 years after the Buddha died. > Considering that human life spans run 70 to 80 years, the Abhidhamma > was composed by `Third Generation' bhikkhus. My hypothesis is that > it was probably composed in reaction to the schisms within the > Sangha that originated at the Second Council. Those opposed to the > rigidity of the Suttas and Vinaya broke away and started to create > their own teachings, which had been supposedly `hidden until the > time was right' (Later becoming Mahayana Buddhism); so why couldn't > those who supported the suttas and Vinaya do the same? Why couldn't > they create their own teachings which had been `taught from a Heaven > Realm' that further supported the rigidity of the suttas and > Vinaya? Get it? Fight fire with fire. This is speculative on my > part, but it would logically explain the origination and purpose of > the Abhidhamma. One thing is certain to me, however, the Lord > Buddha didn't teach it. > > It's position of Rupa/Nama and the various `dhammas classifications' > are not found in the Sutta Pitaka. The Buddha taught that it is > worthwhile to observe the Four Great Elements in the material world > so that the bhikkhu could more readily see them in the body. In the > Sutta Pitaka the Buddha doesn't use any phrases like `Color Rupa, > Eye Consciousness, Sound Rupa, Ear Consciousness, etc.' He teaches > about the four elements which one can experience in the body with > ONE Consciousness that discerns differences, and is itself > changing. He didn't expound on rupa outside of the body because, I > would think, knowledge of such doesn't lead to insight. He taught > dukkha and anatta in terms of human perception/existence, not in > terms of inanimate objects. He wasn't trying to be a scientist per > se; he only spoke of those things leading to enlightenment. > > Frankly, I don't think that most of those who practice meditation > and mindfulness are really doing what the Abhidhamma suggests, even > if they want to. They are not viewing the world as broken up into a > lot of various dhammas. They may think they are, but it is unlikely > that they really are. When you really do contemplate the transient > nature of rupa outside of the body, fear and apprehension naturally > arises. I have felt this again and again. Why? Because what that > person is doing is forcing the mind to run contrary to its natural > functioning. The purpose of the mind's consciousness is to put > sensory input together into a coherent whole, forcing the mind to > separate its 'wholistic view of the world' will, in essence, `break > down' the purpose of the mind. That is a bad thing and why fear > arises. The Buddha taught that the processes of the mind shouldn't > be `reversed' or `halted'; they should be `transcended'. And seeing > their `unsatisfactory' nature will allow one to transcend them. > Tampering with the natural functioning of the mind is not a good > idea, and it very dangerous in my opinion. > > I hope this post answers your questions. These are my opinions and > no one has to agree. Everyone should decide for themselves after > careful and unbiased consideration...just as I believe I have done. > > Metta, James 17159 From: Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 10:10am Subject: pali question Hi all, Does anyone have access to either "Sumangala-Vilasini" or "Samoha-Vinodani"? I'm looking for a description of the fourfold sampajanna. Ven. Nyanaponika Thera gives it in "The Heart of Buddhist Meditation" and I'm guessing he got it from one of these sources. Here's the entry from the PTS online dict.: Sampajanna (p. 690) (nt.) [fr. sampajana, i. e. *sampajanya] attention, consideration, discrimination, comprehension, circumspection A I.13 sq.; II.93; III.307; IV.320; V.98 sq.; S III.169; D III.213 (sati+samp. opp. to muttha--sacca+ asampajanna), 273. Description of it in detail at DA I.183 sq.=VbhA 347 sq., where given as fourfold, viz. satthaka°, sappaya°, gocara°, asammoha°, with examples. Often combined with sati, with which almost synonymous, e. g. at D I.63; A I.43; II.44 sq.; V.115, 118. L: DA = Sumangala-Vilasini, VibhA = Samoha-Vinodani. Would these be parts of the commentaries to Diggha Nikaya and Vibhanga? thanks, Larry 17160 From: Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 10:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Jon, I agree. Now what?????? Larry 17161 From: Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 0:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] pali question Hi again, I found the explanation I was looking for in the commentary we have. It's in the section on the 4 kinds of clear comprehension under contemplation of the body. Larry 17162 From: James Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 1:57pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Although all kusala is support for the development of insight, only > insight itself leads to nibbana and escape from existence. The > develoment of other forms of kusala (dana, sila and samatha), in and > of themselves, do not; in fact, they add to the round of existence. > > That's why the emphasis on this list tends to be on satipatthana and > the other aspects of the teachings that are the essence of the > Buddha's teachings. > > Jon Jon, What!!?? The practice of Dana, Sila, and Samatha leads to Samsara? What are you saying? The absence of Dana (generosity), Sila (moral conduct), and Samantha (calmness) IS SAMSARA! That is where we all naturally reside, because of the first Noble Truth…absent of these qualities. And like water that naturally runs downhill, we all naturally run toward the lowest state possible…such as that found in a sewer. And you are saying that a life in the sewer is the Buddhist life? Huh? I didn't respond to this post right away today because I wanted to ponder it. I can tell that you are very insightful and intelligent and I was confused. I did some errands, came back and read it… cleaned my bathroom, came back and read it…and worked on some computer graphics, came back and read it, and each time I read it, I was reminded again and again of how dangerous the Abhidhamma is. I think it is time for me to being my `Just Say No to the Abhidhamma' worldwide campaign. What you are proposing is a stance of 'convenience' not of 'dhamma'. First and foremost, this stance is contrary to the heart of Buddhism: The Four Noble Truths. I have noticed that those who strongly adhere to the Abhidhamma seem to have forgotten this. They think that the heart of Buddhism is `This/That Conditionality`. No, that is the Heart of Dependent Origination, that is not the Heart of Buddhism. That is only part of the picture…it is the cause but not the solution. This is going to sound radical but I believe the Abhidhamma is a step backwards from the teachings of the Buddha. The Abhidhamma is very Vedic in philosophy and outlook. Before the Buddha, Brahmins believed that wisdom could be 'figured out' by viewing the world and the body with intellect. The Buddha transcended that pitfall… but many today still don't seem to want to. Why? Because Buddhism, as taught by Lord Buddha, requires a 'Leap of Faith.' Intellectuals don't want to do that. They believe that dharma isn't like other religions, it must be logical and understandable with the powers of the mind alone. But it isn't. However, I digress. Allow me to explain in an intellectual way. The path to Nibbana is the Eightfold Path. They are: Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, Right Concentration. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/waytoend.html Now, think to yourself, do these things seem boring, uninspired, and old fashioned? Do they seem confining and unintellectual? If so, I can smell the strong influence of the Abhidhamma. These things are it, the end, the whole enchilada…there is nothing higher. So, what is it that allows one to practice Right this and Right that, etc., as opposed to Wrong this and Wrong that, etc.? Answer: DANA, SILA, and SAMANTHA!! If you deny these things, you deny Buddhism. Plain and simple. Metta, James 17163 From: Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 0:37pm Subject: Re: "what is awareness. Hello James, (A strange day when I'm posting on dsg to defend abhidhamma ;-) There's a misunderstanding here. "Bhikkhus, know kamma, know the cause of kamma, know the variations of kamma, know the results of kamma, know the cessation of kamma and know the way leading to the cessation of kamma ... Bhikkhus, intention, I say, is kamma. A person intends before acting through body, speech or mind. What is the cause of kamma? Sense contact is the cause of kamma. What are the variations of kamma? They are, the kamma which results in birth in hell, the kamma which results in birth in the animal world, the kamma which results in birth in the realm of hungry ghosts, the kamma which results in birth in the human realm, and the kamma which results in birth in the heaven realms. These are known as the variations of kamma. What are the results of kamma? I teach three kinds of kamma-result. They are, results in the present time, results in the next life, or results in a future life. These I call the results of kamma. What is the cessation of kamma? With the cessation of contact, kamma ceases. This very Noble Eightfold Path is the way leading to the cessation of kamma. That is, Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness and Right concentration." A.III.415 (A.22/334/464) "Most people are interested only in black kamma and white kamma, bad kamma and good kamma. They take no interest in this third kind of kamma which is neither black nor white, neither bad nor good, which consists in complete freedom from selfhood and leads to the attainment of Nibbana. It wipes out every kind of bad and good kamma. People don't understand the method for wiping out kamma completely. They don't know that the way to put an end to all kamma is through this special kind of kamma, which consists in applying the Buddha's method. That method is none other than the Noble Eightfold Path. " TWO KINDS OF LANGUAGE : Everyday Language & Dhamma Language Ven. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu metta, stephen >> Although all kusala is support for the development of insight, only >> insight itself leads to nibbana and escape from existence. The >> develoment of other forms of kusala (dana, sila and samatha), in and >> of themselves, do not; in fact, they add to the round of existence. >> >> That's why the emphasis on this list tends to be on satipatthana and >> the other aspects of the teachings that are the essence of the >> Buddha's teachings. >> >> Jon >Jon, >What!!?? The practice of Dana, Sila, and Samatha leads to Samsara? >What are you saying? BTW, Jon, the desire to escape from existence is samsara. Nibbana is awareness, here and now. Well, I think we disagree ;-) 17164 From: James Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 6:08pm Subject: Re: "what is awareness. Stephen, What are you driving at? Where is the misunderstanding? You lost me. :-( Metta, James 17165 From: Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 1:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hello James, Jon noted that kusala actions (dana, sila, samatha, in his example) contribute to continuation in samsara. They do, being 'white' kamma; they lead (traditionally) to rebirth in deva realms, and such. They lead to the higher reaches of samsara, but samsara nonetheless. I believe you were disputing this. Thus the two quotes. Perhaps I misunderstood your position. metta, stephen BTW, the old question remains open: abhidhamma recognizes both black and white kamma, and mixed, but what about the kamma that ends kamma? What is its classification? 17166 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:30pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., oreznoone@a... wrote: > BTW, the old question remains open: abhidhamma recognizes both black and > white kamma, and mixed, but what about the kamma that ends kamma? What is its > classification? ___________ Dear Stephen, Have you asked this question before, I don't recall? 1. "Black and white kamma": The expositor PTS (translator :pe maung tin). P58. Triplets in the Matika "'leading to accumulation' are those states which go about severally arranging births and deaths in a round of of destiny like a bricklayer who arranges bricks, layer by layer in a wall." "..leading to accumulation are those causes which by being accomplished go to, or lead a man, in whom they arise, to that round of rebirth" It then defines these causes as "moral or immoral states". i.e akusala AND kusala. 2: "the kamma that ends kamma": The start of the next chapter is where it discusses the eight-fold path. The Discourse on lokuttara (transcendental). "He cultivates the Jhana means that he evolves, produces the ecstatic jhana of one momentary flash of consciousness. because it goes forth from the world, from the round of rebirths, this is jhana called going out...This is not like that which is known as 'leading to accumulation' which heaps up and increases rebirths by the moral(kusala) consciousness of the three planes. This can be compared with the following sutta in the Anguttara nikaya: [AN IV.232] The Kamma These four types of kamma have been understood, realized, & made known by me. Which four? There is kamma that is black with black result; kamma that is white with white result; kamma that is black & white with black & white result; and kamma that is neither black nor white with neither black nor white result, leading to the ending of kamma. And what is kamma that is black with black result? There is the case where a certain person fabricates an injurious bodily fabrication... an injurious verbal fabrication... an injurious mental fabrication... He rearises in an injurious world where he is touched by injurious contacts... He experiences feelings that are exclusively painful, like those of the beings in hell. This is called kamma that is black with black result. And what is kamma that is white with white result? There is the case where a certain person fabricates an uninjurious bodily fabrication... an uninjurious verbal fabrication... an uninjurious mental fabrication... He rearises in an uninjurious world where he is touched by uninjurious contacts... He experiences feelings that are exclusively pleasant, like those of the Ever-radiant Devas. This is called kamma that is white with white result. And what is kamma that is black & white with black & white result? There is the case where a certain person fabricates a bodily fabrication that is injurious & uninjurious... a verbal fabrication that is injurious & uninjurious... a mental fabrication that is injurious & uninjurious... He rearises in an injurious & uninjurious world where he is touched by injurious & uninjurious contacts... He experiences injurious & uninjurious feelings, pleasure mingled with pain, like those of human beings, some devas, and some beings in the lower realms. This is called kamma that is black & white with black & white result. And what is kamma that is neither black nor white with neither black nor white result, leading to the ending of kamma? The intention right there to abandon this kamma that is black with black result, the intention right there to abandon this kamma that is white with white result, the intention right there to abandon this kamma that is black & white with black & white result. This is called kamma that is neither black nor white with neither black nor white result, leading to the ending of kamma. 17167 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 8:03pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > The purpose of the mind's consciousness is to put > sensory input together into a coherent whole, forcing the mind to > separate its 'wholistic view of the world' will, in essence, `break > down' the purpose of the mind. That is a bad thing and why fear > arises. The Buddha taught that the processes of the mind shouldn't > be `reversed' or `halted'; they should be `transcended'. And seeing > their `unsatisfactory' nature will allow one to transcend them. > Tampering with the natural functioning of the mind is not a good > idea, and it very dangerous in my opinion. ______________ Dear James, Where have you read in the Abhidhamma or on this list that it is advised to 'tamper with the natural functioning of the mind', or to 'force the mind' to do anything. As I read the Abhidhamma it is about understanding mind and matter as they arise naturally here and now; and any forcing is immediately the wrong path. --- _________ James: When you really do contemplate the transient > nature of rupa outside of the body, fear and apprehension naturally > arises. I have felt this again and again. Why? Because what that > person is doing is forcing the mind to run contrary to its natural > functioning. __________ I think you are using 'contemplation' to mean thinking - in words- about rupas outside the body. Thinking can think about any subject and some subjects may condition fear sometimes. For example marananusati - contemplation of death- is recommended at all times and places by the Buddha - yet sometimes, if contemplated wrongly, may produce fear. But all fear is rooted in self clinging. Selfview is the most dangerous because it supports other defilements and wrongviews. Hence to be genuinely successful and calming and productive of energy death contemplation should go together with the understanding of anatta. And the understanding of anatta relies on direct insight into nama and rupa (mind and matter). Thinking about rupas inside or outside the body is only that: thinking, conceptualising. It is not the same as direct insight. However, insight can understand the thinking process while it is happening. I would suggest that it is useful and possible to gradually discern the difference between concept and reality. Then one won't be disturbed much by thinking because the unreality of concepts will be known. It is like finding out the majicians tricks. Prior to finding out, as young boys, we might have been entranced and mystifed by the show. After uncovering them we may still enjoy the show but in a different way- no longer so excited or deluded by it. In the same way the mind continues its complex process exactly as before but the degree of delusion about it continues to be lessened. I think no forcing on this path- it is about understanding not doing. Robert 17168 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 8:34pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > This is speculative on my > part, but it would logically explain the origination and purpose of > the Abhidhamma. One thing is certain to me, however, the Lord > Buddha didn't teach it. > It's position of Rupa/Nama and the various `dhammas classifications' are not found in the Sutta Pitaka. The Buddha taught that it is > worthwhile to observe the Four Great Elements in the material world > so that the bhikkhu could more readily see them in the body. In the Sutta Pitaka the Buddha doesn't use any phrases like `Color Rupa, > Eye Consciousness, Sound Rupa, Ear Consciousness, etc.' _____________ Dear James, I quote just one sutta. Try not to be confused by the different terms the translators use for the same pali words. The original pali in the Abhidhamma and suttas are usually the same. .Majjhima Nikaya below: http://www.vipassana.info/037-culatanhasankhaya-sutta-e1.htm "Bhikkhus, founded on whatever, consciousness arises, it is reckoned on that. On account of eye and forms arises consciousness, it's reckoned eye consciousness. On account of ear and sounds arises consciousness, it's reckoned ear consciousness. On account of nose and smells arises consciousness, it's reckoned nose consciousness. On account of tongue and tastes arises consciousness, it's reckoned tongue consciousness.On account of body and touches arises consciousness, it's reckoned body consciousness. " ________ From another post: James;"I was reminded again and again of how dangerous the Abhidhamma is. I think it is time for me to begin my `Just Say No to the Abhidhamma' worldwide campaign." It's always nice to have a project to work on - I guess worldwide campaigns must really bring up energy. I hope the list can help out with occasional corrections so that your campaign is properly informed. Robert 17169 From: James Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 9:56pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., oreznoone@a... wrote: > Hello James, > Jon noted that kusala actions (dana, sila, samatha, in his example) > contribute to continuation in samsara. They do, being 'white' kamma; they > lead (traditionally) to rebirth in deva realms, and such. They lead to the > higher reaches of samsara, but samsara nonetheless. I believe you were > disputing this. Thus the two quotes. Perhaps I misunderstood your position. > metta, stephen > BTW, the old question remains open: abhidhamma recognizes both black and > white kamma, and mixed, but what about the kamma that ends kamma? What is its > classification? Stephen, Okay, now I understand what you are saying. I agree with you that dana, sila, and Samantha, practiced as the ultimate goal, will lead to rebirth in heaven realms. However, I believe you are jumping to a false conclusion if you say that they should not be practiced at all. Practice of dana, sila, and Samantha will lead to the state where such practice is abandoned. When one has experienced the Four Jhanas and destroyed the cankers, then the mundane practices of dana, sila, and Samantha are natural and transcendent. The difference here is between the mundane Eightfold Path and the transcendent Eightfold Path. One must start with the mundane and then lead to the transcendent. The white and black and mixed kamma sutta is confusing to me (Which is understandable since the Canon states that kamma, like the mind of a Buddha, is unfathomable. And yet the Buddha explains different types of kamma as white/black/mixed/and neither. Or did he? Hmmm… rather odd.). I prefer the Cula-dhammasamadana Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn045.html where the Buddha described what you are referring to in terms of different practices: "Monks, there are these four ways of taking on practices. Which four? There is the taking on of a practice that is pleasant in the present but yields pain in the future. There is the taking on of a practice that is painful in the present and yields pain in the future. There is the taking on of a practice that is painful in the present but yields pleasure in the future. There is the taking on of a practice that is pleasant in the present and yields pleasure in the future." The first is the practice of disregarding things like dana, sila, and Samantha, which is a lot of fun but will lead to rebirth in animal or hell realms. The second is the practice of extreme austerities which are painful which will also lead to rebirth in animal or hell realms. The fourth is the practice of dana, sila, etc. for its own sake, which is painful, and will lead to rebirth in the heaven realms. And the final is the practice of transcendent dana, sila, etc., which leads to the four jhanas, which is pleasurable, and leads to nibanna and parinibbana. The differences are subtle, but important. One must take baby steps before running a marathon. Metta, James 17170 From: James Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 9:59pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > Although all kusala is support for the development of insight, only > > insight itself leads to nibbana and escape from existence. The > > develoment of other forms of kusala (dana, sila and samatha), in and > > of themselves, do not; in fact, they add to the round of existence. > > > > That's why the emphasis on this list tends to be on satipatthana and > > the other aspects of the teachings that are the essence of the > > Buddha's teachings. > > > > Jon > > Jon, > > What!!?? The practice of Dana, Sila, and Samatha leads to Samsara? > What are you saying? The absence of Dana (generosity), Sila (moral > conduct), and Samantha (calmness) IS SAMSARA! That is where we all > naturally reside, because of the first Noble Truth…absent of these > qualities. And like water that naturally runs downhill, we all > naturally run toward the lowest state possible…such as that found in > a sewer. And you are saying that a life in the sewer is the Buddhist > life? Huh? > > I didn't respond to this post right away today because I wanted to > ponder it. I can tell that you are very insightful and intelligent > and I was confused. I did some errands, came back and read it… > cleaned my bathroom, came back and read it…and worked on some > computer graphics, came back and read it, and each time I read it, I > was reminded again and again of how dangerous the Abhidhamma is. I > think it is time for me to being my `Just Say No to the Abhidhamma' > worldwide campaign. What you are proposing is a stance > of 'convenience' not of 'dhamma'. > > First and foremost, this stance is contrary to the heart of > Buddhism: The Four Noble Truths. I have noticed that those who > strongly adhere to the Abhidhamma seem to have forgotten this. They > think that the heart of Buddhism is `This/That Conditionality`. No, > that is the Heart of Dependent Origination, that is not the Heart of > Buddhism. That is only part of the picture…it is the cause but not > the solution. This is going to sound radical but I believe the > Abhidhamma is a step backwards from the teachings of the Buddha. The > Abhidhamma is very Vedic in philosophy and outlook. Before the > Buddha, Brahmins believed that wisdom could be 'figured out' by > viewing the world and the body with intellect. The Buddha > transcended that pitfall… but many today still don't seem to want > to. Why? Because Buddhism, as taught by Lord Buddha, requires > a 'Leap of Faith.' Intellectuals don't want to do that. They > believe that dharma isn't like other religions, it must be logical > and understandable with the powers of the mind alone. But it isn't. > > However, I digress. Allow me to explain in an intellectual way. The > path to Nibbana is the Eightfold Path. They are: Right View, Right > Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right > Effort, Right Mindfulness, Right Concentration. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/waytoend.html Now, think > to yourself, do these things seem boring, uninspired, and old > fashioned? Do they seem confining and unintellectual? If so, I can > smell the strong influence of the Abhidhamma. These things are it, > the end, the whole enchilada…there is nothing higher. So, what is it > that allows one to practice Right this and Right that, etc., as > opposed to Wrong this and Wrong that, etc.? Answer: DANA, SILA, and > SAMANTHA!! If you deny these things, you deny Buddhism. Plain and > simple. > > Metta, James Jon, I must apologize for the tone of this post. Re-reading it, is see that it is far too didactic and preachy. I tend to get overly passionate about dharma at times. I stick by the content of the post, but the delivery is 'over the top'. Sorry. Metta, James 17171 From: James Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 10:04pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > Stephen, > > Okay, now I understand what you are saying. I agree with you that > dana, sila, and Samantha, practiced as the ultimate goal, will lead > to rebirth in heaven realms. However, I believe you are jumping to a > false conclusion if you say that they should not be practiced at > all. Practice of dana, sila, and Samantha I'm not sure who this 'Samantha' girl is, but I just can't get her off my mind! :-) I meant 'samatha'. The Pali feature of my 'Spell Check' is broken I think. :-) 17172 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 2:02am Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > > Okay, now I understand what you are saying. I agree with you that > dana, sila, and Samantha, practiced as the ultimate goal, will lead > to rebirth in heaven realms. However, I believe you are jumping to a > false conclusion if you say that they should not be practiced at > all. ________ Dear James, I looked over the posts Stephen and Jon gave. I didn't see any indication that they had 'jumped to the conclusion that dana, sila and samatha' should not be practiced'? Jon said "athough all kusala is support for the development of insight, only > insight itself leads to nibbana and escape from existence. The > develoment of other forms of kusala (dana, sila and samatha), in and > of themselves, do not; in fact, they add to the round of existence."" . In fact Jon said they support insight: how do you then figure that he (or stephen) is concluding that dana, sila and samatha should not be practised? Robert 17173 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 3:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Larry --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Jon, > > I agree. Now what?????? > > Larry This is an entirely novel situation for which there is no established precedent. What do you suggest? Jon 17174 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 4:07am Subject: The Abhidhamma forgets the 4 noble truths?: "what is awareness. In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: , I > was reminded again and again of how dangerous the Abhidhamma is. I > think it is time for me to begin my `Just Say No to the Abhidhamma' > worldwide campaign. What you are proposing is a stance > of 'convenience' not of 'dhamma'. > > First and foremost, this stance is contrary to the heart of > Buddhism: The Four Noble Truths. I have noticed that those who > strongly adhere to the Abhidhamma seem to have forgotten this. They > think that the heart of Buddhism is `This/That Conditionality`. No, > that is the Heart of Dependent Origination, that is not the Heart of > Buddhism. _______________________- Dear James, Just a couple of points that I hope help ensure your campaign doesn't misrepresent the Abhidhamma. If you take up the study of the Abhidhamma oneday you will see that it was recorded in seven sections. The second of these is called the Vibhanga and the Pali text society has a very good translation by a Burmese monk. In the Vibhanga one section is called Classification of the [four] Noble Truths. Another section is called "Classification of Dependent Origination". As I understand it both these aspects are considered very important in Abhidhamma. In the Majjhima Nikaya http://www.vipassana.info/011-culasihanada-sutta-e1.htm "Bhikkhus, these four holdings[the grasping to sila and ritual practices, the grasping to wrong view, the garsping to self, the garsping to sense objects], from what do they originate, from what do they rise, from what do they come to birth, and with what do they develop. They originate from craving, rise from craving, come to birth from craving, and develop with craving. Bhikkhus, this craving, from what does it originate, from what does it rise, from what does it come to birth, and with what does it develop. ........p. Contact originates from the six spheres, rises from the six spheres, comes to birth from the six spheres and develops with the six spheres. Bhikkhus, these six spheres from what do they originate, from what do they rise, from what do they come to birth, and with what do they develop. ............... Bhikkhus, these determinations, from what do they originate, from what do they rise, from what do they come to birth and with what do they develop. Determinations originate from ignorance, rise from ignorance, come to birth from ignorance and develop with ignorance. Bhikkhus, when ignorance dispelled and turned out science arises, he does not hold to sensuality, does not hold to views, does not hold to virtues, and does not hold to the self view. Not holding is not worried, not worried, he by himself is extinguished: birth is destroyed, the holy life is lived, what should be done is done, there is nothing more to wish. "endquote Robert 17175 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 5:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. James I may not have made myself clear. I was not denying the importance of developing wholesomeness of all kinds. I was pointing out that only insight, the form of wholesomeness that is unique to the Buddha's teachings, leads one out of the round of existence. Other forms of wholesomeness lead to other results such as rebirth in the higher higher realms. In other words, they lead to continued existence. I have not lost sight of the Four Noble Truths, particularly the Noble Eightfold Path. You might be interested in the sutta quoted below, which I give also to indicate that this issue is not just an Abhiddhamma point. In addition to Right View, the sutta gives a similar twofold description of Right Intention, Speech, Action and Livelihood. Jon Majjhima Nikaya, Mahacattarisaka Sutta 'The Great Forty' (M. 117) (Trans MLDB, Bhhikkhu Bodhi) 6. "And what, bhikkhus, is right view? Right view, I say, is twofold: there is right view that is affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening on the side of attachment; and there is right view that is noble, taintless, supramundane, a factor of the path. --- James wrote: ... ... What!!?? The practice of Dana, Sila, and Samatha leads to Samsara? What are you saying? The absence of Dana (generosity), Sila (moral conduct), and Samantha (calmness) IS SAMSARA! That is where we all naturally reside, because of the first Noble Truth…absent of these qualities. And like water that naturally runs downhill, we all naturally run toward the lowest state possible…such as that found in a sewer. And you are saying that a life in the sewer is the Buddhist life? Huh? I didn't respond to this post right away today because I wanted to ponder it. I can tell that you are very insightful and intelligent and I was confused. I did some errands, came back and read it… cleaned my bathroom, came back and read it…and worked on some computer graphics, came back and read it, and each time I read it, I was reminded again and again of how dangerous the Abhidhamma is. I think it is time for me to being my `Just Say No to the Abhidhamma' worldwide campaign. What you are proposing is a stance of 'convenience' not of 'dhamma'. First and foremost, this stance is contrary to the heart of Buddhism: The Four Noble Truths. I have noticed that those who strongly adhere to the Abhidhamma seem to have forgotten this. They think that the heart of Buddhism is `This/That Conditionality`. No, that is the Heart of Dependent Origination, that is not the Heart of Buddhism. That is only part of the picture…it is the cause but not the solution. This is going to sound radical but I believe the Abhidhamma is a step backwards from the teachings of the Buddha. The Abhidhamma is very Vedic in philosophy and outlook. Before the Buddha, Brahmins believed that wisdom could be 'figured out' by viewing the world and the body with intellect. The Buddha transcended that pitfall… but many today still don't seem to want to. Why? Because Buddhism, as taught by Lord Buddha, requires a 'Leap of Faith.' Intellectuals don't want to do that. They believe that dharma isn't like other religions, it must be logical and understandable with the powers of the mind alone. But it isn't. However, I digress. Allow me to explain in an intellectual way. The path to Nibbana is the Eightfold Path. They are: Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, Right Concentration. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/waytoend.html Now, think to yourself, do these things seem boring, uninspired, and old fashioned? Do they seem confining and unintellectual? If so, I can smell the strong influence of the Abhidhamma. These things are it, the end, the whole enchilada…there is nothing higher. So, what is it that allows one to practice Right this and Right that, etc., as opposed to Wrong this and Wrong that, etc.? Answer: DANA, SILA, and SAMANTHA!! If you deny these things, you deny Buddhism. Plain and simple. Metta, James 17176 From: James Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 6:26am Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" > wrote: > > > > > > Okay, now I understand what you are saying. I > agree with you that > > dana, sila, and Samantha, practiced as the ultimate > goal, will lead > > to rebirth in heaven realms. However, I believe > you are jumping to a > > false conclusion if you say that they should not > be practiced at > > all. > ________ > Dear James, > I looked over the posts Stephen and Jon gave. I > didn't see any indication that they had 'jumped to > the conclusion that dana, sila and samatha' should > not be practiced'? Jon said "athough all kusala is > support for the development of insight, only > > insight itself leads to nibbana and escape from > existence. The > > develoment of other forms of kusala (dana, sila > and samatha), in and > > of themselves, do not; in fact, they add to the > round of existence."" . > In fact Jon said they support insight: how do you > then figure that he (or stephen) is concluding that > dana, sila and samatha should not be practised? > Robert Robert, Yea, I missed that 'in and of themselves', it was rather understated as an appositive in the sentence and probably should have been given more attention...since it makes a world of difference. Jon, I am learning, uses as few words as possible...which can lead one to wrong conclusions. I guess I am the one who jumped to the wrong conclusion! :-) Don't take my 'Just Say No to the Abhidhamma' campaign seriously. It is just a joke. If I publish a book, I will probably include my Internet writings about it, but that is hardly a national campaign. Metta, James 17177 From: Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 3:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) Hi, Victor - I returned last night from the ordination (I will give a brief report soon), and I'm plowing through a backlog of posts. In a message dated 11/22/02 1:26:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > Hello Robert and all, > > Thank you, Robert, for responding. Instead of asking why and how > does ignorance condition consciousness? My question should be: Why > and how does sankhara condition consciousness? > > To me the idea of "sankhara" is perhaps one of the most difficult to > comprehend. It's been translated as "mental formation". However, I > am not yet able to see the connection between sankhara and > consciousness. > > Have a good day, > Victor > ========================= I don't know whether or not I'm "Abhidammically correct" in this, but I think that a key way in which sankhara might be required for the arising of vi~n~nana is via *interest*. It seems to me that, in part, interest would direct the discernment of an object. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17178 From: Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 3:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Hi, TG - In a message dated 11/22/02 9:27:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > I believe the Buddha said that only he could fully understand karma and that > > anyone else would go mad trying to figure it out. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha > ha > ha......... > > ======================== ;-))) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17179 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 9:42am Subject: Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Everything that happens to us is a result of our kamma. Our > current situation is a result of our kamma. What we do in our > current situation is not determined by our past kamma ("free will?") > and what we do in our current situation creates new kamma for us. > > ++++++++++++++++++++ Dear RobM, Could you explain this more? I cannot see anywhere in the Paticcasamupada where there is a suggestion of freewill. Robert 17180 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 10:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala leading to samsara. Hi all, op 24-11-2002 22:57 schreef James op buddhatrue@y...: > > What!!?? The practice of Dana, Sila, and Samatha leads to Samsara? Nina: The Buddha encouraged us to perform all kinds of kusala, dana, sila, samatha, vipassana. The study of the Abhidhamma greatly helps us to perform kusala, and it helps us not to delude ourselves into taking for kusala what is akusala. Even the theory is so useful: what is lobha exactly, when can it occur? I quote from the chapter on The Perfection of Truthfulness’ in the series on the Perfections written by me: : When there is an opportunity for any kind of kusala, it is good not to let it go by. We are not going to think beforehand: does it lead to samsara or not? But we know that the development of understanding is most valuable, that it is understanding which conditions kusala to be pure kusala. Eventually satipatthana will lead to lokuttara panna, to breaking down those bricks of the wall of existence. But we are not so far yet. Just live with the moment: do any kind of kusala for which there is an opportunity, and sometimes there may be conditions for awareness of nama and rupa. Who could direct the cittas? They are gone immediately, before we can think of directing. Tomorrow Kom will turn off my mail, since I depart. Your discussion is interesting, Nina. 17181 From: Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 5:13am Subject: Brief Report on Wat Greensboro Ordination - Part 1 Hi, all - I left Thursday from New York LaGuardia Airport for Greensboro, North Carolina to attend the ordination of Ven. Piyadhammo (a.k.a. David) and Ven. Dhammarato (a.k.a. Dhammarato ;-) The two monks-to-be picked me up at the Greensboro airport, and 30 minutes later we pulled into Wat Greensboro, a beautiful Wat located on 10 acres of lovely flora, trees, a large pond, many small animals, a main house, a meditation center, and several smaller buildings including a lovely pagoda which can be used as a kuti and which also serves as a repository for the bones of past supporters of the Wat. Before I say more, I would like to tell you about Phra David and Ven. Dhammarato. Phra David is a lovely, soft-spoken, self-effacing young man in his early forties, very serious about the monk's life, very hardworking, and very dedicated. Ven. Dhammarato, just as "outrageous" in person as on the internet, is - and he will kill me for this! ;-)) - a playful, sweetheart of a guy, filled with joy and exhuberance, the love of the Triple Gem and, particularly filled with great devotion to the Sangha. I would also like to comment on Ven. Yanatharo, who made the great expenditure of time, effort, and money to make the trip from Australia. Bhante Yanatharo is absolutely delightful! He is a devoted but devilishly ;-)) iconoclastic monk who is easy to talk with, great fun to be around, and filled with good humor. I want everyone to know what a limited vehicle the internet is in providing a clear picture of what people are like. These are all absolutely delightful, loving, and "fun" individuals, and it was a privilege for me to get to meet them face to face. The monks at Wat Greensboro are wonderful, joyful, generous and devoted people. They made me feel wonderfully and easily at home there. They are people of real substance who, it would seem, have "gone far". Truly impressive. I will give a follow-up post providing some details of my few days at the Wat and of the marvelous ordination, itself, that took place on the 23rd. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17182 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 10:36am Subject: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: >> > James: When you really do contemplate the transient > > nature of rupa outside of the body, fear and apprehension naturally > > arises. I have felt this again and again. >_______________________________________- Dear James, I add some more about this topic. What you said reminded me that in the early years of nuclear discoveries (before world war II) scientists had uncovered that matter (rupa) is almost all space, and changing so incredibly fast to boot. What had once seemed a solid wrold now seemed astonishly, inherently unstable. These discoveries were initially resisted by some: John Zeleny, Yale universities Chief Physicist, said " I feel that there is real world corresponding to our senses, I believe that Minneapolis is a real city and not simply a city of my dreams" referring to what quantum physics was telling them.(Daniel kelves 1987, The Physicists: the history of a scientific community in modern america cambridge ; harvard. uni. press,p168) This was in about 1930. Thus even such a great scientist as this couldn't accept what the evidence was showing. Of course after science incarnated their insights at Hiroshima such doubts stopped. These days scientists and even school children know very well that the earth, the universe, their bodies, are of such a nature but it doesn't reduce kilesa in any of them. Why? Because it still conceptual knowledge and only genuine panna, wisdom, can remove kilesa. Another example: I once taught an introductory course on Astronomy and some students( and me too) were a little boggled (not surprisingly) when we came to the descriptions of the size of the universe compared to the pinprick that is earth. Not to mention that it is flying through this vast open space at some fantastic speed. In the same way we can read the texts of the Abhidhamma and think about them and conceive and proliferate - and it can be done with akusala, either with dosa(aversion with unpleasant feeling) or with lobha (craving with pleasant or neutral feeling). So we have to learn how to approach the Abhidhamma wisely and patiently so that proper use is made of the wisdom therin. Robert 17183 From: robmoult Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 0:58pm Subject: [dsg] Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) Hi Howard and Victor, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > I don't know whether or not I'm "Abhidammically correct" in this, but > I think that a key way in which sankhara might be required for the arising of > vi~n~nana is via *interest*. It seems to me that, in part, interest would > direct the discernment of an object. I'm not sure about your interpretation, Howard. If I rephrase the terms "sankhara" and "vinnana" using the specific definitions from paticcasamuppada, Victor's question becomes: "How and why does kamma condition rebirth and vipaka cittas?" Personally, I draw an analogy to the law of conservation of energy. A citta that creates kamma (kusala or akusala) is active; it has energy (not to be confused with the cetasika viriya). When the citta falls away, what happens to that energy? It gets stored as potential energy (kammic potential). When other conditions are conducive, this potential energy has the ability to cause the arising of another citta. The citta that arises is a vipaka citta; maybe even a rebirth linking citta (a special type of vipaka citta). So what happens to all that accumulated kammic energy when the rupas that are my body "die"? The potential energy is still there. It doesn't disappear. Depending on conditions, this potential energy finds a new outlet (new existence). If I become an Arahant, my thought processes no longer create energy; kiriya cittas, which are not active, play the role of javana cittas in the Arahant thought process. Because an Arahant doesn't create kamma, he can escape samsara once he has used up past energy accumulated before he became an Arahant. Even the Buddha had to suffer sickness and pain which was the result of kammic actions performed before His enlightenment. Looking at it from another angle, my current situation is vipaka. Why and how has my current situation arisen? In fact, I am now sitting in a Singapore hotel room at 4:30am typing in a response to a question about kamma. What led to this condition: - I chose to come to Singapore to attend a meeting yesterday - I requested an early wake-up call this morning - I decided to check the most recent DSG postings - I selected your message to read - I have an interest in learning the Dhamma These are five of the uncountable number of active states that resulted in my current situation. Each of these active states arose at an earlier time. The origins of some of the above active states are quite mundane; I requested an early wake-up call this morning because I have an early flight to Hong Kong. The origin of some of the above active states starts one thinking; why am I drawn to the Dhamma (and Abhidhamma in particular)? I cannot find a suitable answer to why certain active states arose (i.e. why am I interested in the Dhamma, why are my kids gifted at music, etc.) if I limit my perspective to my current life. It seems perfectly natural to me that some of the conditioning (active states) occured before I was born. I studied the Dhamma in a previous life (active state) thereby conditioning a result in this life (i.e. an interest in the Dhamma). My kids applied themselves to music in a previous life (active states) thereby conditioning results in this life (musical "talent"). We have millions of thought processes each microsecond and each thought process has seven active (javana) cittas which create kamma. So many past active states. I can't even trace the mundane ones, let alone the deeper ones from previous lives. Therefore, I agree with the texts that say that only a Buddha can fully grasp the workings of kamma (I can't remember the reference). Does this help? Metta, Rob M :-) 17184 From: robmoult Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:18pm Subject: Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) Hi Robert K, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > > Everything that happens to us is a result of our kamma. Our > > current situation is a result of our kamma. What we do in our > > current situation is not determined by our past kamma ("free > will?") > > and what we do in our current situation creates new kamma for us. > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++ > Dear RobM, > Could you explain this more? I cannot see anywhere in the > Paticcasamupada where there is a suggestion of freewill. > Robert Busted!! :-( It was wrong of me to type in a long message on paticcasamuppada (directly supported by Vis. XVII 177-181) and then end off with an "editorial comment" about "free will". In "A Manual of Abhidhamma" by Narada, the term "free-will" is used in the context mentioned above (so I am not alone), but the term "free-will" is not found the the Suttas or the commentaries (that I know of). Whenever I use the term "free will" in my class notes or during a lecture, I always put the term in quotation marks and mention that the concept must be understood without having a self behind it. How to explain "free will" without a "self" is something that I am still struggling with. In fact, I had booked a stopover in Bangkok this Friday and hoped to meet up with Khun Sujin, Nina, yourself and the other DSGrs. Unfortunately, Jon told me that you were going on a "field trip" from Friday to Sunday, and would not be in Bangkok, so I have cancelled my stopover. One of the topics that I wanted to raise with the group was how to understand "free will" without a "self". Rob K, can I ask you to please raise the topic in a group discussion and let me know the conclusion? Metta, Rob M :-) 17185 From: James Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 5:14pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > >> > > James: When you really do contemplate the transient > > > nature of rupa outside of the body, fear and apprehension > naturally > > > arises. I have felt this again and again. > >_______________________________________- > > Dear James, > I add some more about this topic. What you said reminded me that in > the early years of nuclear discoveries (before world war II) > scientists had uncovered that matter (rupa) is almost all space, and > changing so incredibly fast to boot. Robert, Okay, I guess I am going to just keep talking about this. Of course perhaps most of my views are discarded because I don't thrown Pali vocabulary into my writing in some anachronistic fashion? But that is okay if so. Robert, I found your post very well-written, intelligent and interesting. But it stops rather abruptly. You write as a final sentence, "So we have to learn how to approach the Abhidhamma wisely and patiently so that proper use is made of the wisdom therin." Please tell me, in simple terms without using Pali, how this is supposed to happen? What is the wisdom contained therein? Where is the Abhidhamma, with its concept of ultimate nama/rupa, supposed to take you? I have read all kinds of things about the Abhidhamma and I don't see anything I can view as a `practice', I see things I can view as `metaphysics'. Why is such knowledge, even if it was true, supposed to lead to insight? This is something everyone is dancing around. Frankly, as I keep saying, for all practical purposes, for insight purposes: THERE IS NO REASON TO CONTEMPLATE RUPA-IT IS ALL NAMA. I could quote sutta after sutta where the Buddha explains this, but I want to look at two only. In the Cula-sihanada Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn011.html "Bhikkhus, there are these four kinds of clinging. What four? Clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, clinging to rules and observances, and clinging to a doctrine of self…These four kinds of clinging have craving as their source, craving as their origin, they are born and produced from craving.[10] Craving has what as its source...? Craving has feeling as its source... Feeling has what as its source...? Feeling has contact as its source... Contact has what as its source...? Contact has the sixfold base as its source... The sixfold base has what as its source...? The sixfold base has mentality-materiality as its source... Mentality-materiality has what as its source...? Mentality-materiality has consciousness as its source... Consciousness has what as its source...? Consciousness has formations as its source... Formations have what as their source...? Formations have ignorance as their source, ignorance as their origin; they are born and produced from ignorance." Summary: Clinging comes from Craving Craving comes from Feeling Feeling comes from the Six Senses Six Senses comes from Mentality-Materiality (one thing, not two like nama/rupa) Mentality-Materiality comes from Consciousness (one consciousness, not many) Consciousness comes from Formations Formations come from Ignorance The important thing to look at here is that mentality-materiality comes from consciousness. It comes from the mind. In other words, there isn't a rupa one needs to consider, it is all nama (mind). Now, to look at the important sutta, the Satipatthana Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn010b.html Let's look at the one area where this sutta appears to be supporting the concept of nama/rupa, but I don't believe it really is when taken as a whole: "3. The Six Internal and External Sense Bases How, monks, does a monk live contemplating mental objects in the mental objects of the six internal and the six external sense-bases? Herein, monks, a monk knows the eye and visual forms and the fetter that arises dependent on both (the eye and forms);[24] he knows how the arising of the non-arisen fetter comes to be; he knows how the abandoning of the arisen fetter comes to be; and he knows how the non- arising in the future of the abandoned fetter comes to be. Commentary: The important phrase here is "the fetter that arises dependent on both". In other words, rupa not directly experienced cannot be seen to have the qualities of anatta, dukkha, or impermanence. It must be directly experienced by one of the six sense bases or it has nothing. They are dependent on each other for a fetter to arise. This is contrary to what the Abhidhamma states. Additionally, examine closely what the remainder of this section states: "Thus he lives contemplating mental objects in mental objects internally, or he lives contemplating mental objects in mental objects externally, or he lives contemplating mental objects in mental objects internally and externally. He lives contemplating origination factors in mental objects, or he lives contemplating dissolution factors in mental objects, or he lives contemplating origination-and-dissolution factors in mental objects.[25] Or his mindfulness is established with the thought, "Mental objects exist," to the extent necessary just for knowledge and mindfulness, and he lives detached, and clings to nothing in the world. Thus, monks, a monk lives contemplating mental objects in the mental objects of the six internal and the six external sense-bases." Commentary: Now, if this doesn't prove that the only thing important to consider is Nama (mind) and the mental objects, I don`t know what could convince you. The Lord Buddha spells it out in black and white in this sutta. The Buddha explains that "he lives contemplating mental objects in mental objects internally and externally." Basically, it is from our mind that we create the world and mental objects exist both internally and externally. He mentions nothing about contemplation of rupa. To the Buddha, rupa didn't really exist separate from the mind. This has been another installment 'James' Notes to Self/Non-Self". Perhaps no one else is really listening. Metta, James 17186 From: James Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 5:39pm Subject: Re: Brief Report on Wat Greensboro Ordination - Part 1 Howard, Thanks for the update. Very interesting. You paint a nice picture in the mind. I am sorry/jealous that I didn't get to meet Ven. Yanatharo. There's more to him than meets the eye, or the Internet... Metta, James 17187 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 7:24pm Subject: Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > > It was wrong of me to type in a long message on paticcasamuppada > (directly supported by Vis. XVII 177-181) and then end off with > an "editorial comment" about "free will". > > In "A Manual of Abhidhamma" by Narada, the term "free-will" is used > in the context mentioned above (so I am not alone), but the > term "free-will" is not found the the Suttas or the commentaries > (that I know of). Whenever I use the term "free will" in my class > notes or during a lecture, I always put the term in quotation marks > and mention that the concept must be understood without having a > self behind it. How to explain "free will" without a "self" is > something that I am still struggling with. > In fact, I had booked a stopover in Bangkok this Friday and hoped to meet up with Khun Sujin, Nina, yourself and the other DSGrs. > Unfortunately, Jon told me that you were going on a "field trip" > from Friday to Sunday, and would not be in Bangkok, so I have > cancelled my stopover. One of the topics that I wanted to raise with > the group was how to understand "free will" without a "self". Rob K, > can I ask you to please raise the topic in a group discussion and > let me know the conclusion? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) _______________ Dear Rob. A real pity we'll miss you this weekend. I'll try and bring up the freewill issue. For now I can say that I believe that in direct proportion to the degree of acceptance/understanding of anatta ancilliary ideas such as 'freewill' also drop away. There are just conditioned dhammas arising and ceasing with no one anywhere. Seeing this gradually leads away from the clinging to self and samsara. I like this old post from Christine: This is a summary of the freewill/ no-control discussion on the weekend - as I 'heard' it. Others may have different points - this is as I 'heard' it through the filters of my own memory, understanding, needs, emotional reactions, views and accumulations. There wasn't a structured hour on Freewill - it just kept surfacing and was interwoven in all discussions ..... Whenever the topic of freewill/no-control arose, Impermanence and Conditions featured heavily - and, as with many of the other exchanges, Anatta (not self) pervaded everything. So many times in the conversations we would slip back into the everyday assumptions, heavily influenced by our culture and habitual language usage, that there was 'someone' who could 'plan', 'achieve', 'do', and 'make things happen' or 'come to be' - i.e. states of consciousness, actions etc. KenH was ever vigilant (some thought 'merciless' :) in reminding us when we strayed off in that direction. We had copies of 'The Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines' on the table to refer to. As Nyanatiloka says, "Anatta is the central doctrine of Buddhism, and without understanding of it, a real knowledge of Buddhism is altogether impossible. It is the only really specific Buddhist doctrine, with which the entire structure of the Buddhist teaching stands or falls. Whosoever has not penetrated this impersonality of all existence, and does not comprehend that in reality there exists only this continually self-consuming process of arising and passing bodily and mental phenomena, and that there is no separate ego-entity within or without this process, he will not be able to understand Buddhism, i.e. the teaching of the 4 Noble Truths in the right light. He will think that it is his ego, his personality, that experiences suffering, his personality that performs good and evil actions and will be reborn according to these actions, his personality that will enter Nibbana, his personality that walks on the Eightfold Path." Isn't that a spine-chilling description? - "there exists only this continually self-consuming process of arising and passing bodily and mental phenomena" ..... The perception of 'loneliness' and 'coldness' for some of us in this explanation was discussed, and the desire for it to be other than this ... finally, the acknowledgment that this is just 'the way it is'. This weekend, though Anatta loomed over all, it was in considering freewill versus no-control that the doctrine of Impermanence made the biggest impact on me. That body and mind are temporary combinations of different realities which arise because of conditioning factors and then fall away immediately. They are succeeded by new realities which fall away again, and so the flux of life goes on. That these bodily and mental phenomena are all 'conditioned things' dependent on something else, and without which they could not be. A concurrence of conditions, not just one condition one effect. Multiple conditions for the effect. So 'choices' and 'decisions' have multiple conditions - and each of these conditions has multiple conditions, all the way back as far as you go I had accepted a sort of 'slower' Impermanence that I see daily - in aging and decaying of people, animals, buildings, objects and trees. But Impermanence - realities rising, staying briefly, falling away in every fraction of a millisecond because of conditions - is difficult to consider ... That's when I began to find it easier to grasp that there is no 'self' who can exert control over realities. How could there be control when everything falls away immediately, including what I think of as 'me'? So regarding Freewill - the more I learn about the conditional nature of every single thing, the multiplicity of conditions, the more I understand that whatever I experience (good or bad) is impermanent, 'not-self' and is beyond *my* control. I have read this again and realise it may not make sense to anyone but me - like trying to explain the taste of a banana ... as was also mentioned on the weekend. :) metta, Christine 17188 From: Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 2:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa)n Hi, Rob - In a message dated 11/25/02 4:00:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Howard and Victor, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > I don't know whether or not I'm "Abhidammically correct" in > this, but > >I think that a key way in which sankhara might be required for the > arising of > >vi~n~nana is via *interest*. It seems to me that, in part, > interest would > >direct the discernment of an object. > > I'm not sure about your interpretation, Howard. If I rephrase the > terms "sankhara" and "vinnana" using the specific definitions from > paticcasamuppada, Victor's question becomes: > > "How and why does kamma condition rebirth and vipaka cittas?" > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Huh? Victor had written the following: "Instead of asking why and how does ignorance condition consciousness? My question should be: Why and how does sankhara condition consciousness?To me the idea of "sankhara" is perhaps one of the most difficult to comprehend. It's been translated as "mental formation". However, I am not yet able to see the connection between sankhara and consciousness." I understood this to be asking about the link in patticca samupada of sankhara -> vi~n~nana, and my supposition was that interest, which would fall under the category of sankhara is a necessary condition for the arising of discernment. --------------------------------------------------- > > Personally, I draw an analogy to the law of conservation of energy. > A citta that creates kamma (kusala or akusala) is active; it has > energy (not to be confused with the cetasika viriya). When the citta > falls away, what happens to that energy? It gets stored as potential > energy (kammic potential). When other conditions are conducive, this > potential energy has the ability to cause the arising of another > citta. The citta that arises is a vipaka citta; maybe even a rebirth > linking citta (a special type of vipaka citta). > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Mmm. But lots of things "have energy". The fact of sankhara being a condition for consciousness is a specific form of conditionality. ------------------------------------------------- > > So what happens to all that accumulated kammic energy when the rupas > that are my body "die"? The potential energy is still there. It > doesn't disappear. Depending on conditions, this potential energy > finds a new outlet (new existence). If I become an Arahant, my > thought processes no longer create energy; kiriya cittas, which are > not active, play the role of javana cittas in the Arahant thought > process. Because an Arahant doesn't create kamma, he can escape > samsara once he has used up past energy accumulated before he became > an Arahant. Even the Buddha had to suffer sickness and pain which > was the result of kammic actions performed before His enlightenment. > > Looking at it from another angle, my current situation is vipaka. > Why and how has my current situation arisen? In fact, I am now > sitting in a Singapore hotel room at 4:30am typing in a response to > a question about kamma. What led to this condition: > - I chose to come to Singapore to attend a meeting yesterday > - I requested an early wake-up call this morning > - I decided to check the most recent DSG postings > - I selected your message to read > - I have an interest in learning the Dhamma > > These are five of the uncountable number of active states that > resulted in my current situation. Each of these active states arose > at an earlier time. > > The origins of some of the above active states are quite mundane; I > requested an early wake-up call this morning because I have an early > flight to Hong Kong. > > The origin of some of the above active states starts one thinking; > why am I drawn to the Dhamma (and Abhidhamma in particular)? > > I cannot find a suitable answer to why certain active states arose > (i.e. why am I interested in the Dhamma, why are my kids gifted at > music, etc.) if I limit my perspective to my current life. It seems > perfectly natural to me that some of the conditioning (active > states) occured before I was born. I studied the Dhamma in a > previous life (active state) thereby conditioning a result in this > life (i.e. an interest in the Dhamma). My kids applied themselves to > music in a previous life (active states) thereby conditioning > results in this life (musical "talent"). > > We have millions of thought processes each microsecond and each > thought process has seven active (javana) cittas which create kamma. > So many past active states. I can't even trace the mundane ones, let > alone the deeper ones from previous lives. Therefore, I agree with > the texts that say that only a Buddha can fully grasp the workings > of kamma (I can't remember the reference). > > Does this help? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > ============================ With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17189 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 7:51pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > Robert, I found your post very well-written, intelligent > and interesting. But it stops rather abruptly. You write as a final > sentence, "So we have to learn how to approach the Abhidhamma wisely > and patiently so that proper use is made of the wisdom therin." > Please tell me, in simple terms without using Pali, how this is > supposed to happen? What is the wisdom contained therein? Where is > the Abhidhamma, with its concept of ultimate nama/rupa, supposed to > take you? I have read all kinds of things about the Abhidhamma and I > don't see anything I can view as a `practice', I see things I can > view as `metaphysics'. Why is such knowledge, even if it was true, > supposed to lead to insight? This is something everyone is dancing > around. _______________________ Dear James, These are the sort of questions that can help. I'll try. Most of us naturally want a practice, something we can do, some obvious method by which we can put in effort and so make discernible progress. But I believe the path out of samsara is so profound. So that if we happen to bring in, with our practice and striving, subtle or not so subtle ideas of self who is making things happen, who is making progress etc. then there is in fact a wrong path that can't give what is hoped for. You ask about why the discernment of nama (mentality)and rupa(matter) is given preponderance in the Abhidhamma? There are many reasons, I try to keep it simple:The Buddha taught about the five khandhas(the aggregates) , the elements, the ayatanas(sense bases). These are all stressed in the suttas as well as the Abhidhamma. And all of them are different classifications of nama and rupa., He taught them so that we could begin to see what really exists. And what exists is evanescent, conditioned phenomenena, no person. Of course, as you indicate, thinking about them can't break up the idea of self ; it is only by direct insight that takes any of these dhammas as an object that the (mis)perception of a whole, a person is slowly erased. It seems like 'we' can control and do as we wish, but this is an illusion that is at the heart of the self view; as the different elements are resolved the 'whole' is found to be concept and instead there is a complex concantenation of conditioned dhammas with no controller or overlord, anywhere. Resolution into the component parts is an antidote to the wrong idea of a self that exists and is somehow directing this conglomerate of namas and rupas. It is like a butcher; when he takes the whole cow he thinks 'this is a cow'. But by the time he has skinned, chopped , cut, boned, diced, sliced and minced the carcase that idea of "cow" is gone. Look forward to continuing the discussion. Robert , 17190 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 9:31pm Subject: Re: Brief Report on Wat Greensboro Ordination - Part 1 - Dear Howard, Thanks for the outline of your trip and how nice to hear of the new monks and ven. Yanantharo. May they rejoice in their lives as monks. Robert -- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > > I left Thursday from New York LaGuardia Airport for Greensboro, North > Carolina to attend the ordination of Ven. Piyadhammo (a.k.a. David) Bhante Yanatharo is absolutely > delightful! He is a devoted but devilishly ;-)) iconoclastic monk who is easy > to talk with, great fun to be around, and filled with good humor. I want > everyone to knowthis message have been removed] 17191 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 9:54pm Subject: [dsg] Re: 2Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > Frankly, as I keep saying, for all practical purposes, for insight > purposes: THERE IS NO REASON TO CONTEMPLATE RUPA-IT IS ALL NAMA. > > I could quote sutta after sutta where the Buddha explains this, but I > want to look at two only. In the Cula-sihanada Sutta > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn011.html > > " Craving has feeling as its source... Feeling has what as > its source...? Feeling has contact as its source... Contact has what > as its source...? Contact has the sixfold base as its source... The > sixfold base has what as its source...? The sixfold base has > mentality-materiality as its source... Mentality-materiality has what > as its source...? Mentality-materiality has consciousness as its > source... > > Summary: > Clinging comes from Craving > Craving comes from Feeling > Feeling comes from the Six Senses > Six Senses comes from Mentality-Materiality (one thing, not two like > nama/rupa) > > The important thing to look at here is that mentality-materiality > comes from consciousness. It comes from the mind. In other words, > there isn't a rupa one needs to consider, it is all nama (mind). > >________________________________ Dear James, Nice you quoted a sutta on Dependent Origination - In any event the sixfold base in the sutta above includes both mental and material factors. The commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, the Abhidhammattha Vibhavani (no English translation completed yet) gives this answer to the question of why the Buddha taught so many detals about nama and rupa: "There are people who like short explanations, there are people who like explanations of medium length, and there are people who like detailed explanations. Those among the different groups who are slow in understanding as regards mentality can understand realities as explained by way of five khandhas, because mentality is classified by way of four khandhas, thus, in a more extensive way. Those who are slow in understanding as regards physical phenomena (rupa) can understand realities as explained by way of ayatanas. The five senses and the five sense objects are ten kinds of rupa which are ayatanas(the sense fields). As to dhammayatana this comprises both nama and rupa. Thus in this classification rupa has been explained more extensively. Those who are slow in understanding as to both nama and rupa can understand realities as explained by way of elements, dhatus, because in this classification both nama and rupa have been explained in detail." Robert 17192 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 9:58pm Subject: [dsg] Re: 3Fear of Rupas > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > > Frankly, as I keep saying, for all practical purposes, for > insight > > purposes: THERE IS NO REASON TO CONTEMPLATE RUPA-IT IS ALL NAMA. __________________________ Dear James, I think, practically, no one can avoid contemplating (correctly or incorrectly) rupa. Seeing must have rupa as an object. Taste tastes rupa. Smelling smells rupa. Touch contacts rupa........ Robert > > > 17193 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 10:44pm Subject: Re: "what is awareness. Hi all, Stephen quoted from TWO KINDS OF LANGUAGE : Everyday Language & Dhamma Language Ven. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu: > "Most people are interested only in black kamma and white kamma, bad kamma and good kamma. They take no interest in this third kind of kamma which is neither black nor white, > -------------- The special kind of kamma which undoes other kamma arises with moments of Path Consciousness (Magga-citta) (see Suan's translations of the Vitthaara Sutta; message #13546). --------------- > neither bad nor good, > ---------------- Is this correct? I would have thought it was the highest good. ---------------- > which consists in complete freedom from selfhood and leads to the attainment of Nibbana. > ---------------- I think it *is* the attainment of Nibbana; perhaps what is meant here is that it conditions higher levels of attainment(?). ---------------- > It wipes out every kind of bad and good kamma. > ---------------- By the stage of Arahatship, it has wiped out all the defilements; kamma would be completely wiped at Parinibbana.(?) ---------------------- > People don't understand the method for wiping out kamma completely. They don't know that the way to put an end to all kamma is through this special kind of kamma, which consists in applying the Buddha's method. That method is none other than the Noble Eightfold Path. " > ------------------- Since this `method' is, as the author rightly says, the Noble Eightfold Path, it is practised exclusively by the Noble Ones. I wonder if the author agrees that the method that worldling disciples can follow is the five-fold way of mundane satipatthana. Kind regards Ken H 17194 From: Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 5:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hello Ken >Since this `method' is, as the author rightly says, the >Noble Eightfold Path, it is practised exclusively by the >Noble Ones. I'd say we all practice it, the Noble Ones have realized it. >I wonder if the author agrees that the >method that worldling disciples can follow is the >five-fold way of mundane satipatthana. That's Samma Sati. Add 7 other steps. (Don't forget effort, which requires doing things/free choice, and samadhi, defined as the four jhanas ;-) metta, stephen 17195 From: Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 5:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness.- kamma Hello Robert, >Have you asked this question before, I don't recall? [On the 4 kinds of kamma, especially the kamma that ends kamma, being treated in the abhidhamma.] No, but it was asked (and unanswered) on another list. I'm glad it's mentioned but the treatment seems somewhat abrupt. Also in Buddhadasa;-) It does seem, to me, to be largely ignored in the abhidhamma; but then, as you know, I'm no expert. For instance, in "the Psychology and Philosophy of Buddhism," by Jayasuriya, there's the usual classifications of kamma by genesis, weight, time of appearance, and in respect of place of rebirth. (Too oddly: each with 4 subcategories.) Nothing on the only kind of kamma that really matters, the kamma that ends kamma. Just, again to me, metaphysical speculations and categorizations. But your reply makes it clear that that's not all there is on the subject within the abhidhamma. Thank you, metta, stephen 17196 From: James Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 11:47pm Subject: Re: 3Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > > > Frankly, as I keep saying, for all practical purposes, for > > insight > > > purposes: THERE IS NO REASON TO CONTEMPLATE RUPA-IT IS ALL NAMA. > __________________________ > > Dear James, > I think, practically, no one can avoid contemplating (correctly or > incorrectly) rupa. Seeing must have rupa as an object. Taste tastes > rupa. Smelling smells rupa. Touch contacts rupa........ > > Robert Robert, I completely disagree with this position. Okay, let me try to explain in a different way why, for the purposes of Buddhist practice, I believe everything we experience is nama (mind). You claim that seeing sees rupa, and hearing hears rupa, tasting tastes rupa, etc. I don`t agree. Seeing is consciousness perceiving a mind object. Hearing is consciousness perceiving a mind object. Tasting is consciousness perceiving a mind object, etc, etc, etc. You seem to be suggesting that mind can be escaped or doesn`t exist in everyday perception; that the eyes see on their own, that the ears hear on their own, that the nose smells on its own, etc. I posit that the six sense bases are like the fingers to a hand, which is the mind…they appear to be separate, but they are really the same thing. Eyes, nose, ears, mouth, body are really just extensions of the mind/heart. They don't 'think' or have `consciousness' on their own. Rupa cannot be known as rupa because it must always be filtered through nama, which makes experience pure nama. The field of quantum physics bears this reality out. Experimenters were discovering that the observation of matter, and its qualities, would change depending on who was doing the viewing/experimenting. So the results of experiments at such a minute level would be unrepeatable. Why is that? Because the experimenters had different minds, the matter was actually 'different' each time. The mind 'made' the matter what it was. Consider, we can't even be sure if matter exists outside of the mind/body. It all comes through the mind so it is all mind. Know the mind and you know it all. Metta, James Ps. I will reply to your other posts later. I did this one first because it is shortest. :-) 17197 From: nidive Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 8:21am Subject: Re: 3Fear of Rupas Hi James, I couldn't agree with you. How can I not be sure that matter exists outside of the mind? If rupas don't exist, then what is it that the eye (which is the mind according to you) sees? If there is no input into the eye (which is the mind according to you), then is the monitor screen that I am seeing now does not exist [as a compounded object]? That this monitor screen is just my wild imagination? That whatever you had written and appeared on this monitor screen is just my wild imagination? That whatever I had typed on my keyboard in response to your message and appeared on this monitor screen is just my wild imagination? It can't be. Because of the Mathematical Law of Contradiction... If whatever you see on your monitor screen is your own imagination and whatever I see on my monitor screen is my own imagination, then why are we here on this Yahoo! group discussing about Abhidhamma? Why am I able to response intelligently to you about what you had said in your message? And why are you able to response intelligently to Robert about what he had said in his messages? Indeed, why are we able to communicate on this Yahoo! group in the first place? Why do I 'imagine' your name to be 'James' and not 'ajmse'? Why am I discussing about Abhidhamma here instead of say Christianity? Why do I not see your message as saying that Jesus died for me on the Cross? If rupas do not exist, then most of us humans (99.99% ?) would not be able to communicate effectively with one another at all. Unless I mastered the supernormal powers of mind-reading & thought transfer... If rupas don't exist, then you would had never heard of the Buddha. Simply because no one transfered the very idea of Buddha to you via thought transference. If rupas don't exist, Yahoo! groups would have never existed in the first place. Because it's impossible to communicate via rupas since rupas don't exist. How do you and I store our messages then? By the time you are reading this message of mine, I would probably be sleeping soundly on my bed. And I wouldn't be able to transfer my thoughts to you while I am sleeping. Does that mean you can't read this message of mine? NEO Swee Boon 17198 From: James Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 11:46am Subject: Re: 3Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > Hi James, > > I couldn't agree with you. How can I not be sure that matter exists > outside of the mind? > > If rupas don't exist, then what is it that the eye (which is the > mind according to you) sees? If there is no input into the eye > (which is the mind according to you), then is the monitor screen > that I am seeing now does not exist [as a compounded object]? That > this monitor screen is just my wild imagination? That whatever you > had written and appeared on this monitor screen is just my wild > imagination? That whatever I had typed on my keyboard in response to > your message and appeared on this monitor screen is just my wild > imagination? NEO Swee Boon, I didn't say that rupa doesn't exist, I said that for all practical purposes we should consider that it doesn't exist to us. We should deal only with our mind and not believe that we can get insight from the contemplation of sound rupa, color rupa, taste rupa, or any other rupa. Okay, you are very convinced that you know reality, right? You sound pretty sure you know all of the manifestations of rupa in `reality'. Okay, answer a few questions for me: Tell me, how many past lives have I had? What is my future life likely going to be? What were you in your past lives? How many did you have? Hmmmm… you don't know? Well, the Buddha, if he was alive, could look at me and look at you and tell us this (if he felt to do so would help us). He could `see' all of our past lives. Maybe those questions are too tough. Here are some more: Tell me, what do divas look like? Where do they live and what do they wear? How about hungry ghosts and demons are there? What does Mara look like and how does he dress? Don't know those answers either? Well, the Buddha did, and his arahants did. Why don't you? Why don't I? The reason is because our `reality', our `rupa', is limited and superficial. We are asleep and the Buddha was awake. We don't see, hear, smell, taste, or feel the whole picture. Why would the contemplation of something that we don't know fully- in its true sense- bring us any kind of wisdom? I don't think it would. What we must concentrate on is the mind, observe the superficial and harmful way the mind works, and then rise above it. Before we do this, we are asleep and blind. The Abhidhamma wants us to take our sleeping dreams for ultimate reality. I refuse to do that. I know better. Metta, James 17199 From: robmoult Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 2:52pm Subject: Free Will (again) Hi Rob K, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > I'll try and bring up the > freewill issue. For now I can say that I believe that in direct > proportion to the degree of acceptance/understanding of anatta > ancilliary ideas such as 'freewill' also drop away. There are just > conditioned dhammas arising and ceasing with no one anywhere. Seeing > this gradually leads away from the clinging to self and samsara. Last night, I met up with Jon, Sarah, Christine and Ajarn Paul. I knew that it was going to be an interesting discussion when the first question that Jon asked as I sat down was, "What do you mean by free will?". We explored the topic and I think that there was some progress, but "the light did not come on". I then raised the question of the role of meditation. After some discussion, Jon asked me what my current mental states were. I replied, "Confusion and restlessness". I then continued on thinking aloud, "But confusion and restlessness are not vipaka. These are javana. I did not choose to be confused. I did not choose to be restless. These states arose naturally because of conditions, not because of free will and choice." I feel that I am now at the edge of a cliff. It seems clear to me now that there is no "choice" in the thought process. However, if I say that all is pre-determined because there is no choice, then I take away any sense of ethical responsibility and all that I have to do is to "stay on the roller-coaster ride until the end". Rob K (or others), can you help pull me back from the edge of the abyss? Metta, Rob M :-) 17200 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 9:58am Subject: Brief Report on Wat Greensboro Ordination - Part 2 Hi, all - After arrival at Wat Greensboro on Thursday and meeting the head monk, Maha Somsak, I was shown my room in the main house, a very comfortable room with several chests, mirrors, and a hide-a-bed sofa, and with easy access to both the kitchen and two bathrooms. A hot water dispenser was also in that room, making tea and coffee easily available. This was already late afternoon, but the head monk cordially offered food to me which I respectfully declined. In the early evening, we left for the other main building which has the meditation hall, a kitchen, a sitting room in which meals are taken, and more. We went to the meditation hall - the head monk, other resident monks, several visiting monks (including Ven. Yanatharo), the two monks-to-be, David's mother, and me. There we engaged in about 45 minutes of chanting (I looked at Dhammarato's chant book) followed by a brief meditation - about 15 minutes. Subsequent meditation sittings, each morning and even, lasted for about the same time as the chanting, 45 minutes. The rest of that evening, until way past midnite was spent in pleasant, animated conversation - primarily Dhamma talk. On Friday a.m., Dhammarato gave a prearranged knock on my door around six a.m. At seven, we were back at the other building for chanting and meditation. Then, after a return to the main house for showering etc, we went over again to the other building for a fish-soup breakfast. Around 11:00 a.m. the main meal of the day was served (the last food for the monks with the exception of possible tea, coffee, or ice cream [an interpretation of ghee]. At the main meal, as was to be expected, the monks ate first, and the rest of us ate of the more-than-adequate food remaining after the monks finished. In the afternoon, we got into cars to drive about 30 miles to get to Wat Lexington, the Wat at which the ordination was to be held. (It was to be held there because at that Wat there was a ring of "sima stones" around the meditation hall, serving to consecrate the enclosed area.) Wat Lexington is another beautiful Wat with an exquisite tree-lined roadway onto the grounds which includes several small and lovely ponds. After parking, we made our way up a rather steep, leaf covered hill at the top of which was the meditation hall. When up there, some of us entered the hall for some purpose that I am unaware of, and outside we took turns clearing the area of leaves and suitably decorating the exterior. Upon return to Wat Greensboro, I took a brief nap, and the rest of the day then went much as the day before, with early-evening chanting and meditation (this time, I had the use of my own chanting sheets kindly photocopied by David), and then followed by pleasant conversation. I went to sleep a bit earlier that day, though, than the previous. (Oh, yes - also on Friday David and Dhammarato received their white robes [to be worn prior to the ceremony], their decorative fans, and their bowls. Oh, and, yes, one more thing happened on Friday: It turned out that Dhammarato's preceptor, who was to officiate at the ordination, had missed his plane, and instead took a bus to Charlotte. So, at midnite, Dhammarato left by car to Charlotte, over 2 hours away, to pick him up. They didn't get back until close to 5 a.m., and, so, neither had any sleep to speak of that night. ) Saturday morning we arose early to go over for chanting and meditation, then to leave at 8:30 for Wat Lexington. We arrived at Wat Lexington a bit late because of a traffic jam due to an accident. After arrival, we entered the meditation hall of one building where we greeted a quite elderly and very sweet monk, and Dhammarato and David donned their white robes. Dammarato gave me his video camera to film throughout the entire ordination and at the meal following. Then we made the trek up the hill, me filming as we went, to the sima-stone-encircled meditation hall. Not only was David's mother there, but so was Dhammarato's and also numerous friends and relatives of each. When a monk ordains, he must be given parental permission. This is done in a ceremonial way, but with both David and Dhammarato, this constituted the most beautiful and touching moments of all for me. The love manifest was so strong and truly moving! (BTW, the previous evening this approval ceremony was carried out as well, back at Wat Greensboro. It happens that Dhammarato's mother wasn't there at the time - so I was asked to stand in for her! ;-)) I had to "give permission", and Dhammarato had to ask me for forgiveness for having mistreated me in any way. He cleverly related this to our history on Dhamma-list!! ;-)) Prior to entering the hall for the ordination, David, Dhammarato, the monks, the family members, and some friends (including me) marched clockwise three times around the hall. I was honored in being allowed to hold one of the decorative fans while circumambulating the hall. After entering the hall, the ordination began. The amount of chanting and responses that the two monks-to-be were responsible for was impressive. More impressive was the aplomb with which they handled it. Dhammarato performed like the experienced monk that he had already been. But for me, David's "performance" was the most impressive. This was a first time for him, and I know he was nervous, but he was marvelous, chanting with a sureness that made others calm! There is so much more detail to provide, but my ignorance in this area is considerable, so I think it might be better to wait until at some point Ven. Dhammarato returns to posting, and we can get the details properly from one who understands them. I also hope at some point to post some photos. Right now, suffice it to say that participating in this wonderful event is something that was a highpoint for me and is an event I will long remember. The next day, Sunday, was the day I left. There was the usual morning chanting and meditation and meals and conversation, but the day was a bit more relaxed. At one point Ven Dhammarato and Ven Piyadhammo took several friends on a walking tour of the beautiful 10 acres of Wat Greensboro. Later on I packed my bags, did a bit more walking around on my own, practiced my t'ai chi form in the shade of a big tree outside the main house, and grabbed a 30-minute meditation. Around 3:30, Ven Yanatharo stopped over to the main house to visit with me before I left for the airport. Around 4:15 Ven Dhammarato and Ven Piyadhammo, and one of the visiting monks - a delightful young monk, Ven Milinda, from Connecticut, drove me to the airport. We exchanged very fond goodbyes, and then I went inside. A delightful dream had ended. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17201 From: robmoult Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 3:06pm Subject: Re: Free Will (again) Hey, don't blame me for that last posting. Conditions arose, I had no choice. I had to write that message. It was predestined to happen. Your reply or lack of reply is also pre-destined. I have aversion to this way of thinking. I see that I did not choose to have this aversion; it arose because of conditions. Is there another option that is not "choice" and not "pre-destiny"? Please help. Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Rob K, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > > I'll try and bring up the > > freewill issue. For now I can say that I believe that in direct > > proportion to the degree of acceptance/understanding of anatta > > ancilliary ideas such as 'freewill' also drop away. There are just > > conditioned dhammas arising and ceasing with no one anywhere. > Seeing > > this gradually leads away from the clinging to self and samsara. > > Last night, I met up with Jon, Sarah, Christine and Ajarn Paul. I > knew that it was going to be an interesting discussion when the > first question that Jon asked as I sat down was, "What do you mean > by free will?". We explored the topic and I think that there was > some progress, but "the light did not come on". > > I then raised the question of the role of meditation. After some > discussion, Jon asked me what my current mental states were. I > replied, "Confusion and restlessness". I then continued on thinking > aloud, "But confusion and restlessness are not vipaka. These are > javana. I did not choose to be confused. I did not choose to be > restless. These states arose naturally because of conditions, not > because of free will and choice." > > I feel that I am now at the edge of a cliff. It seems clear to me > now that there is no "choice" in the thought process. However, if I > say that all is pre-determined because there is no choice, then I > take away any sense of ethical responsibility and all that I have to > do is to "stay on the roller-coaster ride until the end". > > Rob K (or others), can you help pull me back from the edge of the > abyss? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17202 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 10:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Free Will (again) Hi, Rob - In a message dated 11/26/02 5:55:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Rob K, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > >I'll try and bring up the > >freewill issue. For now I can say that I believe that in direct > >proportion to the degree of acceptance/understanding of anatta > >ancilliary ideas such as 'freewill' also drop away. There are just > >conditioned dhammas arising and ceasing with no one anywhere. > Seeing > >this gradually leads away from the clinging to self and samsara. > > Last night, I met up with Jon, Sarah, Christine and Ajarn Paul. I > knew that it was going to be an interesting discussion when the > first question that Jon asked as I sat down was, "What do you mean > by free will?". We explored the topic and I think that there was > some progress, but "the light did not come on". > > I then raised the question of the role of meditation. After some > discussion, Jon asked me what my current mental states were. I > replied, "Confusion and restlessness". I then continued on thinking > aloud, "But confusion and restlessness are not vipaka. These are > javana. I did not choose to be confused. I did not choose to be > restless. These states arose naturally because of conditions, not > because of free will and choice." > > I feel that I am now at the edge of a cliff. It seems clear to me > now that there is no "choice" in the thought process. However, if I > say that all is pre-determined because there is no choice, then I > take away any sense of ethical responsibility and all that I have to > do is to "stay on the roller-coaster ride until the end". > > Rob K (or others), can you help pull me back from the edge of the > abyss? > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Free will or not, Rob, what would happen if you just *let go*?! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------ > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > ===================== With metta (freely willed yet without effort ;-), Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17203 From: robmoult Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 3:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Free Will (again) Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Free will or not, Rob, what would happen if you just *let go*?! ;-)) > ------------------------------------------------ > ===================== > With metta (freely willed yet without effort ;-), > Howard I sense that you are trying to help me and I really appreciate it. My mental state is agitated at this moment and I think that I need some time to reflect on last night's discussion and on your comment. Thank you. Metta, Rob M :-) PS: Appreciate your posts on your trip. 17204 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 10:24am Subject: Another Approach Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi again, Rob - In a message dated 11/26/02 6:08:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hey, don't blame me for that last posting. Conditions arose, I had > no choice. I had to write that message. It was predestined to > happen. Your reply or lack of reply is also pre-destined. > > I have aversion to this way of thinking. I see that I did not choose > to have this aversion; it arose because of conditions. Is there > another option that is not "choice" and not "pre-destiny"? > > Please help. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > ============================= It sounds to me like you are engaged in Zen koan practice. You have a red-hot ball stuck in your throat called "free will" that you can neither swallow nor spit up. Soon your whole world will consist of nothing but that undislodgeable object. You MUST get rid of it, but you CAN'T get rid of it!! It won't go down, it won't come up!! How to move the unmovable?? Ask: "WHO IS IT that must do this?" With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17205 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 10:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Free Will (again) Hi, Rob - In a message dated 11/26/02 6:22:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > >Howard: > > Free will or not, Rob, what would happen if you just *let > go*?! ;-)) > >------------------------------------------------ > >===================== > >With metta (freely willed yet without effort ;-), > >Howard > > I sense that you are trying to help me and I really appreciate it. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Thank you. (Yes, you sense correctly. :-) --------------------------------------------------- > > My mental state is agitated at this moment and I think that I need > some time to reflect on last night's discussion and on your comment. > > Thank you. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > PS: Appreciate your posts on your trip. > > > =========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17206 From: robmoult Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 3:46pm Subject: Another Approach Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > ============================= > It sounds to me like you are engaged in Zen koan practice. You have a > red-hot ball stuck in your throat called "free will" that you can neither > swallow nor spit up. Soon your whole world will consist of nothing but that > undislodgeable object. You MUST get rid of it, but you CAN'T get rid of it!! > It won't go down, it won't come up!! How to move the unmovable?? Ask: "WHO > IS IT that must do this?" > I know that there is no self. There is no self in the citta, no self in any of the cetasikas and no self in the relations that link all these paramattha dhamma together. The realization that my confusion and restlessness arose only because of conditions, not because of any "free will" has dislodged the "free will" object. The object that is lodged in my throat is the idea that there is only one path that the universe is destined to follow. The fact that I do not have the ability to see this path is not a problem for me; the fact that it exists raises serious issues of accountability, responsibility and ethics. Last night, I asked if the Buddha could foresee with precision events that would unfold two thousand years in the future (such as the World Trade Centre bombing). I'm not sure, but I think that our two moderators had different opinions (gasp!). Here is my opinion. It was clear that the Buddha could anticipate things that would soon happen (i.e. when He intervened to stop Angulimalla from killing his mother). Seeing the past accumulations of each person would allow the Buddha to make reasonable conclusions regarding things that were just about to happen. The Buddha could also forsee general future trends as demonstrated in His analysis of the 16 dreams of King Pasendai. At this point, Ajarn Paul made the valid observation that the Buddha was not a fortune teller. Koans are good for you, if you give them time to work at multiple levels. Let me knaw on this one (pre-destiny) for a while. Metta, Rob M :-) 17207 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 4:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Free Will (again) Hi Rob, There is clearly right and wrong choice. See Way 24: "The state of mind that is not clearly comprehending commits blunders of judgment in the business of choosing the right means and in avoiding the wrong. The state of mind which is inattentive -- the mental state of absence of mindfulness -- is incapable of laying hold of the right means and of rejecting the wrong means." L: There will be more on choice and sati sampajanna latter in the commentary. Another thing we have to consider though, is varying degrees of ultimacy. A higher ultimate truth than that indicated by this quotation would say there is no choice in citta process. On the other hand, we could say citta process is not an object of satipatthana because it cannot be directly perceived by someone on a mundane path. The really really really real is only nibbana, imo. Larry 17208 From: Uan Chih Liu Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 4:10pm Subject: Re: Another Approach Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi Rob M, I have struggled with free will for the exact same reason, i.e. the inevitably issues of ethics and accountability, and this is what I have come to terms with. Hope it will helps and love to hear others' views. What we know as "free will" is actually "awareness" or "insight" of what's happening at the moment. When we make decisions (or at least we think we are making decisions), we are not making decisions, but we are rather "aware" of the thought process, "aware" of cittas arising and falling. So essentially we are not making decisions, but we are "conscious" of "decisions" being made. At the same time, depending on the degrees of "insight", we will be aware of the consequences of our actions. So one can say, since I have no control over what I do, I can do whatever I want. Yes, one "can" do whatever he/she wants, but more importantly, one will bear whatever consequences of his/her actions. That, is reality, and that natural consequences IS ethics. THAT is accountability, which happen naturally, regardless of "free will" or not. with metta, Wendy 17209 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 11:34am Subject: Re: Another Approach Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi, Rob - In a message dated 11/26/02 6:47:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > >============================= > > It sounds to me like you are engaged in Zen koan practice. > You have a > >red-hot ball stuck in your throat called "free will" that you can > neither > >swallow nor spit up. Soon your whole world will consist of nothing > but that > >undislodgeable object. You MUST get rid of it, but you CAN'T get > rid of it!! > >It won't go down, it won't come up!! How to move the > unmovable?? Ask: "WHO > >IS IT that must do this?" > > > > I know that there is no self. There is no self in the citta, no self > in any of the cetasikas and no self in the relations that link all > these paramattha dhamma together. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I know that you "know" there is no self. I "know" that too. But do we KNOW it??? -------------------------------------------------- > > The realization that my confusion and restlessness arose only > because of conditions, not because of any "free will" has dislodged > the "free will" object. > > The object that is lodged in my throat is the idea that there is > only one path that the universe is destined to follow. The fact that > I do not have the ability to see this path is not a problem for me; > the fact that it exists raises serious issues of accountability, > responsibility and ethics. > > Last night, I asked if the Buddha could foresee with precision > events that would unfold two thousand years in the future (such as > the World Trade Centre bombing). I'm not sure, but I think that our > two moderators had different opinions (gasp!). > > Here is my opinion. It was clear that the Buddha could anticipate > things that would soon happen (i.e. when He intervened to stop > Angulimalla from killing his mother). Seeing the past accumulations > of each person would allow the Buddha to make reasonable conclusions > regarding things that were just about to happen. The Buddha could > also forsee general future trends as demonstrated in His analysis of > the 16 dreams of King Pasendai. > > At this point, Ajarn Paul made the valid observation that the Buddha > was not a fortune teller. > > Koans are good for you, if you give them time to work at multiple > levels. Let me knaw on this one (pre-destiny) for a while. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I think that koans can be very good for us. For the "free will" one, I think it may be useful to ask ourselves exactly what sort of thing free will would actually *be*. Leaving aside for the moment that the Dhamma sees nothing as arising independent of conditions, would will be free if it were random? Would we be willing freely if we could will something *for no reason whatsoever*? Would such "willing" be something to prize? And whatever willing there is, is it not just an impersonal event/operation? Our arm will not rise when not being lifted "externally" except by means of willing. And that is an "internal" lifting. But is it random, uncaused? Isn't the impulse to lift the arm conditioned by the desire to grasp something? The attachment to the object (upadana) conditions the impulse to reach for it and the reaching (bhava), itself, which in turn conditions our birth as the possessor of the object, a rebirth of "self". It's all impersonal, even the creation of the identity as possessor. It's all impersonal and all conditioned. Cetana is part of the process, and that cetana is conditioned by many things, but most especially by our desires. What do people really mean when they say that their will is free. I think they mean little more than that they will to do what they want to do. Well, that's true. What more is there to look for? Is random willing somehow better? I think it seems so to many of us, because we think that this somehow means greater autonomy for the "person". Not being able to accept willing as conditioned is, I believe, itself conditioned by the sense of self, the heart of avijja. -------------------------------------------------- > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > =========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17210 From: James Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 7:06pm Subject: Re: Brief Report on Wat Greensboro Ordination - Part 2 Howard, This is a beautiful and insightful rendition of the events as you encountered them. I also see the influences of kamma, forgiveness, humility, and service in your telling--which says as much about you as the events you experienced. I wish my brief `Going Forth' had been as illustrious and supported, but that also is kamma; and I am content and deeply happy to know that proper tradition has not completely vanished. Thank you for sharing so humbly and sincerely your experiences. I, for one, greatly appreciate it. Metta, James 17211 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 7:20pm Subject: Re: Free Will (again) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hey, don't blame me for that last posting. Conditions arose, I had > no choice. I had to write that message. It was predestined to > happen. Your reply or lack of reply is also pre-destined. > > I have aversion to this way of thinking. I see that I did not choose > to have this aversion; it arose because of conditions. Is there > another option that is not "choice" and not "pre-destiny"? > Please help. >_______________ Dear RobM, Glad to hear of your meeting with Paul and Sarah and Jon. Just got off the phone to Nina (VanG) who arrived in bangkok just this morning. I read over the conversations between you and Howard (and Wendy) and saw some very nice points. I think most of us have struggled with dilemmas related to anatta. It is the hardest part of the Dhamma and some even give up and decide that really there must be a self that can control somethings, somehow. But that is not the way. Both "freewill" and "predestiny/predetermination" are tied up with selfview. I'm just off for my daily swim so if I repast this old letter for now. I know you've read it before but it summarises several points so is worth another look: Someone wrote to me a while back who feels that no control is a dangerous idea.They wanted to stress control and volitional intention which is what they believe that Buddha really taught and they feel uncontrollabilty to be a pernicious belief leading to apathy. "I have a choice whether to get angry in the present moment." the writer said."this is new kamma". I replied: Yes, the processes of cittas during anger are new kamma. However, they are also conditioned. The Patthana, the last and most important book of the Abhidhamma, goes into enormous detail about the 24 paccaya (conditions). Some of which are past and some present. But even the present ones do not simply arise out of nothing. Nor do they arise because "I" want them to. The processes of mind are happening at enormous speed and there is no "person" who can do anything to stop them or change them. Even the cittas that are arising at this moment are conditioned by previous cittas as well as well as by other conditions that are present at the same time. They further wrote that "we are not just helpless automata acting out our old kamma - that is absurd. I hope the above helps overcome the despair that comes from the belief that we are a slave to our conditioning." I said "This sounds like the debates that western Philosophy used to have (and still does) about Free-will versus Determinism. The Buddha's analysis of the world is neither, it is the middle path. Thus the statement about "we being helpless automata acting out our old kamma" misses the point. There is no "we" to be anything. And kamma is not the only condition. Hearing the teachings of Buddhism - especially the deep teachings on anatta, are a condition for understanding. This understanding leads to energy: energy to hear more, and energy to carry on with the study and practice of vipassana. . And if understanding grows then there will be detachment from the idea of self and of control. Then there is no more despair about the path - because "I" have been taken out of the equation. The "I" that we love so much, the "I" that we want to be happy, get enlightened , whatever. Then, as the Visuddhimagga says, 'there is a path but no one on the path'." This round of births and deaths is beginningless. However, it is not random in any sense. Because of conditions birth occurs in one plane and because of different conditions birth occurs in another plane. Panna (wisdom) is a conditioned phenomena and it is itself conditioned. What are the conditions for panna to develop : hearing the Dhamma, considering it, applying it and also accumulations of merit from the infinite past (pubekata punnata). Why are we so interested in Dhamma? Why isn't the leader of the Taliban interested; surely he makes effort, surely he has the intention to do what is best? Why do some people hear Dhamma but find it unappealing while others can't get enough even after hearing it just once? Why are some initially not interested and then later they get interested and surpass in understanding those who studied much longer? It is clear that there must be reasons for all this; and the Dhamma explains it all. You wrote "that's where i get stuck...if all dhammas except nibbana > are > conditioned (i'm going on saddha with this, of course), then > thinking one > can develop anything seems like an exercise in > micchaditthi.... _________________ Good point. I think it depends on the thinking. If we have the idea of "I can do it", then we are likely to be caught in self view. Or we think we can manufacture sati by effort or good intention - self. But there can be wisdom - not us- that sees the danger in samasara and thus there is naturally effort that arises with that understanding. It is subtle: often we slip into self view; either towards the freewill end of the continuum or towrds the fatalistic end that thinks nothing can be done. ____________________________ > > can the path be developed? or do we just leave it up to (for > lack of a > better f-word) "fate"? "" __________________ Fate implies a preordained outcome. In that case whether we did this that or the other nothing would make a thread of difference. We could go out and kill and pillage and nothing would have any effect and we would all get enlightened or not get enlightened depending on our "fate". This is not what the Buddha taught. He explained in detail many different conditions. It is true that some are past conditions but there are also present ones thus it is not fatalism. Both the idea of fatalism and the idea of freewill are bound up in self view - a self who can control and a self who can't. The Dhamma is the middle way and is neither. Robert 17212 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 2:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Brief Report on Wat Greensboro Ordination - Part 2 Thank you, James! :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/26/02 10:08:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Howard, > > This is a beautiful and insightful rendition of the events as you > encountered them. I also see the influences of kamma, forgiveness, > humility, and service in your telling--which says as much about you > as the events you experienced. I wish my brief `Going Forth' had > been as illustrious and supported, but that also is kamma; and I am > content and deeply happy to know that proper tradition has not > completely vanished. Thank you for sharing so humbly and sincerely > your experiences. I, for one, greatly appreciate it. > > Metta, James > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17213 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 7:38pm Subject: Re: Free Will (again) ---Dear RobM, Still haven't gone for my swim. I thought you might like to read thisold letter from Dan: In dhammastudygroup@y..., dalthorp@o... wrote: Hello my dsg friends, It feels great to see you all again, but my stay this time must really be short. Although each moment is an opportunity for studying Dhamma, some livelihoods do not allow for much discussion. I would fit in under "They earn their living by accounting, computation, calculation,[etc.]--the recluse Gotama abstains from such wrong means of livelihood, from such debased arts" (DN 1, Brahmajala sutta). He was praised for this moral virtue regarding such "trifling and insignificant matters," but even this trifling virtue I lack. A quick comment about something Erik said: > paramattha sacca is an excellent medicine applied at > the right time (like when stubbing the toe) One problem is that when stubbing the toe, the "YEEEOWCH!" comes before there is time to think about applying any medicine. When satipatthana is viewed as a medicine to apply, something to do to remedy dosa after it arises, it is impossible to get beyond the sequence pain->aversion->applying medicine. To get beyond "YEEEOWCH", we must first get beyond the idea of satipatthana as a medicine to apply--it takes too long to "apply" anything and this remains true no matter how much one might practice to make it faster. The problem is that the medicine is applied in response to the aversion rather than the pain. It's easy to see aversion as something that needs a remedy, but when there is clear understanding of rupa as rupa and nama as nama, vedana as vedana and dosa as dosa, and no self in any of it, there is no thought of medicines or remedies or anything to apply or anyone to apply it. This is not to say that there is no benefit to thinking about "applying remedies" to unwholesome states of mind. There is great benefit, especially in comparison to the conventional alternative of NOT applying remedies or considering unwholesome states of mind as no different from wholesome ones. Applying remedies is a wonderful practice that can bring good results and should be encouraged. But if we would learn Dhamma, we must be careful to make a clear distinction between the conventional wisdom of "medicines" and the deeper wisdom of anatta, the realization that ultimately there is no one to apply any medicine, no medicine to apply. This doesn't mean that there is nothing to be done, that there is nothing we can do. On the contrary, there is much to be done at every moment, and it is vital that we do so -- every moment working, studying, observing, understanding. More concretely, one thing we can do is to understand that all we do in normal everyday life is run around trying to apply medicine in response to various sensations, mental and physical. "Paramattha sacca" is not just another medicine apply, another technique to assuage pain. The problem of suffering is not that there is this particular instance of suffering to deal with or that instance of suffering to deal with; instead, it is a general problem perpetuated by our eons-long habit of continually aiming a fire extinguisher at any fire that flares up and our view that this fire extinguisher, medicine approach can solve the problem. What mind arises right now? What are its characteristics? What is rupa? What is nama? What is vedana? Sañña? Sankhara? Viññana? What are kusala and akusala? When these questions are considered seriously, there is no thought of "medicine", a concept rooted in an the idea of an atta who directs. "This director usually makes the wrong decisions, so we just need to train him to make the right decisions. He's so powerful that once we get him trained right, voilá! Liberation." This atta can indeed be trained, and in the training, there is benefit. But liberation is effected by understanding anatta, and not by a well-trained atta. Dan --- End forwarded message --- 17214 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 7:42pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Free Will (again) Dear Rob, > -----Original Message----- > From: robmoult [mailto:rob.moult@j...] > > I then raised the question of the role of meditation. After some > discussion, Jon asked me what my current mental states were. I > replied, "Confusion and restlessness". I then continued on thinking > aloud, "But confusion and restlessness are not vipaka. These are > javana. I did not choose to be confused. I did not choose to be > restless. These states arose naturally because of conditions, not > because of free will and choice." > > I feel that I am now at the edge of a cliff. It seems clear to me > now that there is no "choice" in the thought process. However, if I > say that all is pre-determined because there is no choice, then I > take away any sense of ethical responsibility and all that I have to > do is to "stay on the roller-coaster ride until the end". > > Rob K (or others), can you help pull me back from the edge of the > abyss? That sounds like a pretty good example (to me) that, because of those conditions, this happens. All realities, including confusion, restlessness, and thoughts are conditioned by other realities (and non-realities). If you study patthana, then you can see that the conditioning of a reality is very complexed: it has too many variables that point to uncontrollability. Panna and fears also condition. By listening to the Buddha teachings, we begin to know it for ourselves, at all sort of levels, what's good and what's bad, and the causes and effects of things. Would you "choose" to do something if you think it isn't useful? When panna knows that kusala states are useful (and necessary to reach nibbana), then one begins to follow the path that is wholesome. When panna knows that akusala states are ugly, have many faults, then one avoids (or some of the time!!!) the path that is unwholesome. Panna has many different conditions: what has been accumulated in the past, the suitability of this life to accumulate panna, being associated with a wise person, listening to the true dhamma, skillful attention, etc. When panna leads, many different kusala states follow, but all because of conditions, not us, not you, and not me. kom 17215 From: James Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 7:54pm Subject: Free Willy!! :-) [was: Free Will (again)] --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Rob K, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > > I'll try and bring up the > > freewill issue. For now I can say that I believe that in direct > > proportion to the degree of acceptance/understanding of anatta > > ancilliary ideas such as 'freewill' also drop away. There are just > > conditioned dhammas arising and ceasing with no one anywhere. > Seeing > > this gradually leads away from the clinging to self and samsara. > > Last night, I met up with Jon, Sarah, Christine and Ajarn Paul. I > knew that it was going to be an interesting discussion when the > first question that Jon asked as I sat down was, "What do you mean > by free will?". Rob M, Howard, Wendy, Larry, Kom, and All, Wow! I have read these posts with great interest. I must salute Rob M for his unflinching honesty about his spiritual dilemma concerning non-self and free will. That is a level of honesty I don't see too often and I highly respect it. Please allow me to throw my radical viewpoint to this fray…as usual :-). From my perspective, most of the `knowledgeable' Buddhists in the world are so attached to the teaching of `Non-Self' that they have created in their psyches a replacement self. I call it the: `Self- Non-Self'. It is a `self' that doesn't exist as `self', but does exist as `non-self'. It is a `Non-Self' that is just as much `Self' and the original `Self', but is viewed as `Non-Self'. Is such contradiction possible in the human psyche? YOU BET IT IS!!! Is this what the Buddha intended with his teaching of "Non-Self"? Heck No! He taught it so that people would abandon the sense of self (and the garbage attached) and then have nothing left. But that is not what most Buddhists have done. Many have replaced the original 'self' with a warped and twisted new concept of self. The inescapable result will be deep angst and confusion as one lives with a `Self-Non-Self' that most definitely exists in the psyche, but is not supposed to exist. Howard explained it the best I think, but unfortunately in a very choppy and disjointed way over several posts: Both `Self' and `Non- Self' should be dropped. Holding them is like having a hot ball (shot-putt?) stuck in the throat. They won't go up and they won't go down. My input: Anatta is a concept to be developed slowly through meditation…not a concept to be discussed over dinner in Bangkok. How does Free Will correspond with Anatta? Who cares??!! Enjoy Bangkok before your vacation is over already! The answers will come later…maybe at the pool with Dan. :-) My opinion. Metta, James 17216 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 9:54pm Subject: Re: Free Will (again) DearRobM, Back from my swim. Just off to Thai language class so only have time for one more repost. This was a letter to Christine almost exactly one year ago. BTW great to hear you met with her too in Hongkong - I'll be seeing her for the first time on Friday. _________ I really don't want to believe that > I am just a 'process' who seems to be a living puppet that > everything happens to, things (mental states) arise as an intrusion, > without permission, or without being intended or evoked....the problem is, of course, that I don't want it to be so.....anatta, and > no control. +++++++ Dear Christine, It is very nice that you can admit the difficulty you're having with 'getting' anatta. Sometimes we talk about about this most profound truth rather easily, and so it might seem that it should be like ABC. But is the deepest aspect of life and thus it is incomparably difficult to grasp let alone fathom. I like what you said about 'the living puppet', it reminds me of the Bhikkhuni-samyutta where Mara approaches the Bhikkhuni Sela "Then Mara the Evil One, desiring to arouse fear, trepidation, and terror in the bhikkhuni Sela, desiring to make her fall away from concentration, approached her and addressed her in verse: "By whom has this puppet been created? Where is the maker of the puppet? Where has the puppet arisen? Where does the puppet cease?"[24] Then it occurred to the bhikkhuni Sela: "Now who is this...? This is Mara the Evil One... desiring to make me fall away from concentration." Then the bhikkhuni Sela, having understood, "This is Mara the Evil One," replied to him in verses: "This puppet is not made by itself, Nor is this misery made by another. It has come to be dependent on a cause, When the cause dissolves then it will cease."endquote Things do indeed, as you said, happen "without permission or without being intended or invoked". When I first started to see that this is really the way things are it scared me alot, and I wanted to turn away and try to believe that it was otherwise. But, you know, this is what dukkha really is. We can't stop seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, feeling, knowing, thinking; these dhammas are not ours and they arise by conditions. They oppress by continually arising and ceasing. The amazing thing is that the more we look into this, and the more obvious dukkha thus becomes, the happier we become. And paradoxically the more we see that there is no control the more freedom we have. The more we see that right effort is a conditioned phenomena the more vigor there is - because we are not wasting energy trying to have what can't yet be had. Other parami are needed too - patience and wisdom should develop together. Could I recommend yet another book - a short one - The Perfections Leading to Enlightenment , which explains the ten parami (much easier than the patthana). You can read it at http://www.abhidhamma.org best wishes robert 17217 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 11:01pm Subject: RE: Another Approach Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Dear Rob, > -----Original Message----- > From: robmoult [mailto:rob.moult@j...] > Last night, I asked if the Buddha could foresee > with precision > events that would unfold two thousand years in > the future (such as > the World Trade Centre bombing). I'm not sure, > but I think that our > two moderators had different opinions (gasp!). > > Here is my opinion. It was clear that the Buddha > could anticipate > things that would soon happen (i.e. when He > intervened to stop > Angulimalla from killing his mother). Seeing the > past accumulations > of each person would allow the Buddha to make > reasonable conclusions > regarding things that were just about to happen. > The Buddha could > also forsee general future trends as demonstrated > in His analysis of > the 16 dreams of King Pasendai. How about predicting exactly another Buddha 4 aeons from now? That is way longer (incomparable) than a few thousand years... On the other hand, this Buddha is said to have made a resolution to become a Buddha by thought, and words, for 16 aeons (plus the next 4 aeons [by thought, words, and deeds] making 20 aeons and 100,000 kappas). This Buddha was predicted by 24 sammasam-buddha that appeared in the last 4 aeons. Why didn't the Buddhas before that? kom 17218 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 11:03pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Dear Rob, I think you replied in response to the discussions you had! kom > -----Original Message----- > From: robmoult [mailto:rob.moult@j...] > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 3:06 PM > Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) > > > Hey, don't blame me for that last posting. > Conditions arose, I had > no choice. I had to write that message. It was > predestined to > happen. Your reply or lack of reply is also pre-destined. 17219 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 11:16pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hi Stephen, It's very difficult to discuss the Dhamma if we can't agree on what the Dhamma is. The Abhidhamma and the Commentaries make it clear that the eight factors of the Ariyan Path are mental factors (cetasikas). In a moment when Nibbana is the object of consciousness, those eight mental factors arise as part of the five khandhas (part of the sankhara-khandhas). Likewise, it is made clear that whenever five or six of those factors (including one, at most, of the three abstinences), are present in their mundane forms, then that is a moment of satipatthana. You reject those texts and I think you reject that the eight Path factors are cetasikas; but perhaps you could say where, in the remainder of the Tipitaka, it is stated that they are "steps." Kind regards Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., oreznoone@a... wrote: > > Hello Ken > > >Since this `method' is, as the author rightly says, the > >Noble Eightfold Path, it is practised exclusively by the > >Noble Ones. > I'd say we all practice it, the Noble Ones have realized it. > >I wonder if the author agrees that the > >method that worldling disciples can follow is the > >five-fold way of mundane satipatthana. > That's Samma Sati. Add 7 other steps. > (Don't forget effort, which requires doing things/free choice, and samadhi, > defined as the four jhanas ;-) > metta, stephen 17220 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 7:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hello Ken, >It's very difficult to discuss the Dhamma if we can't >agree on what the Dhamma is. Yes. (The suttas are a sectarian compilation that incorporate much abhihamma; at this point there as good as we have — the agamas being equal — but they can't be regarded as the original teaching. We simply have to pick our best interpretation.) Perhaps the difference between us is that I'm open to many views. >You reject those texts and I think you reject that the >eight Path factors are cetasikas; but perhaps you could >say where, in the remainder of the Tipitaka, it is stated >that they are "steps." Analyzing the khandha of sankhara as 52 cetasikas isn't very plausible or useful to me; if it works for you, great. Using the word "steps" was a poor choice in the context of my original post. I should have simply said that there are 8 factors to be practiced. However, if it's steps you'd like ;-) try MN.iii 72 to 78, the Mahacattarisaka Sutta. metta, stephen 17221 From: Star Kid Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:43am Subject: Reply to ????? Dear James: Thank you for the letter you sent me. I know I waswrong to call you adults "guys", but it was just a sense of humor! I had learnt a lot about Buddhism from your letter,and I think it is my turn to answer your question. Being like a child means that we got to think like a child. We would have to believe in God because you believe in him, and because he is the creator. Child's thoughts are clean and honest, and we have to be like this to go to heaven. Are the Buddhas optimistic? Do you have any more advice? (I thought it was funny that you were like me!!!) Please write back! Yours sincerely, Philip 17222 From: Star Kid Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:47am Subject: Reply to Kom Dear Kom: Thank you for writing. After reading your letter, I have learnt a lot more about Buddhism. But there are one or two things I still don't understand, and I hope you can help me: 1. You said that Buddhas also teach us bad things,like killing, stealing, lying, saying bad things......But Buddhas are Gods, surely they won't teach us to do those things!?? Thanks again for writing. If you have any questions about Christianity, don't hestitate to tell me. Yours sincerely, Philip 17223 From: Star Kid Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:49am Subject: Surprise! I'm Sandy Dear Kiana, I'm Sandy! Are you a Buddhist? Do you know anything about Buddhism? Life and death- What happens after death? Can you find the people who are reborn in the future? Please reply to me. Sandy 17224 From: abhidhammika Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:55am Subject: Buddhadhamma In The Buddha's Own Words Dear Dhamma friends How are you? The following is my reply to the facinating thread regarding Stephen's post "Is Buddhadhamma pessimistic?". Coincidently, I have recently translated Section 49, Catunipaata Paali, Anguttarakikaayo. The statements of the Buddha in that Section 49 seem to be describing what Buddhadhamma really is in the Buddha's own words. When I read these statements of the Buddha, they support the understanding of Brian and Jack while they seem to contradict the views of Stephen, James, Beth and Joyce (due to her Maya quote). But, no big deal! Appreciation of the Buddha's teachings is a slow, gradual and (often painful) process. Now, I also sound pessimistic as I wrote "(often painful) process". As there are Pali scholars and students on this list, I also included the original Pali passages so that they can perform "Syntax Walk- through" on my translations and trace Pali terms and their counterparts in English. Please view the following literal translation. -------------------------------------------- VIPALLAASA SUTTAM "Cattaarome, bhikkhave, saññaavipallaasaa cittavipallaasaa di.t.thivipallaasaa. katame cattaaro? anicce, bhikkhave, niccanti saññaavipallaaso cittavipallaaso di.t.thivipallaaso; dukkhe, bhikkhave, sukhanti saññaavipallaaso cittavipallaaso di.t.thivipallaaso; anattani, bhikkhave, attaati saññaavipallaaso cittavipallaaso di.t.thivipallaaso; asubhe, bhikkhave, subhanti saññaavipallaaso cittavipallaaso di.t.thivipallaaso. ime kho, bhikkhave, cattaaro saññaavipallaasaa cittavipallaasaa di.t.thivipallaasaa. "Cattaarome, bhikkhave, nasaññaavipallaasaa nacittavipallaasaa nadi.t.thivipallaasaa. katame cattaaro? anicce, bhikkhave, aniccanti nasaññaavipallaaso nacittavipallaaso nadi.t.thivipallaaso; dukkhe, bhikkhave, dukkhanti nasaññaavipallaaso nacittavipallaaso nadi.t.thivipallaaso; anattani, bhikkhave, anattaati nasaññaavipallaaso nacittavipallaaso nadi.t.thivipallaaso; asubhe, bhikkhave, asubhanti nasaññaavipallaaso nacittavipallaaso nadi.t.thivipallaaso. ime kho, bhikkhave, cattaaro nasaññaavipallaasaa nacittavipallaasaa nadi.t.thivipallaasaa"ti. ABERRATIONS Monks, these four are aberrations of memory, aberrations of consciousness and aberrations of view. What are the four? Monks, taking permanence in impermanence is aberration of memory, aberration of consciousness and aberration of view. Monks, taking pleasure in misery is aberration of memory, aberration of consciousness and aberration of view. Monks, taking self in selflessness is aberration of memory, aberration of consciousness and aberration of view. Monks, taking beauty in ugliness is aberration of memory, aberration of consciousness and aberration of view. Monks, these four are aberrations of memory, aberrations of consciousness and aberrations of view. Monks, these four are sanities of memory, sanities of consciousness and sanities of view. What are the four? Monks, taking impermanence in impermanence is sanity of memory, sanity of consciousness and sanity of view. Monks, taking misery in misery is sanity of memory, sanity of consciousness and sanity of view. Monks, taking selflessness in selflessness is sanity of memory, sanity of consciousness and sanity of view. Monks, taking ugliness in ugliness is sanity of memory, sanity of consciousness and sanity of view. Monks, these four are sanities of memory, sanities of consciousness and sanities of view. The above Suttam is Section 49, Catunipaata Pali, Anguttaranikaayo. According to the VIPALLAASA SUTTAM, the Buddha did not mince his words. He called any views aberrant that deviate from four characteristics of body and mind (misery, impermanence, selflessness, and ugliness). If you regard the Buddha's description of real phenomena as misery, impermanence, selflessness, and ugliness - as pessimism, then you may perhaps need a lot of Buddhist psychotherapy to rid yourselves of aberrations (VIPALLAASAA). With kind regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org 17225 From: Star Kid Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:57am Subject: Hi. Dear Jan, Hi, Jan. My name is Ki Yong Kim and I am thirteen years old. I was born in Seoul, Korea. I go to West Island School in Hong Kong. My hobbies are playing computer games and playing football. I am a home alone kid, because my mom lives in Korea with my elder brother who has to go to university next year. Wish him luck, hehe. I know your brother well. Kane... Our lesson is boring without him. Hehe I read your letter Jan. Its really surprising when someone you know dies unexpectedly. If someone dies by disease or they get too old, you can just think thats the way he/she had to go, but if someone died by terrorist attacks, its really hard to understand. I never had that kind of experience before, but I still know how you'd feel. Bali Bombing killed a lot of people and it made a lot of harms to people. I can't believe Mr. Wash-till was one of the victims. Some tourist guides quit their jobs and many shops near the tourism places were closed. This world is such a mess. I don't why people kill each other. I hope there will be peace soon. In your letter I learnt that you had your own religion and Buddhism people belives in reincarnation. I have a different opinion Jan. Because I am Catholic, I belive in heaven and the under world also known as hell. I hope Mr Wash-till is having a peaceful life in heaven. I have some questions about Buddhism Jan. I am just wandering when do you have to go to the temple? In Catholic we go to church Saturday or Sunday. Can every monks do Shaolin? They are cool. Hehe... Hm... I think I have no more questions. Please excuse me if there are grammar mistakes. I am not really good at English because I don't try(??). Have a good time, and you don't have to reply me if you can't. See ya. Sincerly, Ki Yong KIM _ 17226 From: ajahn_paul Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 4:02am Subject: Re: Hi. Hi Kim, After reading your letter, i would like to share something, my own story! ^^ i'd been a vegetarian for 11 yrs, i know its not easy for u to know what had happened 13yrs ago, but i will try to let u know anyway! ^_~ in June of 1989, many many ppl got killed in China, and i started to think,,, why? why so many ppl got killed at the same time? what caused them to die at the same time? Kamma? if yes, how can so many ppl were having the same situation???? on 3 july 1989, i started to be a vegetarian, and everyday after work, i just keep reading books. no movies, no tv-program, no sport, everything stopped. i kept spending my spare time like that for 2 yrs. during that period, i found out that there r 2 kinds of kamma, one is individual, another one is common. [there should be a special term, but sorry, i dont know! :p] For example, from the early morning when u woke up, u brush ur teeth, having ur breakfast, get change, then go to school. althought all ur school-mates r doing the same, but u may not getting up at the same time, not having the same breakfast, no using the same transpotation to go to school, thats what i called the individual kamma. Then, all of u sitting in the same class, thats what i called the kamma in common. im not sure if any of u can understand what im trying to say, but since we have so many good dhamma friends here, i know they will help me to explain that! hehehee --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > > Dear Jan, > > Hi, Jan. My name is Ki Yong Kim and I am thirteen > years old. I was born in Seoul, Korea. I go to West > Island School in Hong Kong. My hobbies are playing > computer games and playing football. I am a home alone > kid, because my mom lives in Korea with my elder > brother who has to go to university next year. Wish > him luck, hehe. I know your brother well. Kane... Our > lesson is boring without him. Hehe > > I read your letter Jan. Its really surprising when > someone you know dies unexpectedly. If someone dies by > disease or they get too old, you can just think thats > the way he/she had to go, but if someone died by > terrorist attacks, its really hard to understand. I > never had that kind of experience before, but I still > know how you'd feel. Bali Bombing killed a lot of > people and it made a lot of harms to people. I can't > believe Mr. Wash-till was one of the victims. Some > tourist guides quit their jobs and many shops near the > tourism places were closed. This world is such a mess. > I don't why people kill each other. I hope there will > be peace soon. > > In your letter I learnt that you had your own religion > and Buddhism people belives in reincarnation. I have a > different opinion Jan. Because I am Catholic, I belive > in heaven and the under world also known as hell. I > hope Mr Wash-till is having a peaceful life in heaven. > > I have some questions about Buddhism Jan. I am just > wandering when do you have to go to the temple? In > Catholic we go to church Saturday or Sunday. Can every > monks do Shaolin? They are cool. Hehe... Hm... I think > I have no more questions. > > Please excuse me if there are grammar mistakes. I am > not really good at English because I don't try(??). > Have a good time, and you don't have to reply me if > you can't. See ya. > > Sincerly, Ki Yong KIM 17227 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 5:46am Subject: RE: [dsg] Reply to Kom Dear Philip, > -----Original Message----- > From: Star Kid [mailto:starkidsclub@y...] > > > 1. You said that Buddhas also teach us bad things,like > killing, stealing, lying, saying bad things......But > Buddhas are Gods, surely they won't teach us to do > those things!?? That's very good, Philip. The Buddha teaches that doing bad things (bad kamma) bring bad results (results of kamma). Because of doing bad things, one might suffer lives in unhappy planes of existence, like being in hell, being a hungry ghost, being animals, or at the very least when being a human, suffers things that we don't like. A Buddha (according to my understanding) is not a god. He is a human who has accumulated wisdom and compassion for others for a very long period of time, over many lives. By knowing things that should be known (by wisdom), he has achieved true happiness, and by his compassion, he teaches what he knows so that other may also achieve true happiness as well. > > Thanks again for writing. If you have any questions > about Christianity, don't hestitate to tell me. Thanks for writing, and for the offer to explain about Christianity. I do not have any questions at the moment, and if I do, we will have to do this off-list. Many folks here are parts of this group to learn about what the Buddha teaches, so we don't normally discuss things that aren't related on the group. I hope you write again. kom 17228 From: James Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:04am Subject: Re: Buddhadhamma In The Buddha's Own Words --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "abhidhammika" wrote: > ABERRATIONS > > Monks, these four are aberrations of memory, aberrations of > consciousness and aberrations of view. What are the four? Monks, > taking permanence in impermanence is aberration of memory, aberration > of consciousness and aberration of view. Monks, taking pleasure in > misery is aberration of memory, aberration of consciousness and > aberration of view. Monks, taking self in selflessness is aberration > of memory, aberration of consciousness and aberration of view. Monks, > taking beauty in ugliness is aberration of memory, aberration of > consciousness and aberration of view. Monks, these four are > aberrations of memory, aberrations of consciousness and aberrations > of view. > > Monks, these four are sanities of memory, sanities of consciousness > and sanities of view. What are the four? Monks, taking impermanence > in impermanence is sanity of memory, sanity of consciousness and > sanity of view. Monks, taking misery in misery is sanity of memory, > sanity of consciousness and sanity of view. Monks, taking > selflessness in selflessness is sanity of memory, sanity of > consciousness and sanity of view. Monks, taking ugliness in ugliness > is sanity of memory, sanity of consciousness and sanity of view. > Monks, these four are sanities of memory, sanities of consciousness > and sanities of view. > > The above Suttam is Section 49, Catunipaata Pali, Anguttaranikaayo. > > > According to the VIPALLAASA SUTTAM, the Buddha did not mince his > words. He called any views aberrant that deviate from four > characteristics of body and mind (misery, impermanence, selflessness, > and ugliness). Dear Suan, How are you? With all due respect, I find your interpretation of this sutta lacking. Where is the Buddha saying that the four characteristics of body and mind are: misery, impermanence, selflessness, and ugliness? I don't see him saying that. I believe you have misunderstood his message. First, he is talking about aberrations of view, memory and consciousness, not "official" characteristics of mind and body. In other words, he is speaking about incorrect perception in regards to the mundane and the transcendent. Allow me to use an analogy to explain how I interpret this sutta: Let's say you are standing in front of a fun house mirror that radically distorts your image. Some people (the majority) will look at that image and think, "That is me." These are the people who take permanence for impermanence, pleasure for misery, etc. And a few wise people will look into the mirror and know, "That is not me." They are the ones who take impermanence for impermanence, misery for misery, selflessness for selflessness, etc. But, and this is the important thing, the 'you' being reflected, your Buddha Nature, is not the image in the mirror. Rejecting the fun house mirror of distorted view, consciousness, and memory isn't pessimistic...it is liberating and joyful. This is my interpretation and I could be mistaken while you are correct. Importantly, my interpretation and optimist outlook works for me...that's all that matters. Take care. Metta, James > > If you regard the Buddha's description of real phenomena as misery, > impermanence, selflessness, and ugliness - as pessimism, then you may > perhaps need a lot of Buddhist psychotherapy to rid yourselves of > aberrations (VIPALLAASAA). > > > With kind regards, > > Suan Lu Zaw > > http://www.bodhiology.org 17229 From: nidive Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:40am Subject: Re: 3Fear of Rupas Hi James, Oh well whatever... I know that I am 'correct' and you know that you are 'correct'. For personal reasons, I know I am 'correct' that contemplation of rupas will lead to insight in conjunction with contemplation of nama. For personal reasons, I know that it is possible to know rupas as rupas are and namas as namas are. I don't take the view that rupas are to be disregarded since they can't be known exactly as they are (simply because I know that rupas can be known exactly as they are). With metta, NEO Swee Boon 17230 From: James Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:58am Subject: Re: Reply to ????? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > > Dear James: > > Thank you for the letter you sent me. I know I > waswrong to call you adults "guys", but it was just a > sense of humor! > > I had learnt a lot about Buddhism from your letter,and > I think it is my turn to answer your question. Being > like a child means that we got to think like a child. > We would have to believe in God because you believe in > him, and because he is the creator. Child's thoughts > are clean and honest, and we have to be like this to > go to heaven. > > Are the Buddhas optimistic? > > Do you have any more advice? (I thought it was funny > that you were like me!!!) > > Please write back! > > Yours sincerely, > > Philip Hi Star Kid Philip! Thank you for the apology and admitting you went too far with your `sense of humor'. Yes, you and I are very similar. I also often go too far with my sense of humor. Will either of us be able to completely stop doing that? Should we? My answer to both questions is: no. Some things can't be completely changed. What we both need to do is to apologize freely and frequently. I am glad you have learned this already. I have business cards with "I'm sorry" printed on them that I often give out. Makes the process quicker! :-) Just kidding! Thank you for your answer about Christianity. I agree with you. We all must try to keep our thoughts `clean and honest'. It is funny that you ask about the optimism of Buddhas because I have had some discussion about that recently on the Internet. Philip, I believe you will get different answers depending on whom you ask and how they interpret the meaning of the word `optimist'. I believe that many misinterpret that word and think it means something that it doesn't mean. `Optimist' means someone who is hopeful, enthusiastic, and dedicated; but many people seem to think that `Optimist' means someone who is deliriously happy, silly, and foolhardy. With my interpretation of the word, I would have to say that I think any Buddha is 100% an Optimist. People view Buddhism, just as they view life, in different ways depending on their personalities. Are you familiar with the `Winnie The Pooh' stories? Well, in those stories you will see how the different animals represent different types of people in the world. Eeroy the donkey is a pessimist, Tigger is a happy-go-lucky fool, The Owl is an intellectual, Piglet is a paranoid, Kinga is motherly, and Winnie the Pooh is an optimist. I think Winnie the Pooh is the most like a Buddha. Winnie the Pooh always tries to help others, he doesn't judge, he doesn't do too much or too little, he knows and accepts his limitations, when he is tired he sleeps and when he is hungry he eats, and he has hope and the knowledge that everything will turn out just fine (even when it appears that things won't.) We should all try to be as much like Winnie the Pooh as possible. The only advice I can give you Philip is to do your best in school; try to understand where other people are coming from; and MOST IMPORTANTLY, don't let anyone tell you that you are not a good person and you should be someone else. Each star in the universe shines in a different way. You just keep shining Star Kid!! Love, James 17231 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 8:15am Subject: Re: Free Will (again) Robert, You are seeing yourself as nama-rupa. And since nama-rupa is conditioned, you conclude that there is no control. Seeing oneself as nama-rupa is a self-view, and the view "there is no control" is derived from the self-view of seeing oneself as nama-rupa. Metta, Victor > so is worth another look: > > Someone wrote to me a while back who > feels that no control is a dangerous idea.They wanted to stress > control and volitional intention > which is what they believe that Buddha really taught > and they feel uncontrollabilty to be a pernicious > belief leading to apathy. > > "I have a choice whether to get angry in the present > moment." the writer said."this is new kamma". > > I replied: > Yes, the processes of cittas during anger are new > kamma. However, they are > also conditioned. The Patthana, the last and most > important book of the > Abhidhamma, goes into enormous detail about the 24 > paccaya (conditions). > Some of which are past and some present. But even the > present ones do not > simply arise out of nothing. Nor do they arise because > "I" want them to. The > processes of mind are happening at enormous speed and > there is no "person" > who can do anything to stop them or change them. Even > the cittas that are > arising at this moment are conditioned by previous > cittas as well as well as > by other conditions that are present at the same time. > > They further wrote that "we are not just > helpless automata acting out our old kamma - that is > absurd. > I hope the above helps overcome the despair that comes > from the belief that we are a slave to our > conditioning." > > I said "This sounds like the debates that western > Philosophy used to have (and still > does) about Free-will versus Determinism. > The Buddha's analysis of the world is neither, it is > the middle path. Thus > the statement about "we being helpless automata acting > out our old kamma" > misses the point. There is no "we" to be anything. And > kamma is not the only > condition. > Hearing the teachings of Buddhism - especially the > deep teachings on anatta, > are a condition for understanding. This understanding > leads to energy: > energy to hear more, and energy to carry on with the > study and practice of > vipassana. . And if > understanding grows then there > will be detachment from the idea of self and of > control. Then there is no > more despair about the path - because "I" have been > taken out of the > equation. The "I" that we love so much, the "I" that > we want to be happy, > get enlightened , whatever. Then, as the > Visuddhimagga says, > 'there is a path but no one on the path'." > > This round of births and deaths is beginningless. However, it is > not random in any sense. Because of conditions birth occurs in > one plane and because of different conditions birth occurs in > another plane. Panna (wisdom) is a conditioned phenomena and it > is itself conditioned. > What are the conditions for panna to develop : hearing the > Dhamma, considering it, applying it and also accumulations of > merit from the infinite past (pubekata punnata). Why are we so > interested in Dhamma? Why isn't the leader of the Taliban > interested; surely he makes effort, surely he has the intention > to do what is best? Why do some people hear Dhamma but find it > unappealing while others can't get enough even after hearing it > just once? Why are some initially not interested and then later > they get interested and surpass in understanding those who > studied much longer? It is clear that there must be reasons for > all this; and the Dhamma explains it all. > > You wrote "that's where i get stuck...if all dhammas except > nibbana > > are > > conditioned (i'm going on saddha with this, of course), then > > thinking one > > can develop anything seems like an exercise in > > micchaditthi.... > > _________________ > Good point. I think it depends on the thinking. If we have the > idea of "I can do it", then we are likely to be caught in self > view. Or we think we can manufacture sati by effort or good > intention - self. But there can be wisdom - not us- that sees > the danger in samasara and thus there is naturally effort that > arises with that understanding. It is subtle: often we slip into > self view; either towards the freewill end of the continuum or > towrds the fatalistic end that thinks nothing can be done. > > ____________________________ > > > > > can the path be developed? or do we just leave it up to (for > > lack of a > > better f-word) "fate"? "" > __________________ > Fate implies a preordained outcome. In that case whether we did > this that or the other nothing would make a thread of > difference. We could go out and kill and pillage and nothing > would have any effect and we would all get enlightened or not > get enlightened depending on our "fate". This is not what the > Buddha taught. He explained in detail many different conditions. > It is true that some are past conditions but there are also > present ones thus it is not fatalism. Both the idea of fatalism > and the idea of freewill are bound up in self view - a self who > can control and a self who can't. The Dhamma is the middle way > and is neither. > Robert 17232 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 8:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Free Will (again) Hi Kom, I think you are confusing conditionality with uncontrollability. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Rob, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: robmoult [mailto:rob.moult@j...] > > > > I then raised the question of the role of meditation. After some > > discussion, Jon asked me what my current mental states were. I > > replied, "Confusion and restlessness". I then continued on thinking > > aloud, "But confusion and restlessness are not vipaka. These are > > javana. I did not choose to be confused. I did not choose to be > > restless. These states arose naturally because of conditions, not > > because of free will and choice." > > > > I feel that I am now at the edge of a cliff. It seems clear to me > > now that there is no "choice" in the thought process. However, if I > > say that all is pre-determined because there is no choice, then I > > take away any sense of ethical responsibility and all that I have to > > do is to "stay on the roller-coaster ride until the end". > > > > Rob K (or others), can you help pull me back from the edge of the > > abyss? > > That sounds like a pretty good example (to me) that, because of those > conditions, this happens. All realities, including confusion, restlessness, > and thoughts are conditioned by other realities (and non- realities). If you > study patthana, then you can see that the conditioning of a reality is very > complexed: it has too many variables that point to uncontrollability. > > Panna and fears also condition. By listening to the Buddha teachings, we > begin to know it for ourselves, at all sort of levels, what's good and > what's bad, and the causes and effects of things. Would you "choose" to do > something if you think it isn't useful? When panna knows that kusala states > are useful (and necessary to reach nibbana), then one begins to follow the > path that is wholesome. When panna knows that akusala states are ugly, have > many faults, then one avoids (or some of the time!!!) the path that is > unwholesome. > > Panna has many different conditions: what has been accumulated in the past, > the suitability of this life to accumulate panna, being associated with a > wise person, listening to the true dhamma, skillful attention, etc. When > panna leads, many different kusala states follow, but all because of > conditions, not us, not you, and not me. > > kom 17233 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 4:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/26/02 10:22:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > Yes, the processes of cittas during anger are new > kamma. However, they are > also conditioned. The Patthana, the last and most > important book of the > Abhidhamma, goes into enormous detail about the 24 > paccaya (conditions). > Some of which are past and some present. But even the > present ones do not > simply arise out of nothing. Nor do they arise because > "I" want them to. > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, there is no "I" to do *anything*. However, there *does* arise wanting, and wanting, in turn, conditions other activity. To the extent that wanting/willing is a condition for dhammas to arise there is what is misinterpreted as a self exerting control. ---------------------------------------------------- The> > processes of mind are happening at enormous speed and > there is no "person" > who can do anything to stop them or change them. Even > the cittas that are > arising at this moment are conditioned by previous > cittas as well as well as > by other conditions that are present at the same time. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: There's that speed business again! ;-)) How did it add to the point of impersonality? ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17234 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 9:37am Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi Howard, There is no "I" to do "anything"? Did you write a post to DSG today? Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 11/26/02 10:22:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, > rjkjp1@y... writes: > > > Yes, the processes of cittas during anger are new > > kamma. However, they are > > also conditioned. The Patthana, the last and most > > important book of the > > Abhidhamma, goes into enormous detail about the 24 > > paccaya (conditions). > > Some of which are past and some present. But even the > > present ones do not > > simply arise out of nothing. Nor do they arise because > > "I" want them to. > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Well, there is no "I" to do *anything*. However, there *does* arise > wanting, and wanting, in turn, conditions other activity. To the extent that > wanting/willing is a condition for dhammas to arise there is what is > misinterpreted as a self exerting control. > ---------------------------------------------------- > The> > > processes of mind are happening at enormous speed and > > there is no "person" > > who can do anything to stop them or change them. Even > > the cittas that are > > arising at this moment are conditioned by previous > > cittas as well as well as > > by other conditions that are present at the same time. > > > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > There's that speed business again! ;-)) How did it add to the point of > impersonality? > ========================== > With metta, > Howard 17235 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 5:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi, Victor - In a message dated 11/27/02 12:39:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > There is no "I" to do "anything"? Did you write a post to DSG today? > > Metta, > Victor > > ======================= That's a loaded question, Victor! ;-)) Conventionally speaking, of course I do things, and writing a post today was one of them. Conventionally speaking there are also such things as troubles and efforts and capacities. But I've never literally seen any of them. Victor, there are (at least) two ways to talk about things. Our ordinary speech is a mix of these two modes, literal and conventional. This is just fine so long as the mix doesn't take us in. The example of such conflation that I like is that of someone asking a farmer whether a sprout has the capacity to grow to a plant; when the farmer answers in the affirmative, the next question is where in the sprout can one find the capacity! The farmer, of course, looks at the questioner as if he were out of his mind - which he would be if he thought that speaking of capacities was to speak of "things". Conventional speech is *perfectly* useful, meaningful, and correct so long as it isn't conflated with literal speech. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17236 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 11:14am Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi Howard, How should one understand what you mean by "there is no 'I' to do 'anything'", if there is anyone to understand it at all? Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Victor - > > In a message dated 11/27/02 12:39:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, > yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > > Hi Howard, > > > > There is no "I" to do "anything"? Did you write a post to DSG today? > > > > Metta, > > Victor > > > > > ======================= > That's a loaded question, Victor! ;-)) > Conventionally speaking, of course I do things, and writing a post > today was one of them. Conventionally speaking there are also such things as > troubles and efforts and capacities. But I've never literally seen any of > them. Victor, there are (at least) two ways to talk about things. Our > ordinary speech is a mix of these two modes, literal and conventional. This > is just fine so long as the mix doesn't take us in. The example of such > conflation that I like is that of someone asking a farmer whether a sprout > has the capacity to grow to a plant; when the farmer answers in the > affirmative, the next question is where in the sprout can one find the > capacity! The farmer, of course, looks at the questioner as if he were out of > his mind - which he would be if he thought that speaking of capacities was to > speak of "things". Conventional speech is *perfectly* useful, meaningful, and > correct so long as it isn't conflated with literal speech. > > With metta, > Howard 17237 From: robmoult Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:12pm Subject: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Howard: > Yes, I know that you "know" there is no self. I "know" that too. But > do we KNOW it??? > -------------------------------------------------- Excellent point! Three days ago, I "knew" that there was no self and could argue the point from an academic perspective; "No self in any of the five aggregates, no self in conditions, therfore no self at all." Three days ago, I was trying to reconcile the idea of no-self with "free will". I clung to the concept of "free will" because I felt that "free will" was necessary as a foundation of responsibility, accountability and ethics. Two days ago, when Jon asked me (when discussing another issue) about my current mental state, I answered, "confusion and restlessness". This triggered one of those "ah-ha" moments and I realized that these states did not arise because of "free will" but could only have arisen because of conditions. This led me to understand that there could not be "free will", that there could not be a self in the thought process. I went from "I know that there is no self" to "I Know that there is no self". I went one step closer to "I KNOW that there is no self". Rather than taking an academic position on the issue, I could now argue with strong conviction and confidence that there could not be a self. I feel that this was one step towards an understanding of anatta. With "free will" in the dustbin (I will also be taking it out of my Class Notes), I was now stuck with the red hot ball of pre-destiny in my throat. Again, I felt that pre-destiny undermined the concepts of responsibility, accountability and ethics. I have now realized that responsibility and accountability lose their relevance if there is no self. I have no realized that, without a self, ethics becomes a sterile classification method (good or bad), nothing more. Moving from "I know that there is no self" to "I Know that there is no self" has allowed me to lessen my attachment to concepts of responsibility, accountability and ethics. Howard, you likened my dilemma to a koan. My first practice was Zen. I remembered the koan "does a dog have a Buddha-nature" and my answer of "it doesn't matter". With reduced clinging to responsibility, accountability and ethics, I can now swallow the ball of pre-destiny and wash it down with a helping of "it doesn't matter"; pre-destiny doesn't matter because it is beyond my ability to understand the workings of kamma. I now look around and start to see how ubiquitous and insidious this self-view is; it distorts almost everything. Perhaps with further reflection, I will be able to take the next step up to "I KNow that there there is no self". I now have the rather mundane concern of, "How am I going to explain this to my class?" I will probably just take a shot at it and go through the logic a first time. This will undoubtedly condition a lot of confusion and restlessness. I will then grasp the moment to ask them the source of their own confusion and restlessness. It helped me (thanks Jon, for being a condition :-) ), perhaps it will help some of them. I also want to thank all of you who have become engaged in this discussion (especially you, Howard) for helping me along. I really hope that I can return the wonderful favour some day. Lots of Metta, Rob M :-) 17238 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:20pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Robert, I am afraid that you are being misled, that you are not anywhere close to understanding what the Buddha taught on "anatta". Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Howard, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > Howard: > > Yes, I know that you "know" there is no self. I "know" that > too. But > > do we KNOW it??? > > -------------------------------------------------- > > Excellent point! > > Three days ago, I "knew" that there was no self and could argue the > point from an academic perspective; "No self in any of the five > aggregates, no self in conditions, therfore no self at all." > > Three days ago, I was trying to reconcile the idea of no-self > with "free will". I clung to the concept of "free will" because I > felt that "free will" was necessary as a foundation of > responsibility, accountability and ethics. > > Two days ago, when Jon asked me (when discussing another issue) > about my current mental state, I answered, "confusion and > restlessness". This triggered one of those "ah-ha" moments and I > realized that these states did not arise because of "free will" but > could only have arisen because of conditions. This led me to > understand that there could not be "free will", that there could not > be a self in the thought process. I went from "I know that there is > no self" to "I Know that there is no self". I went one step closer > to "I KNOW that there is no self". Rather than taking an academic > position on the issue, I could now argue with strong conviction and > confidence that there could not be a self. I feel that this was one > step towards an understanding of anatta. > > With "free will" in the dustbin (I will also be taking it out of my > Class Notes), I was now stuck with the red hot ball of pre-destiny > in my throat. Again, I felt that pre-destiny undermined the concepts > of responsibility, accountability and ethics. > > I have now realized that responsibility and accountability lose > their relevance if there is no self. I have no realized that, > without a self, ethics becomes a sterile classification method (good > or bad), nothing more. Moving from "I know that there is no self" > to "I Know that there is no self" has allowed me to lessen my > attachment to concepts of responsibility, accountability and ethics. > > Howard, you likened my dilemma to a koan. My first practice was Zen. > I remembered the koan "does a dog have a Buddha-nature" and my > answer of "it doesn't matter". With reduced clinging to > responsibility, accountability and ethics, I can now swallow the > ball of pre-destiny and wash it down with a helping of "it doesn't > matter"; pre-destiny doesn't matter because it is beyond my ability > to understand the workings of kamma. > > I now look around and start to see how ubiquitous and insidious this > self-view is; it distorts almost everything. Perhaps with further > reflection, I will be able to take the next step up to "I KNow that > there there is no self". > > I now have the rather mundane concern of, "How am I going to explain > this to my class?" I will probably just take a shot at it and go > through the logic a first time. This will undoubtedly condition a > lot of confusion and restlessness. I will then grasp the moment to > ask them the source of their own confusion and restlessness. It > helped me (thanks Jon, for being a condition :-) ), perhaps it will > help some of them. > > I also want to thank all of you who have become engaged in this > discussion (especially you, Howard) for helping me along. I really > hope that I can return the wonderful favour some day. > > Lots of Metta, > Rob M :-) 17239 From: robmoult Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:32pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Victor, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > I am afraid that you are being misled, that you are not anywhere > close to understanding what the Buddha taught on "anatta". I agree that I am not anywhere close to understanding what the Buddha taught on "anatta". Please help me see that I am being misled. Metta, Rob M :-) 17240 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 2:17pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Robert, Robert, every action of yours will have a consequence, and whether you like it or not, you and only you are accountable for it. If one commited murder, he or she will always suffer its consequence. You are not going anywhere by moving from "I know that there is no self" to "I Know that there is no self". The idea that one is not responsible and accountable for his or her actions and consequences is a wishful, immature thinking. It leads to harm to self and to others. Regarding your concern, I would suggest that you don't mislead your class with your current understanding. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > > I am afraid that you are being misled, that you are not anywhere > > close to understanding what the Buddha taught on "anatta". > > I agree that I am not anywhere close to understanding what the > Buddha taught on "anatta". > > Please help me see that I am being misled. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17241 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 2:30pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Free Will (again) Dear Victor, I appreciate the response, although I disagree. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: yu_zhonghao [mailto:yu_zhonghao@y...] > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 8:25 AM > Subject: Re: [dsg] Free Will (again) > > > Hi Kom, > > I think you are confusing conditionality with uncontrollability. > > Metta, > Victor > 17242 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 2:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhadhamma In The Buddha's Own Words Hi Suan, Thanks for this translation. I was having trouble understanding the difference between sanna, citta, and ditthi, so I did some searching and found an article by Ledi Sayadaw in which he said these were like three degrees of deception by an ordinary person, a magician, and a demon, respectively. So I guess that means each of the four vipallasa has three levels of depth. Correct? Do you know where this simile came from? Ledi Sayadaw, or his translator, renders "citta" as "thought", so it seems to me that we should understand "ditthi" as something like "deep seated belief". Here is an interesting snippet I have a question on: "In this world all our mistaken ideas as to what comes within the field of our observation, are due to the action of the hallucination of thought which is deeper and more unfathomable than that of the perception, since it deludes us by making false things seem true. However, as it is not so firmly rooted as the latter, it can easily be removed by investigation or by searching into the causes and conditions of things." L: Do you, or anyone, know if there is a similar succinct 'fix' to sanna and ditthi vipallasa? Is "citta" the weakest link? How are sanna and ditthi eradicated? Obviously the 4 satipatthanas correspond to the 4 vipallasas but I was wondering if there were special instructions related to sanna and ditthi. What is meant by "sanna" and "ditthi" if "citta" is "thought"? thanks, Larry "Manual of Insight" by Ledi Sayadaw http://www.ubakhin.com/ledi/MANUAL01.html 17243 From: robmoult Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 2:52pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Victor, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Robert, every action of yours will have a consequence, and whether > you like it or not, you and only you are accountable for it. If one > commited murder, he or she will always suffer its consequence. > > You are not going anywhere by moving from "I know that there is no > self" to "I Know that there is no self". The idea that one is not > responsible and accountable for his or her actions and consequences > is a wishful, immature thinking. It leads to harm to self and to > others. > > Regarding your concern, I would suggest that you don't mislead your > class with your current understanding. > I see your line of reasoning. The way that I see it, starting with the conventional concepts of "responsibility" and "accountability" and deducting the concept of self, leaves behind the natural law of kamma. In other words, the appreciation of the law of kamma is strengthened, not weakened, by the elimination of the self-view. Above, you wrote, "The idea that one is not responsible and accountable for his or her actions and consequences is a wishful, immature thinking. It leads to harm to self and to others." I see a lot of "self-view" in these statements. How would these statements be re-written without any reference to self? I am now having second thoughts about presenting this idea to my class. There are many in my class with an extraordinarly strong attachment to self-view and they could easily misinterpret what I was saying as a denial of the law of kamma rather than a reinforcement of the law of kamma. To use Howard's imagery, I want to move from "know" to "KNOW". As mentioned below, I feel that I have taken a first step and perhaps I can capitalize the first letter; I have moved to "Know". I notice that the remaining letters to be capitalized spell out another word, "now". Somehow I feel that there is something symbolic in this, but I can't quite put my finger on it. Maybe this is pointing to the fact that there is nothing but the now to know. Comments? Metta, Rob M :-) 17244 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 3:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta No now Rob. I think you have gone from know to gnough. The first concept to get the ax is progress. Larry :)) 17245 From: robmoult Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 3:21pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > No now Rob. I think you have gone from know to gnough. The first concept > to get the ax is progress. > > Larry :)) Here is one way of visualizing my path "progressing": - know: taking the self out of the 5 aggregates / conditions - now: taking the self out of the thought process / perception - no: taking the self out of the understanding of kamma - o: taking the self out of the concept of progress - : understanding anatta Comments? Metta, Rob M :-) 17246 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 3:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi, Victor - In a message dated 11/27/2002 2:14:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > How should one understand what you mean by "there is no 'I' > to > do 'anything'", if there is anyone to understand it at all? > > Metta, > Victor ======================= Victor, I'd like you to know that my grandmother would have exclaimed "Oy, vey!!" ;-)) Understanding occurs, Victor. That's it. An event occurs. With metta, Howard 17247 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 4:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Rob, It occured to me that this "knowing" question probably has something to do with the three levels (?) of vipallasa: sanna, citta, & ditthi. Do you know anything about this? Larry ps: also there is the Path of Purification formula which includes various insight knowledges I know nothing about; but Purification of View is understanding of nama and rupa and concomitant (I think) with understanding (realizing ?) anatta. 17248 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:55pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Robert, I don't think you really understand what a self-view is. Reference to self in a statement does not necessarily imply self-view. Likewise, statements without reference to self does not necessarily imply it is free of self-view. Instead of teaching your class Abhidhamma, why not teach your class the verses in Dhammapada 12? I think they will benefit more from your teaching if you teach them those verses. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > > Robert, every action of yours will have a consequence, and whether > > you like it or not, you and only you are accountable for it. If > one > > commited murder, he or she will always suffer its consequence. > > > > You are not going anywhere by moving from "I know that there is no > > self" to "I Know that there is no self". The idea that one is not > > responsible and accountable for his or her actions and > consequences > > is a wishful, immature thinking. It leads to harm to self and to > > others. > > > > Regarding your concern, I would suggest that you don't mislead > your > > class with your current understanding. > > > > I see your line of reasoning. > > The way that I see it, starting with the conventional concepts > of "responsibility" and "accountability" and deducting the concept > of self, leaves behind the natural law of kamma. In other words, the > appreciation of the law of kamma is strengthened, not weakened, by > the elimination of the self-view. > > Above, you wrote, "The idea that one is not responsible and > accountable for his or her actions and consequences is a wishful, > immature thinking. It leads to harm to self and to others." I see a > lot of "self-view" in these statements. How would these statements > be re-written without any reference to self? > > I am now having second thoughts about presenting this idea to my > class. There are many in my class with an extraordinarly strong > attachment to self-view and they could easily misinterpret what I > was saying as a denial of the law of kamma rather than a > reinforcement of the law of kamma. > > To use Howard's imagery, I want to move from "know" to "KNOW". As > mentioned below, I feel that I have taken a first step and perhaps I > can capitalize the first letter; I have moved to "Know". > > I notice that the remaining letters to be capitalized spell out > another word, "now". > > Somehow I feel that there is something symbolic in this, but I can't > quite put my finger on it. > > Maybe this is pointing to the fact that there is nothing but the now > to know. > > Comments? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17249 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 7:22pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta --- Dear RobM, Thanks so much for showing us your contemplations over the last few days. As you see increasing acceptance of anatta and conditionality doesn't suddenly lead to wanton behaviour. In fact because kamma is one of the main conditions it has to be understood- to the degree that this is possible- and understanding kamma properly strenghtens understanding of anatta, while also refining the understanding of what sila really is. Mike made some comments a while back :"This is such a fine and crucial point. I think that it's relatively easy to embrace anatta on a conceptual level, because, with a little understanding, it's easy to see how much unhappiness springs from the illusion of self (among other reasons). So we can reject atta out of plain old dosa... The idea of 'freedom'--meaning 'freedom of choice'--is MUCH harder to relinquish--especially (ironically) among those of us for whom 'liberation' is the central issue. I think this line of thinking usually goes something like this: "If 'I' can't choose patipada over pariyatti, or pariyatti over panyatti, If 'I' can't choose vipassana- over samatha-bhavana, If 'I' can't choose to investigate dhammas rather than to ignore them, to hear buddhadhamma rather than not to hear it, If 'I' can't choose to think, speak and act* in a wholesome way, then 'I' can never cultivate the eightfold path and attain liberation. So, 'I' don't mind giving up the idea of self, just so long as 'I'm' allowed to choose to do so (and receive the credit)...! Whether pariyatti or patipada or panyatti arises, whether samatha or vipassana bhavana is cultivated, whether dhammas are investigated or not, or buddhadhamma listened to or ignored, even whether kusala or akusala kamma is committed, NO ONE IS THERE in the arising, or the cultivation, or the investigation, listening, ignoring, thinking, speaking or acting. If there is no chooser, how can there be, or have been, a choice? Just wisdom or ignorance, in any possible situation, tipping the scale one way or the other depending on how much of each has accumulated. So it really doesn't make much sense to argue about whether we'll meditate or not, or study abhidhamma or not, or contemplate our breath rather than aggregates or bases or elements. 'We' will do what conditions, internal and external, allow us to do, and not otherwise--ever. If sufficient wisdom has accumulated for us to think, say and do intelligent things, and not to think, say or do stupid things, that's just wisdom at work--not 'us'."" Mike Robert I went one step closer > to "I KNOW that there is no self". Rather than taking an academic > position on the issue, I could now argue with strong conviction and > confidence that there could not be a self. I feel that this was one > step towards an understanding of anatta. > > With "free will" in the dustbin (I will also be taking it out of my > Class Notes), I was now stuck with the red hot ball of pre-destiny > in my throat. Again, I felt that pre-destiny undermined the concepts > of responsibility, accountability and ethics. > > I have now realized that responsibility and accountability lose > their relevance if there is no self. I have no realized that, > without a self, ethics becomes a sterile classification method (good > or bad), nothing more. Moving from "I know that there is no self" > to "I Know that there is no self" has allowed me to lessen my > attachment to concepts of responsibility, accountability and ethics. > >> I now look around and start to see how ubiquitous and insidious this > self-view is; it distorts almost everything. Perhaps with further > reflection, I will be able to take the next step up to "I KNow that > there there is no self". > > 17250 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 2:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi, Victor - Well, I guess that settles that!! ;-)) With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/27/02 4:22:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > Hi Robert, > > I am afraid that you are being misled, that you are not anywhere > close to understanding what the Buddha taught on "anatta". > > Metta, > Victor > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17251 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 2:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi, Rob - In a message dated 11/27/02 6:25:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Larry, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > >No now Rob. I think you have gone from know to gnough. The first > concept > >to get the ax is progress. > > > >Larry :)) > > Here is one way of visualizing my path "progressing": > - know: taking the self out of the 5 aggregates / conditions > - now: taking the self out of the thought process / perception > - no: taking the self out of the understanding of kamma > - o: taking the self out of the concept of progress > - : understanding anatta > > Comments? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > ============================ I'm not sure that trying to gauge one's "progress" is a very useful activity. Until we really know what's going on we'd probably be mistaken anyway! ;-) Thinking over things is definitely useful, but is only a little piece of the practice. Lots of guarding the senses - as consistently as posssible, regular formal meditation, and ongoing mindfulness, all carried out in a manner as consistent with the Buddha's teaching as possible, constitute the core of the practice as I see it. And we should try to engage in this with as little anticipation or expectation of "progress" as possible, for that is just a craving-trap. No doubt others here will se this matter quite differently from me, but this is my take on it. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17252 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 8:02pm Subject: Re: 2Getting closer to Anatta --- Dear RobM and all, As you have noted one of dilemmas that occur (Wendy brought this up too) when learning about anatta is that of choice and decisions and ethics. Jon wrote this letter to a friend back in 1976 Dear Friends, '......I got the impression you may be worried about making the right decision, or doing the right thing. In fact, of course, there is no 'right' decision or thing to do, nor in any absolute sense is there a 'better' decision or thing to do. Decisions are made according to our accumulations. We can, however, appreciate the importance of having kusala citta at any moment and of developing sati at any moment. Worry is akusala, so is fear, regret and all shades of uncertainty and unease. No doubt you have in mind that you would like to be sure that what you do will be the best for your study and practice of Dhamma (as well as suiting/satisfying other less noble purposes). But how do you know what circumstances may eventuate? How can you make that situation happen? We cannot foresee the long-term course of events that our past kamma will condition as result. In fact we cannot even know the more immediate plans that our kamma has for us. In ignorance we wonder about what will be the result if...? Not realizing that next month's or next year's vipaka is the result of action already performed, not the result of today's decisions. We forget the importance of developing understanding of the realities of the present moment. How valuable it is to have just a moment of sati, to see just for a moment a little more clearly one of the realities of this moment. Do you remember the sutta when the Buddha talks about a fingersnap of awareness? We spend a lot of time wondering about what we should be doing, or thinking about what we would like to do, or worrying about what we are not doing, but we have no understanding of what is actually happening at the present moment....seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and a lot of mind-door activity. The decisions we make are just another moment of thinking, conditioned by our accumulations to do many other things too. Then we may act, but this is quite another moment, with a different moment of intention, and different realities appearing.' (end quote) 17253 From: robmoult Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 8:25pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > It occured to me that this "knowing" question probably has something to > do with the three levels (?) of vipallasa: sanna, citta, & ditthi. Do > you know anything about this? > My understanding is that the Suttas talk of two types of knowledge (can't remember the reference); mundane knowledge and bright knowledge. Mundane knowledge is intellectual understanding and bright knowledge comes from direct experience. As an analogy, if I am standing by the side of the river wondering if I could jump across and I see another person accomplish the task, I have mundane knowledge that it can be done. Once I have jumped over the stream myself, I can look back with bright knowledge that it can be done. I believe that vipallasa has to do with "perversions" or "distortions" that are uprooted (not merely surpressed) by attainment of maggas. The difference between uprooting and supressing is important. Imagine a pot of boiling water. Forcing a lid on the pot will supress the steam being produced. Turning off the steam (no more conditions for the steam to arise) is analgous to uprooting. If an akusala accumulation is supressed, it can continue to exist as a latent defilement; it is always possible that it can arise in the future. Attaining a magga allows the uprooting of defilements so that they can never arise again. The four vipallasa are: - To regard what is impermanent as permanent (anicca) - To regard what is unsatisfactory as hapiness-producing (dukkha) - To regard what is without a self as a self (anatta) - To regard what is unpure as beautiful (akusala / kusala) They talk of four "types" of vipallasa (citta / sanna / ditthi). I'm not sure if "level" is the best term, but I am also not sure that "types" is a better term. For this discussion, let's call them C-type, S-type and D-type. The first magga (becoming a sotapanna) uproots: - To regard what is impermanent as permanent (anicca) [C-type, S- type and D-type] - To regard what is unsatisfactory as hapiness-producing (dukkha) [D- type only] - To regard what is without a self as a self (anatta) [C-type, S- type and D-type] - To regard what is unpure as beautiful (akusala / kusala) [D-type only] The third magga (becoming an anagami) uproots: - To regard what is unsatisfactory as hapiness-producing (dukkha) [C- type and S-type] The fourth magga (becoming an arahant) uproots: - To regard what is unpure as beautiful (akusala / kusala) [C-type and S-type] The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 3-5) explains the difference between sanna, citta and panna by way of a simile. Sanna is like the mere perception of a coin by a child who does not know its value. Citta is like the villager who knows its value. Panna is like the money- changer who penetrates its true characteristics. This simile uses panna because it is from a kusala perspective. Vipallasa are akusala, so therefore it is probably valid to substitute ditthi (which is usually taken taken to mean "wrong view" unless written as samma-ditthi) for sanna. Does this help? Metta, Rob M :-) 17254 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 7:39pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > ---------------------------------------------------- > The> > > processes of mind are happening at enormous speed and > > there is no "person" > > who can do anything to stop them or change them. Even > > the cittas that are > > arising at this moment are conditioned by previous > > cittas as well as well as > > by other conditions that are present at the same time. > > > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > There's that speed business again! ;-)) How did it add to the point of > impersonality? > ========================== >Dear Howard, The three characteristics are related to each other in various ways. With regard to aniccum (impermanence) this is far deeper than the impermance that everyone witnesses in daily life. The anicca of the tilakkhana is the rise and fall of nama and rupa and that is happening so fast. You see we think it is the same me that decided to walk over to get a glass of water. But even while that thought (to have a drink)was in its incipient stage, just some slight urge building, countless number of cittas have arisen and fallen away. All of these are conditioned. How could any of them be controlled . To relate this to anatta this is one of my favourite quotes: The burmese Abhidhamma teacher Thein Nyun in his preface to the DhatuKathu (Pali Text Society) xxvii writes about this: "Because the functions of the elements give rise to the concepts of continuity, collection and form, the ideas arise: 1)the initial effort that has to be exerted when a deed is about to be performed and 2) the care that has to be taken while the deed is being performed to its completion and this leads to the subsequent ideas 3)"I can perform" and 4) "I can feel". Thus these four imaginary characteristic functions of being have bought about a deep-rooted belief in their existence. But the elements have not the time or span of duration to carry out such functions" . Robert 17255 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 8:51pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) > impermance that everyone witnesses in daily life. The anicca of the > tilakkhana is the rise and fall of nama and rupa and that is happening so > fast. Speed is irrelevant. 17256 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 9:26pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hello Stephen, You wrote: > Perhaps the difference between us is that I'm open to many views. > That could be it. I don't see how two conflicting views could both be right; the only understanding of the Dhamma worth having is the right one. How to find the right one? Well, there is the oldest recorded version, the Pali Canon. Admittedly, it can be interpreted in many ways but, I think very few ways could be consistent with it in its entirety. The ancient commentators have a version that is totally consistent, why look any further? Why prefer any other version over theirs? Whatever we do, let's not prefer our own, instinctive versions. By definition, we worldlings have wrong views -- let's not read them into the Buddhadhamma(!). I can't pretend to have a definitive understanding of the sutta you cited (the Mahacattarisaka-sutta), but may I ask you to read it again? This time, try to see it as a description of the supramundane mental factors. They are cetasikas that accompany moments of Path-consciousness and therefore, they are exclusive to the ariyans (referred to in the sutta as learners and arahats). They are the culmination of the ultimately real form of the Buddha's teaching (satipatthana), and they arise all together, not as single steps. Kind regards Ken H 17257 From: robmoult Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 9:51pm Subject: Re: 2Getting closer to Anatta Wow! Jon has been this clever for more than 25 years! Metta, Rob M :-) PS: Dear Mods, I know that I should snip this post, but I was really impressed by it's content. Please forgive me. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- Dear RobM and all, > As you have noted one of dilemmas that occur (Wendy brought this up > too) when learning about anatta is that of choice and decisions and > ethics. Jon wrote this letter to a friend back in 1976 > Dear Friends, > > '......I got the impression you may be worried about > making the right decision, or doing the right thing. > In fact, of course, there is no 'right' decision or > thing to do, nor in any absolute sense is there a > 'better' decision or thing to do. Decisions are made > according to our accumulations. We can, however, > appreciate the importance of having kusala citta at > any moment and of developing sati at any moment. > Worry is akusala, so is fear, regret and all shades of > uncertainty and unease. > > No doubt you have in mind that you would like to be > sure that what you do will be the best for your study > and practice of Dhamma (as well as suiting/satisfying > other less noble purposes). But how do you know what > circumstances may eventuate? How can you make that > situation happen? We cannot foresee the long-term > course of events that our past kamma will condition as > result. > > In fact we cannot even know the more immediate plans > that our kamma has for us. In ignorance we wonder > about what will be the result if...? Not realizing > that next month's or next year's vipaka is the result > of action already performed, not the result of today's > decisions. We forget the importance of developing > understanding of the realities of the present moment. > How valuable it is to have just a moment of sati, to > see just for a moment a little more clearly one of the > realities of this moment. > > Do you remember the sutta when the Buddha talks about > a fingersnap of awareness? We spend a lot of time > wondering about what we should be doing, or thinking > about what we would like to do, or worrying about what > we are not doing, but we have no understanding of what > is actually happening at the present moment....seeing, > hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and a lot of > mind-door activity. > > The decisions we make are just another moment of > thinking, conditioned by our accumulations to do many > other things too. Then we may act, but this is quite > another moment, with a different moment of intention, > and different realities appearing.' (end quote) 17258 From: robmoult Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 9:57pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Victor, Perhaps you can help my understanding. Can you explain kamma / rebirth works without a self. Thanks. Metta, Rob M :-) 17259 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 11:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Rob, You are right that the complete eradication of vipallasa only occurs during a path moment, and, as such, eradication of self view is only the beginning. However, what I was really interested in was the 3 manifestations: sanna, citta, ditthi, and Ledi Sayadaw's comment that citta was easier to penetrate than sanna because it was just a matter of investigation. This implies to me that sanna and ditthi require more than satipatthana. Is that right? If so, can you fill in the blanks? Alternately, "investigation" might mean something other than (less than) satipatthana or only one aspect of satipatthana. I'm waiting to hear from Suan on this. If you missed that email, here's the link to Ledi Sayadaw's comment: http://www.ubakhin.com/ledi/MANUAL01.html I would be interested in what you have to say on this. Do you think penetration of sanna, citta, and ditthi could be considered as progress of insight? If panna is the antidote for ditthi, what is the antidote for sanna? What would be an example of self view manifested as sanna, as citta, and as ditthi? It looks like we might be drifting toward sila, samadhi, panna as a solution, but I don't see how sila would work here and samadhi as "investigation" is a bit of a stretch. Maybe there is something in the Satipatthana Sutta Commentary that would relate to these 3 manifestations. How about body, speech, and mind? Larry 17260 From: James Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 11:20pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > Perhaps you can help my understanding. > > Can you explain kamma / rebirth works without a self. > > Thanks. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Rob M. Well, I am not Victor, but I would like to answer this question. First, as I have written many times on the Internet and tried to explain to fellow Buddhists, often to no avail, but I will try again: I, you, Howard, Kom, etc., everyone on this list and everyone in the world (probably), has a 'self'. The only person who doesn't have a 'self', who has anatta or non-self instead, would be a Buddha . What is the difference? We all have the desire for existence/non- existence, but a Buddha doesn't. Desire for existence or non- existence is what creates the 'self', and that created 'self' is what experiences kamma and rebirth. A Buddha will not experience kamma or rebirth because the desire for existence has been removed, therefore the false sense of a permanent self has been removed , and therefore there is nothing to experience kamma or rebirth. The Buddha taught that ultimate reality for humans is `non-self', but he accepted that a `false sense of self' is very real in all of us non-Buddhas. Why is figuring out anatta so difficult? Because we don't have it yet. How can you know non-self when you have a `self` blocking your insight? When non-arahants go around talking about how they have `no-self', and tell other people that they have `no-self', they are being quite silly. I do have a self that will be reborn and experience kamma. It isn't until I destroy the last five fetters, of which the desire for existence/non-existence is one, that I will finally lose that pesky `self'. Intellectualizing the teaching of anatta won't get me there, and I shouldn't pretend I am there already. I have a self, but when I abandon that self and achieve anatta, only then will I say I have no-self. I hope this explanation answers your question. Take care. Metta, James 17261 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 0:15am Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi James, Thanks for your message. Something to think about. I just called up my recent message to Larry on vipallasa which said that the first magga (becoming a sotapanna) uproots the perversion / distortion that regards what is without a self as a self (anatta). This works at all levels (citta level, the sanna level and ditthi level). The other vipallasa to be uprooted (at the anagami and arahant stage) have nothing to do with anatta. Please help me reconcile your message with this information which was taken from Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary of Terms and Concepts. Metta, Rob M :-) 17262 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 3:07am Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > What I was really interested in was the 3 > manifestations: sanna, citta, ditthi, and Ledi Sayadaw's comment that > citta was easier to penetrate than sanna because it was just a matter of > investigation. This implies to me that sanna and ditthi require more > than satipatthana. Is that right? If so, can you fill in the blanks? > Alternately, "investigation" might mean something other than (less than) > satipatthana or only one aspect of satipatthana. Let me give it a shot. I start by considering the nature of citta, sanna and ditthi. Citta ===== Citta is awareness; it is "on the surface". It arises because of the presence of an object. Ledi Sayadaw used the analogy of mistaking a tree-stump to be a person at night as an example of citta. He makes the point that simple investigation is enough to dispel the illusion. I believe that he was using the term "investigation" in a very conventional sense in this context, not in a "satipatthana sense". I suspect that uprooting citta manifestation of vipallasa requires mindfulness (yoniso manasikara). The development of yoniso manasikara is done though satipatthana. Sanna ===== Sanna is recall; it is "just below the surface". It arises because of previous "marking". Ledi Sayadaw used the analogy of the deer and the scarecrow to illustrate the superficial nature of sanna. Vis. XIV 130 uses the analogy of the blind men touching an elephant to illustrate the superficial nature of sanna. In my earlier message, it was clear that citta manifestation of vipallasa and sanna manifestation of vipallasa are grouped together. This leads me to suspect that yoniso manasikara (satipatthana) is also what is requried to uproot sanna manifestation of vipallasa. Ditthi ====== Ditthi is a wrong view; it can be deeply embedded. It arises because of accumulations. Ledi Sayadaw makes the point that wrong views (ditthi) are deeper and more firmly established than citta manifestation. It is clear that uprooting ditthi requires more than yoniso manasikara (satipatthana), it requires sotapanna-magga. In my earlier message, I noted that a sotapanna only uproots the ditthi manifestations of dukkha and akusala / kusala. It takes a higher level of sainthood to uproot the citta and sanna manifestations of these vipallasa. Uprooting the ditthi manifestation is a necessary pre-condition to uprooting the sanna and citta manifestations. Likewise, the citta manifestation can only be targetted once the sanna manifestation has been uprooted. Citta is easier to penetrate than sanna, but you have to penetrate sanna first before getting an opportunity to penetrate citta. For example, the last step over my doorstep is the easiest part of my journey home, but I have to go through h*ll to get into a position to be able to take that last step. > Do you think penetration of sanna, citta, and ditthi could be considered as progress > of insight? Uprooting ditthi comes from sotapanna-magga. Once this has been done, satipatthana can work on uprooting citta and sanna manifestations of the remaining vipallasa. In other words, I suspect that the satipatthana of a sotapanna is required. I'm not sure that I would call this "progress of insight". > If panna is the antidote for ditthi, what is the antidote > for sanna? Sanna is ethically variable and therefore can arise in both akusala and kusala states. Not sure that it needs an "antidote". > What would be an example of self view manifested as sanna, as > citta, and as ditthi? Self-view manifested as ditthi might be the belief that there is a "self" who percieves and thinks. Self-view manifested as sanna might be linking a name (a label / concept) with a person. Self-view manifested as a citta might be cittas #1, #2, #5 and #6 (all lobha- mula). Does this make sense? I gotta admit that I am making most of this up as I go along, so I hope that somebody (Suan?) can correct my mistakes. Metta, Rob M :-) 17263 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 4:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Free Will (again) Rob M, Paul (and Christine & Sarah) --- robmoult wrote: ... ... > Last night, I met up with Jon, Sarah, Christine and Ajarn Paul. I > knew that it was going to be an interesting discussion when the > first question that Jon asked as I sat down was, "What do you mean > by free will?". It was indeed and interesting discussion, and a lively one too, with plently of views being challenged or put to the test all round. Thanks to both of you for making the effort to come, and especially to you, Rob, for providing the necessary stimulus for the discussion. Do feel free to contact Sarah and me whenever you can make time during a stop in Hong Kong. Paul, we hope you will join us again next time. Jon 17264 From: abhidhammika Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 4:15am Subject: Re: Buddhadhamma In The Buddha's Own Words: To Larry and Pali Enthusiats Dear Larry You wrote: "I was having trouble understanding the difference between sanna, citta, and ditthi." The following is my answer. "Saññaa and di.t.thi are mental associates (cetasikas). Citta is a mental event (cittupaada). Citta, mano and viññaa.nam are synonyms. I mentioned these because I want to uphold my translations of those terms as memory (saññaa), view (di.t.thi) and consciousness (cittam). Many Pali scholars translate saññaa as perception by looking up Pali- English dictionaries. Pali-English dictionaries are very useful, but are aslo very out of date. They were compiled while Pali scholarship was in its infancy. So the compilers of dictionaries, while experts in linguistics, may not have adequate time to do research in technical terms like saññaa. So they must have prematurely rendered it as perception. I do not agree with them because perception belongs to viññaa.nakkhandhaa, not to saññakkandhaa. This is in line with the use of the term "perception" in the textbooks on psychology. Translating saññaa as perception amounts to equating a cetasika with cittam. That is a serious example of disciplinary oversight at best and disciplinary ignorance at worst, I am afraid. I said this with due respect to international Sayadaws who have to rely on the available but out-of-date Pali-English dictionaries when they translate Pali texts. Similarly, cittam should be translated as mind or consciousness because we should translate cakkhuviviññaa.nam as visual consciousness, not visual thought. Now, I translate saññaa as memory in line with definitions of saññaa given by Buddhaghosa in A.t.thasaalinii and Visuddhimaggo. The more I read different Pali texts including other commentaries, sub- commentaries and Pali grammar texts, the more I am convinced that the closest technical term in English to the term "saññaa" would be memory. As an example, a traditional Pali grammar has a beginning chapter called Saññaavidhaana. I translate this term as Treatment On Terminology. But, a literal translation of Saññaavidhaana would be "Committing To Memory Specially", or "Special Holding In Memory" by looking at vi + dhaa. In fact, Saññaavidhaana is exactly those literal meanings because this chapter contains things we must memorise first before we move on to the next and later chapters. The counterpart of Saññaavidhaana of Pali grammar texts is Samjñaaprakara.nam in Sanskrit grammar texts. Samjñaaprakara.nam literally means a book for memorising or a chapter for memorising. This is because traditional Pali and Sanskrit grammar texts work like a textbook of Euclidean geometry. A student needs to calculate how the form of a term is derived from pre-memorised rules. Burmese Sayadaws and novice monks call this process "Ruupa calculation". I will write more to answer your other questions later. For now, please kindly check if my translations of saññaa as memory, di.t.thi as view and cittam as consciousness help. With kind regards, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org 17265 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 4:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Stephen --- oreznoone@a... wrote: > > BTW, Jon, the desire to escape from existence is samsara. Nibbana > is > awareness, here and now. Well, I think we disagree ;-) Desire to escape from existence/samsara does not lead to the breaking of the fetters that bind us to existence/samsara, but awareness (at the level of satipatthana) does. Sorry to disappoint you, Stephen, but I think we agree.;-)) Jon 17266 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 5:18am Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Rob M, Let me rephrase what your question as "How does kamma / rebirth work without a self?" This question is to be put aside. Why? Because this question comes with an implicit assumption that self is something, and this very assumption is self-view, which is what gets you stuck. People who assert "there is a self" or "there is no self" or "I have a self" or "I have no self" also implicitly assume self as something. Many people think that "there is no self anywhere" is what the Buddha taught without realizing that it is their implicit assumption that leads to those conclusions. The first step to get close to understand the Buddha's teaching of anatta is to understand the meaning of the word "atta", how it is normally used without metaphysical meaning attached to it. Cutting off the metaphysical meaning attached to the word "self" is not an easy thing to do. Are you considering teaching Dhammapada 12 to your class? Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > Perhaps you can help my understanding. > > Can you explain kamma / rebirth works without a self. > > Thanks. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17267 From: Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 0:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi, Robert - Okay, I believe I get your point. As I see it, it is not the speed, per se, of the microscopic flow of phenomena, but the typical invisibility of phenomena at that level which is germane, so that our not seeing arising and falling at the finest level fools us into imagining a false higher-level homogeneity and permanence. (A comparison might be made with the static example of the difference in seeing the individual cells of tissue under a microscope versus the apparently solid mass seen with the bare eye.) With the "progress of insight" the finer levels of impermanence become manifest (i.e., no longer "missed"), leading to the direct and full insight into aniccataa. With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/27/02 11:30:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > Howard: > > There's that speed business again! ;-)) How did it add to the > point of > >impersonality? > >========================== > >Dear Howard, > The three characteristics are related to each other in various ways. With > regard to aniccum (impermanence) this is far deeper than the > impermance that everyone witnesses in daily life. The anicca of the > tilakkhana is the rise and fall of nama and rupa and that is happening so > fast. > You see we think it is the same me that decided to walk over to get a > glass of water. But even while that thought (to have a drink)was in its > incipient stage, just some slight urge building, countless number of cittas > > have arisen and fallen away. All of these are conditioned. How could any > of them be controlled . To relate this to anatta this is one of my > favourite quotes: The burmese Abhidhamma teacher Thein Nyun in his > preface to the > DhatuKathu (Pali Text Society) > xxvii writes about this: "Because the > functions of the elements give rise to the concepts of > continuity, collection and form, the ideas arise: > 1)the initial effort that has to be exerted when a > deed is about to be performed and 2) the care that has > to be taken while the deed is being performed to its > completion and this leads to the subsequent ideas > 3)"I can perform" and 4) "I can feel". Thus these four > imaginary characteristic functions of being have > bought about a deep-rooted belief in their existence. > But the elements have not the time or span of duration > to carry out such functions" . > > Robert > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17268 From: Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 0:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi, Victor - In a message dated 11/27/02 11:51:57 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > >impermance that everyone witnesses in daily life. The anicca of > the > >tilakkhana is the rise and fall of nama and rupa and that is > happening so > >fast. > > > > Speed is irrelevant. > > =========================== As you may have seen in recent posts of mine, I agree with this. However, I think that the "speed business" is an imperfect expressing of an issue (microscopic vs macroscopic) which *is* relevant. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17269 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 5:41am Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi Howard and Robert, Have you both already got tired of this decaying body? What more insight do you need? Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > Okay, I believe I get your point. As I see it, it is not the speed, > per se, of the microscopic flow of phenomena, but the typical invisibility of > phenomena at that level which is germane, so that our not seeing arising and > falling at the finest level fools us into imagining a false higher- level > homogeneity and permanence. (A comparison might be made with the static > example of the difference in seeing the individual cells of tissue under a > microscope versus the apparently solid mass seen with the bare eye.) With the > "progress of insight" the finer levels of impermanence become manifest (i.e., > no longer "missed"), leading to the direct and full insight into aniccataa. > > > With metta, > Howard > > In a message dated 11/27/02 11:30:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, > rjkjp1@y... writes: > > > Howard: > > > There's that speed business again! ;-)) How did it add to the > > point of > > >impersonality? > > >========================== > > >Dear Howard, > > The three characteristics are related to each other in various ways. With > > regard to aniccum (impermanence) this is far deeper than the > > impermance that everyone witnesses in daily life. The anicca of the > > tilakkhana is the rise and fall of nama and rupa and that is happening so > > fast. > > You see we think it is the same me that decided to walk over to get a > > glass of water. But even while that thought (to have a drink)was in its > > incipient stage, just some slight urge building, countless number of cittas > > > > have arisen and fallen away. All of these are conditioned. How could any > > of them be controlled . To relate this to anatta this is one of my > > favourite quotes: The burmese Abhidhamma teacher Thein Nyun in his > > preface to the > > DhatuKathu (Pali Text Society) > > xxvii writes about this: "Because the > > functions of the elements give rise to the concepts of > > continuity, collection and form, the ideas arise: > > 1)the initial effort that has to be exerted when a > > deed is about to be performed and 2) the care that has > > to be taken while the deed is being performed to its > > completion and this leads to the subsequent ideas > > 3)"I can perform" and 4) "I can feel". Thus these four > > imaginary characteristic functions of being have > > bought about a deep-rooted belief in their existence. > > But the elements have not the time or span of duration > > to carry out such functions" . > > > > Robert 17270 From: ajahn_paul Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 5:41am Subject: regarding the free will ^_^ hi all, i would like to use my limited english to tell my thinking on the free will issue. ^_~ A got punched by B accidentally, if we take that as a kamma from our previous lives caused the punch, it may be as what rob said, predestiny. but,,,, now it comes A's free will, he could 1)punch B back, 2)kill B, or 3)just walk away. if we beleive in kamma.... the story will go on like 1) A may get another punch from B in next life, 2) A may get killed by B in next life, or 3) the kamma on this issue stop. i think free will and predestiny is not the main point, the main point is how u react on any matters, and what u do is making a differnt future. ^__^ 17271 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 5:45am Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) --- I think this is indeed the main point, Howard. I was going to add some more but I think you've summed it nicely already Best Robert > Hi, Robert - > > Okay, I believe I get your point. As I see it, it is not the speed, > per se, of the microscopic flow of phenomena, but the typical invisibility of > phenomena at that level which is germane, so that our not seeing arising and > falling at the finest level fools us into imagining a false higher- level > homogeneity and permanence. (A comparison might be made with the static > example of the difference in seeing the individual cells of tissue under a > microscope versus the apparently solid mass seen with the bare eye.) With the > "progress of insight" the finer levels of impermanence become manifest (i.e., > no longer "missed"), leading to the direct and full insight into aniccataa. > 17272 From: Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 0:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi, Rob - In a message dated 11/28/02 12:58:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Hi Victor, > > Perhaps you can help my understanding. > > Can you explain kamma / rebirth works without a self. > > Thanks. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > =========================== Could you explain how kamma / rebirth works *with* a self? ;-) What is self is permanent, unchanging, fixed. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17273 From: Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 0:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi, Victor - In a message dated 11/28/02 8:42:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > Hi Howard and Robert, > > Have you both already got tired of this decaying body? What more > insight do you need? > > Metta, > Victor > ======================== When there is liberation, I will know that the insight is sufficient. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17274 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 6:06am Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi Howard, What insight? Don't expect liberation if you haven't got tired of the body. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Victor - > > In a message dated 11/28/02 8:42:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, > yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > > Hi Howard and Robert, > > > > Have you both already got tired of this decaying body? What more > > insight do you need? > > > > Metta, > > Victor > > > ======================== > When there is liberation, I will know that the insight is sufficient. > > With metta, > Howard 17275 From: Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 1:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi, Victor - In a message dated 11/28/02 9:07:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > What insight? Don't expect liberation if you haven't got tired of > the body. > > Metta, > Victor > ========================== Why do you presume that I am enamored of that which ages, decays, and finally ceases? With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17276 From: James Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 6:44am Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi James, > > Thanks for your message. Something to think about. > > I just called up my recent message to Larry on vipallasa which said > that the first magga (becoming a sotapanna) uproots the perversion / > distortion that regards what is without a self as a self (anatta). > This works at all levels (citta level, the sanna level and ditthi > level). The other vipallasa to be uprooted (at the anagami and > arahant stage) have nothing to do with anatta. > > Please help me reconcile your message with this information which > was taken from Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary of Terms and > Concepts. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Stephen, Through some research, I can only conclude that the dictionary you are referring to is giving erroneous information. Amazingly, it does admit this in the preface to the first addition (see end of this post). The editor, or the sources, have confused `belief in a permanent individuality' (sakkaya) and `desire for existence' (asava). The destruction of the fetter of sakkaya does occur at the first 'stage', Sotapatti (Entering the Stream), but the destruction of the three asavas, of which desire for existence is one, occurs at the last stage, Arahatship (Enlightened) . The difference between this two is very crucial to understanding: the first is concerning belief and the second is concerning desire. At the Stream Entry level, the person no longer believes that he/she has a permanent self, or a soul that will last for eternity. He or She has lost the belief in that idea/view. However, that doesn't mean 'a false self' is then no longer present, it still present to experience kamma and rebirth. The Stream Enterer just knows that it is false, but can't do much about it. It isn't until the final stage that 'the desire for existence' is eradicated, along with lust and ignorance, that this `false self' is no longer generated., anatta is truly reached (not just understood), and kamma and rebirth ends. Allow me to quote the source I am using for this information. It is `The History of Buddhist Thought' by Edward J. Thomas. It was first published in 1951 in England. I will conclude with why I believe this source is more authoritative than the dictionary you are referencing: "They who have cast off the three fetters of belief in a permanent individuality (sakkaya), doubt, and belief in mere morality and rites are those who have reached the first stage of Entering the stream (sotapatti). They are not liable to be reborn in an unhappy existence, and are destined to enlightenment. They who have cast off the three fetters and weakened the bonds of passion, hatred, and stupidity have reached the second stage of the Once-returner (sakadagamin). They will return once to this world before making an end of pain. They who have cast off the five lower fetters (the three above with sensual passion and malice), and who arise by apparitional birth [footnote: There are four kinds of birth-oviparous, viviparous, birth from moisture (as insects), and apparitional birth, which takes place in the higher planes of existence without any physiological process, and the individual reborn (as a god or still higher being) simply appears there.] in a higher stage of existence, and there attain Nirvana, without returning to this world, have reached the third stage of the Non-returner (anagamin). Those who are arahats have destroyed the asavas (lust, desire for existence, ignorance), they have completed what was to be done, they have laid down the burden, obtained their end, and with the destruction of the fetter of desire for existence are liberated with complete knowledge. Their course cannot be pointed out (Thomas, 117- 118)." Okay, about Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines, by NYANATILOKA. This dictionary is very much influenced by the Abhidhamma and attempts to reconcile the incongruities in the Abhidhamma and even later commentaries with the original teachings of the Buddha. The result is a lot of unavoidable misinterpretation, which the author freely admits in the preface. Allow me to quote what is written in the preface of the first edition, published in 1952, England http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic1-titel.htm: "As already pointed out by the author in the preface to his Guide through the Abhidhamma-Pitaka (Colombo 1938), there are found in the Abhidhamma Canon numerous technical terms not met with in the Sutta Canon; and again other terms are found only in the Commentaries and not in Sutta and Abhidhamma. The author therefore has made a first attempt - without, however, laying any claim to absolute reliability or completeness in this by no means easy undertaking - to indicate in the Appendix all the terms that in the oldest Sutta texts are either not found at all, or at least not in the same form or meaning, and to set forth how far these are deviations from the older texts, or further developments. In this connection, the author wishes to state that the often quoted Patisambhidá-Magga, as well as Niddesa, Buddhavamsa and Cariyapitaka, though included in the Khuddaka Nikáya of the Sutta Pitaka, nevertheless bear throughout the character of Commentaries, and though apparently older than the Sutta Commentaries handed down to us in Buddhaghosa's version, must doubtless belong to a later period of origin than the Abhidhamma Canon. In rendering the terms into English, I often had to differ considerably from the interpretation of Western scholars, and to introduce quite new words. A great number of such earlier translations must be considered partly as totally incorrect, partly as misleading, or at the very least ambiguous. Incorrect are, for instance, the English renderings of náma-rúpa by 'name and form'; javana (impulsion, i.e. the karmic impulsive moments) by 'apperception', etc. The expositions concerning the true nature of the 8-fold Path, the 4 Noble Truths, the paticca-samuppáda and the 5 groups of existence - doctrines which, with regard to their true nature, have been often misunderstood by Western authors - are sure to come to many as a revelation. On the doctrine of anattá, or 'egolessness', i.e. the impersonality and emptiness of all phenomena of existence, the author repeatedly felt the necessity of throwing light from every possible point of view, for it is exactly this doctrine which, together with the doctrine of the conditionality of all phenomena of existence, constitutes the very essence of the whole Teaching of the Buddha without which it will be by no means possible to understand it in its true light. Thus the doctrine of impersonality runs like a red thread right through the whole book." The source I quoted, Edward J. Thomas, predominately used the original texts translated into English by the Pali-Text society, not other sources. He didn't try to reconcile the suttas, Abhidhamma, and commentaries into his analysis. He treats them as each different and distinct. I believe my source is far more authoritative than than the Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines, by NYANATILOKA. Metta, James 17277 From: Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 8:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Rob, The only mistake I spotted is that sanna, citta, and ditthi manifestations of self view are all eradicated at the sotapanna path moment. See Vism. XXII 68. I think we could work with vipallasa on a mundane path, hence their relationship to the 4 satipatthanas. I do agree with your basic assessment of sanna, citta, and ditthi. I would put it this way: Sanna is the recognition of identity or wholeness. When I see a washing machine, I recognize it as a washing machine or at least some kind of single whole contraption rather than a list of parts, how they fit together, and what they do. The way to work through this desception in satipatthana is to recognize the parts and what they are doing or not doing. The same goes for recognizing a person or myself. Citta is the various ideas we have about identity. I'm a little uncertain about the difference between citta and ditthi. At this point I'm inclined to say citta is emotional (lobha, dosa) and ditthi is conceptual (moha). This is based on my understanding of what is going on in cittanupassana and dhammanupassana. If this is valid, the way to relate in satipatthana to citta manifestation is to recognize the impermanence of attitudes about identity and the way to relate to ditthi manifestation of self view is through ultimate analysis, in other words, looking for the object. This does seem a little doubtful to me, especially as I have only studied a small part of the Satipatthana Sutta Commentary. If you, or anyone, has alternate views on characterizing sanna, citta, and ditthi manifestations of self view and corresponding treatments in satipatthana, I would be interested. Larry 17278 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 8:45am Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi Howard, What more insight do you need to realize that which ages, decays, and finally ceases is not to be enamored? Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Victor - > > In a message dated 11/28/02 9:07:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, > yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > > > > Hi Howard, > > > > What insight? Don't expect liberation if you haven't got tired of > > the body. > > > > Metta, > > Victor > > > ========================== > Why do you presume that I am enamored of that which ages, decays, and > finally ceases? > > With metta, > Howard 17279 From: nidive Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 8:48am Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Rob M, I think you are making progress in your contemplation! Terms such as 'free will' and 'predestiny' all implicitly implies the existence of a self. As you have correctly contemplated, there is no such thing as 'free will'. Responsibility, accountability and ethics are caused. They are not uncaused. Nevertheless, this does not mean that responsibility, accountability and ethics are abandoned. What is abandoned is the attachment of a self with regards to responsibility, accountability and ethics. This will then be in accordance with the Middle Path. We do not cling to one extreme of a self (or eternalism), but neither do we ignore cause and effect such that we cling to the other extreme, nihilism. Avoiding these two extremes, we see the Middle Path of cause and effect. Regarding the red-hot ball of 'predestiny' in your throat... Let's call 'predestiny' as 'the fruition of latent (or past) kamma'. If you could see kamma as impermanent, sufferable and not-self, then you would see that the fruition of latent kamma is without a self centering around it. You would see that there is only cause and EFFECT. If wisdom were to arise, you would see that you, as a being, are merely just the fruition of latent kamma. NEO Swee Boon 17280 From: nidive Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 9:15am Subject: Re: Free Will (again) Rob M, If this is what you actually meant by 'predestiny' (I interpreted it wrongly in my last post), then you have a problem of holding to either extreme views. To say that there is "choice", you are holding to eternalist view. To say that there is "predestiny", you are holding to nihilist view. Yes, there is another option that is neither: The Middle Path, of Cause and Effect. Both concepts of "choice" and "predestiny" can only arise out of the preoccupation with a self and doubts about a self. Correct understanding of the Middle Path will pull you out of the edge of the abyss of two extremes. NEO Swee Boon --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hey, don't blame me for that last posting. Conditions arose, I had > no choice. I had to write that message. It was predestined to > happen. Your reply or lack of reply is also pre-destined. > > I have aversion to this way of thinking. I see that I did not choose > to have this aversion; it arose because of conditions. Is there > another option that is not "choice" and not "pre-destiny"? > > Please help. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi Rob K, > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > I'll try and bring up the > > > freewill issue. For now I can say that I believe that in direct > > > proportion to the degree of acceptance/understanding of anatta > > > ancilliary ideas such as 'freewill' also drop away. There are > just > > > conditioned dhammas arising and ceasing with no one anywhere. > > Seeing > > > this gradually leads away from the clinging to self and samsara. > > > > Last night, I met up with Jon, Sarah, Christine and Ajarn Paul. I > > knew that it was going to be an interesting discussion when the > > first question that Jon asked as I sat down was, "What do you mean > > by free will?". We explored the topic and I think that there was > > some progress, but "the light did not come on". > > > > I then raised the question of the role of meditation. After some > > discussion, Jon asked me what my current mental states were. I > > replied, "Confusion and restlessness". I then continued on > thinking > > aloud, "But confusion and restlessness are not vipaka. These are > > javana. I did not choose to be confused. I did not choose to be > > restless. These states arose naturally because of conditions, not > > because of free will and choice." > > > > I feel that I am now at the edge of a cliff. It seems clear to me > > now that there is no "choice" in the thought process. However, if > I > > say that all is pre-determined because there is no choice, then I > > take away any sense of ethical responsibility and all that I have > to > > do is to "stay on the roller-coaster ride until the end". > > > > Rob K (or others), can you help pull me back from the edge of the > > abyss? > > > > Metta, > > Rob M :-) 17281 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 9:18am Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Howard, Your delineation of self is that it is permanent, unchanging, fixed. That is the self-view you are holding onto. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Rob - > > In a message dated 11/28/02 12:58:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, > rob.moult@j... writes: > > > Hi Victor, > > > > Perhaps you can help my understanding. > > > > Can you explain kamma / rebirth works without a self. > > > > Thanks. > > > > Metta, > > Rob M :-) > > > =========================== > Could you explain how kamma / rebirth works *with* a self? ;- ) What is > self is permanent, unchanging, fixed. > > With metta, > Howard 17282 From: Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 4:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi, Victor - In a message dated 11/28/02 11:46:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > What more insight do you need to realize that which ages, decays, and > finally ceases is not to be enamored? > > Metta, > Victor > ======================== Victor, there are levels and degrees of realization. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17283 From: Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 9:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhadhamma In The Buddha's Own Words: To Larry and Pali Enthusiats Dear Suan, Thank you for your excellent reply. I basically agree with your translation of sanna as memory. It gives an accounting for the function of memory which otherwise we don't have, plus Buddaghosa seems clear on this. But I am a little unclear on its meaning in this context. Is there, by any chance, a commentary on the passage you translated? Larry 17284 From: Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 4:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi, Victor - In a message dated 11/28/02 12:19:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > Your delineation of self is that it is permanent, unchanging, fixed. > That is the self-view you are holding onto. > > Metta, > Victor > ========================== First of all, that was not a *definition* of 'self', but just a listing of some of what is included in that notion. Secondly, if we are to have no idea of what a term is supposed to mean, then we have no basis for even discussing it. As far as I understand it, 'atta ditthi' refers to a view which associates an alleged self/core with the khandhas, either as one of them or a combination of some of them or underlying some or all of them or as existing outside of them. But a definition of what is *meant* by the term 'self' is not self-view. Suppose that someone claimed that there is a car which runs on water, and someone else denies this. To look into the matter at all, it is necessary to know what is *meant* by the term 'car'. Suppose someone claims that gazingies exist, and someone else denies this. How shall we look for gazingies when we don't know what 'gazingy' is intended to mean? With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17285 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 9:45am Subject: ATTENTION: DSG "LURKERS" Hi "Lurkers", I am going to use Ajahn Paul's post as an opportunity to try and get you more involved. At the same time, I may be rasing some potentially controversial perspectives. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "ajahn_paul" wrote: > hi all, > > i would like to use my limited english to tell my thinking on the > free will issue. ^_~ > > A got punched by B accidentally, if we take that as a kamma from our > previous lives caused the punch, it may be as what rob said, > predestiny. > > but,,,, now it comes A's free will, he could 1)punch B back, 2) kill > B, or 3)just walk away. if we beleive in kamma.... the story will go > on like 1) A may get another punch from B in next life, 2) A may get > killed by B in next life, or 3) the kamma on this issue stop. > > i think free will and predestiny is not the main point, the main > point is how u react on any matters, and what u do is making a > differnt future. ^__^ Anything that happens to us is vipaka (the passive effect of an past active consciousness). It arises because of conditions. One of the conditions that cause the vipaka to arise is some past javana (active consciousness). Let me draw an analogy. We throw a handful of mango-seeds on the ground. A complex combination of conditions (wind, rain, sun, soil, etc.) may allow one or more of these mango-seeds to develop and a mango-tree will arise. The tree that arises will definitely be a mango tree, but there are many other factors which will decide which seed will develop. In this analogy, the mango seeds are the kamma from past actions. Each has the potential to develop but the actual development will depend on other conditons. Those other conditions can support or supress the development, but they cannot cause a mango seed to develop into an apple tree. Let us look at "A" (the one getting punched). Getting punched was the vipaka of "A". At some time in the past (perhaps in a past life), "A" did something bad. I am going to assume that getting punched is a result of a bad action in the past, not a good action in the past. The bad thing that "A" did in the past caused a "seed" to be created. That "seed" had been waiting for a long time (perhaps many lifetimes) for the right conditions to arise which would allow the "seed" to develop. Considering that there are millions of these seeds created in the blink of an eye, and that some seeds can last for many lifetimes, there are always lots and lots of seeds waiting to develop. At the particular instant, the conditions allowed the "getting punched" seed to develop and it happened. Was it pre-destined that "A" would get punched? My answer is, "it doesn't matter". Consider an apple orchard covering the entire world. Each tree is covered with apples. You are told that one of these apples will form the next tree. Could you pick out the "chosen" apple? In a sense, the chosen apple is "pre-destined", but there is no way by looking only at the apples that one could tell which one was the "chosen" apple. Perhaps if you could look at all the apples and had a way of seeing how the other conditions (sun, rain, clouds, wind, soil, etc.) would develop, one could determine the "chosen" apple. But in reality, it just doesn't matter. Let me draw another analogy. Is your current physical appearance "pre-destined"? Your current physical appearance is dependent on many conditions including: - The DNA of the sperm and egg that created you - Your past actions (the scar you got by falling off your bike as a kid) - Your recent actions (you decided to get you hair cut yesterday) We don't normally think about our current physical appearance as being "pre-destined", but in a sense, it is pre-destined; in the same way, "A" getting punched was pre-destined. Could anybody less than a Buddha have predicted (i.e. it was pre-destined) that "A" would get punched? Definitely not. If nobody (other than a Buddha perhaps) can know what the future holds, can we say that the future is pre-destined? As Ajahn Paul pointed out in HK, "The Buddha was not a fortune teller". Now the punch lands on "A". The first thought process in "A" to be aware of the punch will be a sense door process. In the mind of "A", the mental stream which was previously dormant (bhavanga) recieves a "vibration" that something has happened at the body-sense door. The stream of dormant mind-states is "cut off". Following that is a mind-moment when the mind turns toward the external object (the sensation of painful bodily feeling from being punched). This mind- moment is functional, not linked to kamma or vipaka. The next mind- moment is called "sense door consciousness". In this case, the sense door consciousness will arise with upleasant physical feeling. The sensation is received into the mind at the next mind moment. The nature of the sensation is investigated to learn its nature. The sense door consciousness, the receiving and the investigating are all vipaka cittas; they arise as results of a previous kammic action. THe mind now determines what it will "do" with this sensation. This determining consciousness is functional (independent of kamma), it is not vipaka. Some of the outcomes which may result from this determining consciousness are: - Liking the pain (lobha-rooted "active" consciousness will arise at the next moment) - Disliking the pain (dosa-rooted "active" consciousness will arise at the next moment) - Indifferent to the pain (moha-rooted "active" consciousness will arise at the next moment) - Wise attention to the pain (seeing the situation as it truly is will cause a good "active" consciousness to arise at the next moment) Which of these four outcomes will arise? Firstly, our nature will limit the options available. This is called carita. Secondly, we have many accumulations (past active consciousness moments create kamma, but they also create accumulations). Carita and accumulations are really the same thing, but carita is more "deep-seated". So our accumulations (and carita), act as conditions which allow one of the four options to arise. There is no self with a "free-will" to choose which of the four will arise. The arising happens because of conditions, not because of choice. The response to the stimulus arose because of condition, not because of a choice was made. There is no free will. Is this pre-destiny? Perhaps, but it doesn't matter because nobody (exept perhaps a Buddha) could have anticipated what would happen. Conditioned by the determining consciousness, a series of seven "active" consciousnesses will arise (lobha-rooted, moha- rooted, dosa-rooted or kusala). These seven "active" consciousnesses will create seven "seeds". The first seed created is the weakest; if it does not find conditions to allow it to develop in the current lifetime, it will become defunct. The second through the sixth seed are strong; they can develop any time from the next lifetime onwards. The seventh seed is also weak (but not as weak as the first); if the seventh seed does not develop in the next lifetime, it will become defunct. In any case, any kamma created during a sense door process is exceptionally weak. The stength of the kamma depends on the amount of volition (cetana) in the mental state. The volition in the active mental states of a sense door process is very weak because the impression is too new. As we will see, in subsequent mental processes, the volition will increase in strength and the kamma created will be proportionally stronger. Because this has been a significant event for the mind, the object (sensation or tangible object) is "registered" so that it can be passed along to the next thought process that occurs. Some dormant mental states (bhavanga) will follow the sense door process and then a mind door process will arise. The physical contact is over. What is left is a mental image. The mental image is what is created by the sense door process and what is passed along (because it was registered, it is passed along) to the first mind door thought process. The mind door process is purely internal. There are multiple mind door processes. The first few mind door processes "clarify" the pain (this pain is in my arm, this pain is sharp, etc.) and label the pain (this is pain from a punch, etc.). So far the kamma created is still quite weak because the mind is "spreading out to but a boundary or a definition around the pain". Once the pain is named and defined, the mind starts adding layers on top of the mental image of the pain. Now the voiltion is starting to feed itself and increase in strength (and the kammic impact is also increasing). This is called the stage of papanca (conceptual proliferation). The object of the mind door thought processes is no longer the original mental image of the pain. It is now aversion to the mental image of the pain which conditions the arising of anger over the aversion to the mental image of the pain. The anger feeds on itself as layer upon layer of thought processes arise, each condtioned by the previous ones. The cittas build up in strength until they condition the creation of a rupa called "body intimation" which causes the hand to move to respond to the punch. Each of the thought processes (sense door and mind door) create more kamma conditioned by what happens at the determining consciousness. What happens at the determining consciousness (called the mind-door adverting in the mind door process) depends on carita and accumulations. There is no self directing the thought process. It is an empty process that rolls along with no self to "control" it. If "A" ends up punching "B" back, killing "B" or just walking away, these events arise because conditions caused them to arise. There was no choice, no free will. Were the actions of "A" pre-destined? Perhaps, but it doesn't matter because nobody (except perhaps a Buddha), including "A" himself, could predict what would happen. Will the actions of "A" have a future impact? Absolutely. The law of kamma is just as absolute as the law of gravity. If the response to being punched was pre-destined, what about the responsibility and accountability of "A"? The concepts of responsibility and accountability depend on a self view. There is no self to which to attach the responsibility and accountability. "Resonsibility" and "accountability" are concepts that are just as empty as the concept of "free will". Understanding that there is no free will takes the "self" out of the thought process (there is no choice). If we take the "self" out of kamma, the concepts of responsibility and accountability become meaningless. I decided to give an extremely detailed answer to a short message. I have done this because I am hoping that this will help the "lurkers" better understand the Abhidhamma and give them an opportunity to clarify points by asking questions. There are subtle points made in this message which others on the DSG may disagree with (and there may be some minor areas where I am wrong), but don't let the dialogue that this message will inevitably create be a distraction for you. Start by focusing on and understanding the areas that nobody disagrees with (should be most of it) and please feel free to ask questions. Again, I went to a lot of effort, hoping that the "lurkers" would ask questions. Metta, Rob M :-) PS: Ajahn Paul, I really respect your efforts to learn the Dhamma (and Abhidhamma) in a language in which you are not fluent. I have already sent an email to try and track down a Chinese verion of Bhikkhu Bodhi's "Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma". 17286 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 9:59am Subject: Re: Free Will (again) Hi Swee Boon, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > Rob M, > > If this is what you actually meant by 'predestiny' (I interpreted it > wrongly in my last post), then you have a problem of holding to > either extreme views. > > To say that there is "choice", you are holding to eternalist view. > To say that there is "predestiny", you are holding to nihilist view. > > Yes, there is another option that is neither: The Middle Path, of > Cause and Effect. > > Both concepts of "choice" and "predestiny" can only arise out of the > preoccupation with a self and doubts about a self. > > Correct understanding of the Middle Path will pull you out of the > edge of the abyss of two extremes. > > NEO Swee Boon I would be interested in your comments on my recent post addressed to DSG Lurkers. Metta, Rob M :-) 17287 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 10:05am Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Victor, Thanks for your comments; lots to consider. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi Rob M, > > Let me rephrase what your question as "How does kamma / rebirth work > without a self?" > > This question is to be put aside. Why? Because this question comes > with an implicit assumption that self is something, and this very > assumption is self-view, which is what gets you stuck. > > People who assert "there is a self" or "there is no self" or "I have > a self" or "I have no self" also implicitly assume self as > something. Many people think that "there is no self anywhere" is > what the Buddha taught without realizing that it is their implicit > assumption that leads to those conclusions. > > The first step to get close to understand the Buddha's teaching of > anatta is to understand the meaning of the word "atta", how it is > normally used without metaphysical meaning attached to it. > > Cutting off the metaphysical meaning attached to the word "self" is > not an easy thing to do. > > Are you considering teaching Dhammapada 12 to your class? > I only have one more class in 2002 and I have to finish off Paticcasamuppada. In January, I start with a new class. I read over Dhammapada 12 and I need to see if I could work it into next year's syllabus. Thanks for the suggestion. Metta, Rob M :-) 17288 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 10:19am Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > =========================== > Could you explain how kamma / rebirth works *with* a self? ;-) What is > self is permanent, unchanging, fixed. In this case, self is seen as the stream of kamma. In a conventional sense, the water in the stream keeps changing, but it is still has an identity as a stream. At this moment, I create kamma. The vipaka from that kamma will impact what? Answer: My stream, not your stream. It is easy to associate the stream of kamma with a self. Intellectually, I feel that this is wrong view, but I haven't had the "ah-ha" moment that allows me to proceed with an anatta perspective. Perhaps it is unreasonable to expect two "ah-ha" moments in the same week :-). Metta, Rob M :-) 17289 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 10:28am Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi James, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi James, > > > > Thanks for your message. Something to think about. > > > > I just called up my recent message to Larry on vipallasa which said > > that the first magga (becoming a sotapanna) uproots the > perversion / > > distortion that regards what is without a self as a self (anatta). > > This works at all levels (citta level, the sanna level and ditthi > > level). The other vipallasa to be uprooted (at the anagami and > > arahant stage) have nothing to do with anatta. > > > > Please help me reconcile your message with this information which > > was taken from Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary of Terms and > > Concepts. > > > > Metta, > > Rob M :-) > > Stephen, > > Through some research, I can only conclude that the dictionary you > are referring to is giving erroneous information. > > I believe my source is far more authoritative than > than the Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines, by NYANATILOKA. Sorry to mislead you. On this point, Nyanatiloka was quoting directly from Ledi Sayadaw's "Manual of Insight" http://www.ubakhin.com/ledi/MANUAL01.html Comments? Thanks, Rob M :-) 17290 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 11:29am Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Howard, I think you are entangled in your own self-view "what is self is permanent, unchanging, fixed." Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Victor - > > In a message dated 11/28/02 12:19:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, > yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > > > > Hi Howard, > > > > Your delineation of self is that it is permanent, unchanging, fixed. > > That is the self-view you are holding onto. > > > > Metta, > > Victor > > > ========================== > First of all, that was not a *definition* of 'self', but just a > listing of some of what is included in that notion. Secondly, if we are to > have no idea of what a term is supposed to mean, then we have no basis for > even discussing it. As far as I understand it, 'atta ditthi' refers to a view > which associates an alleged self/core with the khandhas, either as one of > them or a combination of some of them or underlying some or all of them or as > existing outside of them. But a definition of what is *meant* by the term > 'self' is not self-view. > Suppose that someone claimed that there is a car which runs on water, > and someone else denies this. To look into the matter at all, it is necessary > to know what is *meant* by the term 'car'. > Suppose someone claims that gazingies exist, and someone else denies > this. How shall we look for gazingies when we don't know what 'gazingy' is > intended to mean? > > With metta, > Howard 17291 From: James Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 0:31pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi James, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > > > Hi James, > > > > > > Thanks for your message. Something to think about. > > > > > > I just called up my recent message to Larry on vipallasa which > said > > > that the first magga (becoming a sotapanna) uproots the > > perversion / > > > distortion that regards what is without a self as a self > (anatta). > > > This works at all levels (citta level, the sanna level and > ditthi > > > level). The other vipallasa to be uprooted (at the anagami and > > > arahant stage) have nothing to do with anatta. > > > > > > Please help me reconcile your message with this information > which > > > was taken from Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary of Terms and > > > Concepts. > > > > > > Metta, > > > Rob M :-) > > > > Stephen, > > > > Through some research, I can only conclude that the dictionary you > > are referring to is giving erroneous information. > > > > I believe my source is far more authoritative than > > than the Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines, by NYANATILOKA. > > Sorry to mislead you. On this point, Nyanatiloka was quoting > directly from Ledi Sayadaw's "Manual of Insight" > > http://www.ubakhin.com/ledi/MANUAL01.html > > Comments? > > Thanks, > Rob M :-) Rob M, Oh, so this is Ledi Sayadaw's interpretation. I thought we were discussing interpretations of Lord Buddha's teachings. Yes, you should have said this earlier. In that case, let me return your question. Are you going to trust more the teachings of Lord Buddha or the teachings of Ledi Sayadaw? My vote goes with Lord Buddha. Metta, James 17292 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 1:26pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi James, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > Are you going to trust more the teachings of Lord Buddha > or the teachings of Ledi Sayadaw? My vote goes with Lord Buddha. I'm with you 100%. Please help me out with a Sutta reference. Metta, Rob M :-) 17293 From: James Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 2:13pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi James, > Sorry to mislead you. On this point, Nyanatiloka was quoting > directly from Ledi Sayadaw's "Manual of Insight" > > http://www.ubakhin.com/ledi/MANUAL01.html > > Comments? > > Thanks, > Rob M :-) Rob, I have been reading `The Manual of Insight'. I am very disappointed in the poor scholarship of this work. I am not sure how it is representing the teachings of the Abhidhamma, but it seems a little off even for the Abhidhamma; but I am pretty sure he is misrepresenting the suttas. He writes about the Chiggala Sutta, The Hole, which he calls the Kanakacchapa-Sutta, which is about the blind sea turtle and the floating yoke and how becoming a human is a very rare thing. This is one of my favorite suttas. However, Sayadaw REWRITES the sutta (or combines it with another sutta), adding an odd section that isn't in the original sutta! *gasp* Then he follows with an interpretation of the sutta that is completely contrary to the meaning of the original. *gasp* Allow me to quote an abbreviated section of this misrepresentation: "At one time, the Buddha addressed the disciples thus: 'There is, O Bhikkhus, in the ocean a turtle, both of whose eyes are blind. He plunges into the water of the unfathomable ocean and swims about incessantly Then the Buddha said, 'O Bhikkhus, the occurence of such a strange thing is not to be counted a difficult one; for there is still a greater…more difficult than this lying hidden from your knowledge. And what is this? It is, O Bhikkhus, the obtaining of the opportunity of becoming a man again by a man who has expired and is reborn once in any of the four realms of misery. The occurrence of the yoking of the blind tortoise is not worth thinking of as a difficult occurrence in comparison therewith. Because those who perform good deeds and abstain from doing bad alone can obtain the existence of men and Devas. The beings in the four miserable worlds cannot discern what is virtuous and what vicious, what good and what bad, what moral and what immoral, what meritorious and what demeritorious, and consequently they live a life of immorality and demerit, tormenting one another with all their power. Those creatures of the Niraya and Peta abode in particular, live a very miserable life on account of punishments and torments which they experience with sorrow, pain and distress. Therefore, O Bhikkhus, the opportunity of being reborn in the abode of men is a hundred times, a thousand times harder to obtain than the encountering of the blind turtle with the yoke." James: This second section isn't in the original sutta. First, the original doesn't have that odd 'O Bhikkhus' repeated over and over again (and I don`t know of a single sutta where the Buddha says that so many times). The original doesn't have 'O Bhikkhus' at all The only thing similar is the last sentence. Now, when reading this last sentence, and reading Sayadaw's interpretation, I am very puzzled. This is how he interprets this sutta: "According to this Sutta, why those creatures who are born in the miserable planes are far from human existence is because they never look up but always look down. And what is meant by looking down? The ignorance in them by degrees becomes greater and stronger from one existence to another; and as the water of a river always flows down to the lower plains, so also they are always tending towards the lower existences; for the ways towards the higher existences are closed to them, while those towards the lower existences are freely open. This is the meaning of "looking down". Hence, from this story of the blind turtle, the wise apprehend how great, how fearful, how terribly perilous are the evils of the -- Puthujjana-gati, i.e. "the dispersion of existence." ` Huh? This interpretation is contrary to the original, to the first section, and to the last line. I don't hold this work in high regard. Metta, James 17294 From: James Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 2:29pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi James, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > Are you going to trust more the teachings of Lord Buddha > > or the teachings of Ledi Sayadaw? My vote goes with Lord Buddha. > > I'm with you 100%. Please help me out with a Sutta reference. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Rob M, Sure, Check out the Majjhima Nikaya; The Middle Length Discourses: M,i,141. (The welcome to this group said not to quote entire suttas, only sections). Metta, James 17295 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 2:49pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi James, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > Sure, Check out the Majjhima Nikaya; The Middle Length Discourses: > M,i,141. (The welcome to this group said not to quote entire suttas, > only sections). I don't think that it is on-line and I have to wait until I fly home to pull out my hard copy. Metta, Rob M :-) 17296 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 3:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta > > Through some research, I can only conclude that the dictionary you are referring to is giving erroneous information. Amazingly, it does admit this in the preface to the first addition (see end of this post). The editor, or the sources, have confused `belief in a permanent individuality' (sakkaya) and `desire for existence' (asava). The destruction of the fetter of sakkaya does occur at the first 'stage', Sotapatti (Entering the Stream), but the destruction of the three asavas, of which desire for existence is one, occurs at the last stage, Arahatship (Enlightened) . The difference between this two is very crucial to understanding: the first is concerning belief and the second is concerning desire. At the Stream Entry level, the person no longer believes that he/she has a permanent self, or a soul that will last for eternity. He or She has lost the belief in that idea/view. However, that doesn't mean 'a false self' is then no longer present, it still present to experience kamma and rebirth. I don't think it is quite correct to say that some false self is present and that this false self experiences kamma and rebirth. Rather it is the desire for becoming, the subtle attachment to the idea ' I am' that is still present. A very good Sutta on this is SM XXII.89, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-089.html . Here is the part that relates to this..... "Friends, even though a noble disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters, he still has with regard to the five clinging-aggregates a lingering residual 'I am' conceit, an 'I am' desire, an 'I am' obsession. But at a later time he keeps focusing on the phenomena of arising & passing away with regard to the five clinging-aggregates: 'Such is form, such its origin, such its disappearance. Such is feeling... Such is perception... Such are fabrications... Such is consciousness, such its origin, such its disappearance.' As he keeps focusing on the arising & passing away of these five clinging-aggregates, the lingering residual 'I am' conceit, 'I am' desire, 'I am' obsession is fully obliterated." 17297 From: James Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 6:37pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Ray Hendrickson" wrote: A very good Sutta on this is SM XXII.89, > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-089.html . Here is the > part that relates to this..... > > "Friends, even though a noble disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters, > he still has with regard to the five clinging-aggregates a lingering > residual 'I am' conceit, an 'I am' desire, an 'I am' obsession. But at a > later time he keeps focusing on the phenomena of arising & passing away with > regard to the five clinging-aggregates: 'Such is form, such its origin, such > its disappearance. Such is feeling... Such is perception... Such are > fabrications... Such is consciousness, such its origin, such its > disappearance.' As he keeps focusing on the arising & passing away of these > five clinging-aggregates, the lingering residual 'I am' conceit, 'I am' > desire, 'I am' obsession is fully obliterated." Dear Ray, Thanks for the sutta! It is funny because I have argued this issue for months on the Internet, even got private e-mails blasting me for being 'attached to atta', and this is the first time that my position is being considered without overreaction. I agree with you, my term 'false self' is probably not the best term to use; and I knew it wasn't when I used it, but I wanted to keep my description simple. The 'I am that I am' of Selfhood sounds a bit too Biblical ;-) But I guess it will work. I just want to disagree on one minor point, the "I am that I am" of Selfhood is what propels existence into life after life, where kamma is a natural law of that conditioned existence. The sutta that you quote doesn't say otherwise. I am not sure how you came to your conclusion that rebirth and kamma aren't related/linked. Again, I really like the sutta. Thanks for sharing :-) Metta, James 17298 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 8:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Oh I think that rebirth and kamma are indeed linked, but there is nothing in that linking that can be called self, at least as the term is normally used. Ray is not reborn, James is not reborn and yet there is rebirth. Even that most basic craving for being is without self, is dependently arisen and ceases when the conditions for its arising cease. > > I agree with you, my term 'false self' is probably not the best term > to use; and I knew it wasn't when I used it, but I wanted to keep my > description simple. The 'I am that I am' of Selfhood sounds a bit too > Biblical ;-) But I guess it will work. > > I just want to disagree on one minor point, the "I am that I am" of > Selfhood is what propels existence into life after life, where kamma > is a natural law of that conditioned existence. The sutta that you > quote doesn't say otherwise. I am not sure how you came to your > conclusion that rebirth and kamma aren't related/linked. > > Again, I really like the sutta. Thanks for sharing :-) > > Metta, James 17299 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 8:53pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Dear Rob M, I'd like to second what Robert K wrote; "Thanks so much for showing us your contemplations over the last few days." There have been some excellent posts on this thread including some reposted from the past. Aside from the humour, I thought Mike's comment was very deep: "'I' don't mind giving up the idea of self, just so long as 'I'm' allowed to choose to do so (and receive the credit)...!" As you know, the answer to these conundrums is simply to understand the namas and rupas of the present moment. Where, after all, is the *need* to understand (to KNOW)? -- which paramattha dhamma is that? It's nowhere, there is no such thing; it's just like the past and the future -- non-existent. Kind regards, Ken H 17300 From: Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 5:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi, Victor - In a message dated 11/28/02 2:30:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I think you are entangled in your own self-view "what is self is > permanent, unchanging, fixed." > > Metta, > Victor > > ======================= These are standard features of an alleged self. In any case, if you think I am entangled, it's fine with me that you think so. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17301 From: Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 5:55pm Subject: Away Until Sunday Night Hi, all - I'm leaving by plane in the morning for the Chicago area, to return Sunday night. I will reply after I get back to any mail directed to me. Have a good weekend, all. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17302 From: rahula_80 Date: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:12am Subject: Rebirth-Immediate? Hi, Is rebirth immediate? SN 4.400 At that time, Vaccha, when a being has laid down this body, and that being (satto) has not yet taken up another (annataram) body (kayam) in rebirth (anupapanno); therein I declare [that beings] fuel to be thirstfulness (tanhupadanam). At that time, Vaccha, I declare [the beings] fuel to be thirstfulness. This sutta seems to suggest that it is not. 17303 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Nov 29, 2002 4:24am Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Ray and all, How is the term "self" normally used? Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Ray Hendrickson" wrote: > Oh I think that rebirth and kamma are indeed linked, but there is nothing > in that linking that can be called self, at least as the term is normally > used. Ray is not reborn, James is not reborn and yet there is rebirth. > Even that most basic craving for being is without self, is dependently > arisen and ceases when the conditions for its arising cease. > > > > I agree with you, my term 'false self' is probably not the best term > > to use; and I knew it wasn't when I used it, but I wanted to keep my > > description simple. The 'I am that I am' of Selfhood sounds a bit too > > Biblical ;-) But I guess it will work. > > > > I just want to disagree on one minor point, the "I am that I am" of > > Selfhood is what propels existence into life after life, where kamma > > is a natural law of that conditioned existence. The sutta that you > > quote doesn't say otherwise. I am not sure how you came to your > > conclusion that rebirth and kamma aren't related/linked. > > > > Again, I really like the sutta. Thanks for sharing :-) > > > > Metta, James 17304 From: nidive Date: Fri Nov 29, 2002 6:36am Subject: Re: ATTENTION: DSG "LURKERS" Hi robmoult, You said: Anything that happens to us is vipaka (the passive effect of an past active consciousness). But how does that fit into what the Buddha said below ? ... "Having approached the priests & contemplatives who hold that... whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold that... whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past?' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.' Then I said to them, 'Then in that case, a person is a killer of living beings because of what was done in the past. A person is a thief... unchaste... a liar... a divisive speaker... an abusive speaker... an idle chatterer... covetous... malevolent... a holder of wrong views because of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative... [AN III.61] NEO Swee Boon 17305 From: ajahn_paul Date: Fri Nov 29, 2002 7:07am Subject: Re: ATTENTION: DSG "LURKERS" > > PS: Ajahn Paul, I really respect your efforts to learn the Dhamma > (and Abhidhamma) in a language in which you are not fluent. I have > already sent an email to try and track down a Chinese verion of > Bhikkhu Bodhi's "Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma". Thanks Rob! i will study hard! ^_~ 17306 From: James Date: Fri Nov 29, 2002 9:49am Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Ray Hendrickson" wrote: > Oh I think that rebirth and kamma are indeed linked, but there is nothing > in that linking that can be called self, at least as the term is normally > used. Ray is not reborn, James is not reborn and yet there is rebirth. > Even that most basic craving for being is without self, is dependently > arisen and ceases when the conditions for its arising cease. Ray, I don't understand what you are saying here. Could you please clarify? If 'I am that I am' of Selfhood isn't at the center of kamma or rebirth, what is? What is the catalyst and the receiver of kamma and rebirth? I am not following you. Perhaps you are defining 'self' in a way unfamiliar to me. Please explain in as many ways as you can. This is a slippery subject and I need more to go on. Thanks. Metta, James 17307 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Fri Nov 29, 2002 9:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Victor, I think the term is normally used as some sort of identity which has some type of control over the body, thoughts, feelings, etc and can possess other items, such has bravely, material possessions, etc. Usually this identification is with some aspect of mental formations or consciousness, but it can also be with the body. Thus you hear statements like 'I am smart.' I am sensitive.' I am strong.' etc. ----- Original Message ----- From: "yu_zhonghao" Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 4:24 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta > Hi Ray and all, > > How is the term "self" normally used? > > Metta, > Victor > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Ray Hendrickson" > wrote: > > Oh I think that rebirth and kamma are indeed linked, but there is > nothing > > in that linking that can be called self, at least as the term is > normally > > used. Ray is not reborn, James is not reborn and yet there is > rebirth. > > Even that most basic craving for being is without self, is > dependently > > arisen and ceases when the conditions for its arising cease. > > > > > > I agree with you, my term 'false self' is probably not the best > term > > > to use; and I knew it wasn't when I used it, but I wanted to keep > my > > > description simple. The 'I am that I am' of Selfhood sounds a bit > too > > > Biblical ;-) But I guess it will work. > > > > > > I just want to disagree on one minor point, the "I am that I am" > of > > > Selfhood is what propels existence into life after life, where > kamma > > > is a natural law of that conditioned existence. The sutta that > you > > > quote doesn't say otherwise. I am not sure how you came to your > > > conclusion that rebirth and kamma aren't related/linked. > > > > > > Again, I really like the sutta. Thanks for sharing :-) > > > > > > Metta, James 17308 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Fri Nov 29, 2002 11:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Considering the nature of this group, I wish I could put things into Abhidhamma terms, but I will do the best I can and hope others could expand or detract within the framework of the Abhidhamma. I do not see any notion of 'I am' at the center of kamma or rebirth. I see something much more fundamental, a subtle basic desire or thirst for becoming. Not necessarily becoming any self, just becoming. Let me give some examples....if you have never had an experience which you felt was life threatening there can arise a very fundamental, basic desire to live. This sensation or feeling that arises is not the desire for Ray to live, but just a basic fear of death and a longing for life. After this comes the notion of I may not live, my family needs me, etc. But before that I have felt just a overwhelming desire for life that was not related to self per say. I think this is something of the nature of the thirst for being. As for something receiving karma, I don't see it that way. Take the example of a caterpillar metamorphosing into a butterfly. Probably most of what the caterpillar ate and perhaps some of what was experienced, will go into what will become the butterfly. But the butterfly does not really receive this, that is putting the cart in front of the horse, but rather develops from it. Thus I would not say that the caterpillar becomes the butterfly, the butterfly is not the caterpillar with wings, but rather the caterpillar becomes the cause for the development of the butterfly. They are not two separate beings, nor are they one. ----- Original Message ----- From: "James" Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 9:49 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Ray Hendrickson" > wrote: > > Oh I think that rebirth and kamma are indeed linked, but there > is nothing > > in that linking that can be called self, at least as the term is > normally > > used. Ray is not reborn, James is not reborn and yet there is > rebirth. > > Even that most basic craving for being is without self, is > dependently > > arisen and ceases when the conditions for its arising cease. > > Ray, > > I don't understand what you are saying here. Could you please > clarify? If 'I am that I am' of Selfhood isn't at the center of > kamma or rebirth, what is? What is the catalyst and the receiver of > kamma and rebirth? I am not following you. Perhaps you are > defining 'self' in a way unfamiliar to me. Please explain in as > many ways as you can. This is a slippery subject and I need more to > go on. Thanks. > > Metta, James 17309 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Nov 29, 2002 0:56pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Ray, Ray, you are trying to explain how the term "self" is used by delineating what self is. You presented your self-view even though I didn't ask for it. What are the definitions of the word "self" in the dictionary? In what way do people normally use it? In what way did the Buddha and his disciples use it as recorded in the Pali Canon? Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Ray Hendrickson" wrote: > Hi Victor, I think the term is normally used as some sort of identity which > has some type of control over the body, thoughts, feelings, etc and can > possess other items, such has bravely, material possessions, etc. Usually > this identification is with some aspect of mental formations or > consciousness, but it can also be with the body. Thus you hear statements > like 'I am smart.' I am sensitive.' I am strong.' etc. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "yu_zhonghao" > To: > Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 4:24 AM > Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta > > > > Hi Ray and all, > > > > How is the term "self" normally used? > > > > Metta, > > Victor > > 17310 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta What I gave you is what I think folks mean by the word. When you asked me how is the term normally used, I gave you what I think folks mean by the term. The dictionary says "1.A person or thing referred to with respect to complete individually, 'ones own self.' ....4. the ego; that which knows, remembers, desires, suffers, etc." (Random House Dictionary) I think the tem is used similarly within the Pali Canon, esp. number 4 with regards to discussions about non-self. It is definition number 4 that is being refuted, that there is a "self" that knows, etc. There is knowing but no knower. ----- Original Message ----- From: "yu_zhonghao" Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 12:56 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta > Hi Ray, > > Ray, you are trying to explain how the term "self" is used by > delineating what self is. You presented your self-view even though I > didn't ask for it. > > What are the definitions of the word "self" in the dictionary? In > what way do people normally use it? In what way did the Buddha and > his disciples use it as recorded in the Pali Canon? > > Metta, > Victor > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Ray Hendrickson" > wrote: > > Hi Victor, I think the term is normally used as some sort of > identity which > > has some type of control over the body, thoughts, feelings, etc and > can > > possess other items, such has bravely, material possessions, etc. > Usually > > this identification is with some aspect of mental formations or > > consciousness, but it can also be with the body. Thus you hear > statements > > like 'I am smart.' I am sensitive.' I am strong.' etc. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "yu_zhonghao" > > To: > > Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 4:24 AM > > Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta > > > > > > > Hi Ray and all, > > > > > > How is the term "self" normally used? > > > > > > Metta, > > > Victor > > > > 17311 From: robmoult Date: Fri Nov 29, 2002 2:03pm Subject: Re: ATTENTION: DSG "LURKERS" Hi Swee Boon, You raise an excellent point. Forgive me for "going back to basics" and bringing up stuff that you probably already know in my reply, but my stated intention is to bring more "lurkers out of the woodwork". Consciousness (citta) is grouped into four classifications according to jati (birth): - Kusala: active "good" states (generates kamma) - Akusala: active "bad" states (generates kamma) - Vipaka: passive result of past kusala or akusala (result of kamma) - Kiriya: functional states, not associated with kamma You may see vipaka classified as being "akusala vipaka" or "kusala vipaka", but don't get confused. Vipaka is not inherently good or bad; "akusala vipaka" has a past akusala action as its seed. That past akusala was "bad" because it was lobha-mula (greed rooted), dosa-mula (hatred rooted) or dosa-mula (delusion rooted). The vipaka that arises because of that past akusala action is not inherently bad (it has no roots); the use of the term "akusala" in "akusala vipaka" is simply to indicate the source in the past, not to assign any moral value to the vipaka citta. With these definitions in mind, let's look at the cittas in a sense door thought process: - Bhavanga: Vipaka (the result of the last thought moment of your last existence) - Adverting: Kiriya (directs the thought process to take up the new object) - Sense door consciousness / Receiving / Investigating: Vipaka (this is what "happens to us"; it is the result of some past kamma. What happens to us is not inherently good or bad) - Determining: Kiriya (this is the crux of the issue. The mental state that directs the thought process to the active states is functional, it is outside the workings of kamma) - Javana: Akusla or Kusala (the active states that create more kamma) - Registration: Vipaka (same as Sense door consciousness / Receiving / Investigating) The key point here is that the critical determining citta is functional; free from kamma. In other words, our past determines what happens to us (our current situation), but does not determine what we do with our current situation (or action). In other words, our actions are not determined by kamma. I think that the problem is that the Sutta says, "Whatever a person experiences... all that is caused by past action" is a wrong view. The answer lies in the examples given by the Buddha; "killer, thief, liar, etc.". These are examples of things that a person *DOES*; these are not examples of a person's current situation. If the Buddha had given examples of "rich, poor, clever, etc.", then I would be perplexed. I am hoping that there is a Pali scholar out there who can look at the Pali word that was translated as "experiences" and confirm that it might be better translated as "does" or "becomes". In any case, the examples given by the Buddha make his meaning clear. Swee Boon, did I answer your question? Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > Hi robmoult, > > You said: > Anything that happens to us is vipaka (the passive effect of an past > active consciousness). > > But how does that fit into what the Buddha said below ? ... > > "Having approached the priests & contemplatives who hold that... > whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in > the past,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold that... > whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in > the past?' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.' Then I said to > them, 'Then in that case, a person is a killer of living beings > because of what was done in the past. A person is a thief... > unchaste... a liar... a divisive speaker... an abusive speaker... an > idle chatterer... covetous... malevolent... a holder of wrong views > because of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what > was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, > no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be > done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & > shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot > righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative... > > [AN III.61] > > NEO Swee Boon 17312 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Nov 29, 2002 3:10pm Subject: RE: [dsg] question Dear Ranil, If we think of situations as really no situations, but think of them as dhammas or about some relevant situations as presented in the tipitakas, a lot (and all, if one is really wise ;-) ) of situations can provide many useful learning experiences. The most beneficial attention would be the attention toward the appearing dhamma at the moment. one can see for oneself, that even right then, there is only nama and rupa. There is no person, no beings, and only thinking causes us to complicate things that is already past. This applies to all situations: if mindfulness arises, then one is already learning about the "situation" (or really, the no-situation). But besides learning about the dhamma directly or by contemplation of the dhammas, we can learn by situations too... For example, if we notice the behavior of the bodhisattas, the monks, and even the laymen, about being detailed about a situation, then we can learn why it benefits to be one ourselves. There is a story about maha kaccana(???). The monk was in his hut, while there were young brahmins outside who made loud noises and said things to mock the monks. The monk went out and gave them a comparison of an arahat and those who hasn't heard of the Buddha's teachings. The young brahmins went back and told their teacher that the monk had made disparage comments about brahmins. The teacher got angry, but when he arrived at the monk's residence, he queried the monk (instead of being accusory) as to what really happened. The monk then repeated what he told the young brahmins to the teacher. At the end of the teaching, the teacher took refuge in the triple gems. We can see in this story that, despite being angry, but because of being wise, the teacher is detailed in finding out from the direct participant of an event what happened. Because of that, hearing the true teaching is possible for him. This is a great benefit indeed. When I hear/see something that is obviously akusala, I sometimes think that I myself haven't be ridden of these unbeneficial states, and should work toward ridding those unbeneficial states (at foremost, permanently, and for now, temporarily). Akusala states should be "let go", and kusala states can be developed. When I hear/see something that is obviously kusala, the opposite thought sometimes occur. Besides Anumoddhana, I sometimes think, I, too, should develop these beneficial states. One is inclined to think about things however one has accumulated. I don't think how a person thinks of things will work for everybody. This is why it is nice to read the Tipitakas, and read about how all these wise people learned from situations in their daily life. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: ranil gunawardena [mailto:dearranil@h...] > > > if another person misunderstands us, > on the misunderstanding builds more and scolds us, > how should we handle the situation? > what thoughts should we have towards that person? > 17313 From: nidive Date: Fri Nov 29, 2002 4:38pm Subject: Re: ATTENTION: DSG "LURKERS" Hi robmoult, You said: Consciousness (citta) is grouped into four classifications according to jati (birth): - Kusala: active "good" states (generates kamma) - Akusala: active "bad" states (generates kamma) - Vipaka: passive result of past kusala or akusala (result of kamma) - Kiriya: functional states, not associated with kamma How does that fit into SN XXXVI.21 ? ... Once the Blessed One dwelled at Rajagaha in the Bamboo-Grove Monastery, at the Squirrel's Feeding Place. There a wandering ascetic, Moliya Sivaka by name, called on the Blessed One, and after an exchange of courteous and friendly words, sat down at one side. Thus seated, he said: "There are, revered Gotama, some ascetics and brahmans who have this doctrine and view: 'Whatever a person experiences, be it pleasure, pain or neither-pain-nor-pleasure, all that is caused by previous action.' Now, what does the revered Gotama say about this?" "Produced by (disorders of the) bile, there arise, Sivaka, certain kinds of feelings. That this happens, can be known by oneself; also in the world it is accepted as true. Produced by (disorders of the) phlegm... of wind... of (the three) combined... by change of climate... by adverse behavior... by injuries... by the results of Kamma -- (through all that), Sivaka, there arise certain kinds of feelings. That this happens can be known by oneself; also in the world it is accepted as true. "Now when these ascetics and brahmans have such a doctrine and view that 'whatever a person experiences, be it pleasure, pain or neither- pain-nor-pleasure, all that is caused by previous action,' then they go beyond what they know by themselves and what is accepted as true by the world. Therefore, I say that this is wrong on the part of these ascetics and brahmans." When this was spoken, Moliya Sivaka, the wandering ascetic, said: "It is excellent, revered Gotama, it is excellent indeed!...May the revered Gotama regard me as a lay follower who, from today, has taken refuge in him as long as life lasts." ----------------------------------------------- Other Questions: If I am hurrying home and the rain started to pour halfway through and I got all drenched, is 'being drenched by the rain' vipaka? What is the cause of 'being drenched by the rain'? Need there be a cause for it? It 'being drenched by the rain' necessarily vipaka even though it is unpleasant? I am repairing a car. While I was repairing, I accidentally poked my hand with the screwdriver. Blood oozed out from my hand and it was painful bodily. Is this vipaka? What is the cause for it? NEO Swee Boon 17314 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Nov 29, 2002 5:38pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Ray, Do you know that the word "self" is also a pronoun? I believe most dictionaries have that definition. Other definitions for the word "self" are mostly on what self is. The definition you mentioned "the ego; that which knows, remembers, desireds, suffers, etc." is one of them. When it comes to understand the word "self", most people either think in terms of what self is or assume it implicitly. They are entangled in one self-view or another. When I asked you how the term "self" is normally used, I did not ask you to define what self is. Instead, I was trying to get you see how the word "self" is used as pronoun. If you examine the Pali Canon closely, you will see that is how the Buddha and his disciples used it as well. Do you see how the dictionary define the word "self" as pronoun? Instead of giving definition of what self is, it gives example to show how the word "self" is used. The Buddha's teaching on each and every aggregate being not self is a simple yet profound and liberating teaching. Self-views are entangling. One would never get close to understand the Buddha's teaching if he or she tries to understand it with a self-view. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Ray Hendrickson" wrote: > What I gave you is what I think folks mean by the word. When you asked me > how is the term normally used, I gave you what I think folks mean by the > term. The dictionary says "1.A person or thing referred to with respect to > complete individually, 'ones own self.' ....4. the ego; that which knows, > remembers, desires, suffers, etc." (Random House Dictionary) I think the > tem is used similarly within the Pali Canon, esp. number 4 with regards to > discussions about non-self. It is definition number 4 that is being > refuted, that there is a "self" that knows, etc. There is knowing but no > knower. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "yu_zhonghao" > To: > Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 12:56 PM > Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta > > > > Hi Ray, > > > > Ray, you are trying to explain how the term "self" is used by > > delineating what self is. You presented your self-view even though I > > didn't ask for it. > > > > What are the definitions of the word "self" in the dictionary? In > > what way do people normally use it? In what way did the Buddha and > > his disciples use it as recorded in the Pali Canon? > > > > Metta, > > Victor 17315 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Fri Nov 29, 2002 6:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Yes Victor I agree that the term self is most often used in the Pali Canon as a pronoun. Often those who find quotes to try to show the Buddha taught about some eternal self take the term self, used as a pronoun, and assume that it is some statement about an eternal self. For example this use of self as a pronoun is demonstrated in the Dhammapada #12. ----- Original Message ----- From: "yu_zhonghao" Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 5:38 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta > Hi Ray, > When I asked you how the term "self" is normally used, I did not ask > you to define what self is. Instead, I was trying to get you see how > the word "self" is used as pronoun. If you examine the Pali Canon > closely, you will see that is how the Buddha and his disciples used > it as well. > > Do you see how the dictionary define the word "self" as pronoun? > Instead of giving definition of what self is, it gives example to > show how the word "self" is used. > > The Buddha's teaching on each and every aggregate being not self is a > simple yet profound and liberating teaching. Self-views are > entangling. One would never get close to understand the Buddha's > teaching if he or she tries to understand it with a self-view. > > Metta, > Victor > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Ray Hendrickson" > wrote: > > What I gave you is what I think folks mean by the word. When you > asked me > > how is the term normally used, I gave you what I think folks mean > by the > > term. The dictionary says "1.A person or thing referred to with > respect to > > complete individually, 'ones own self.' ....4. the ego; that which > knows, > > remembers, desires, suffers, etc." (Random House Dictionary) I > think the > > tem is used similarly within the Pali Canon, esp. number 4 with > regards to > > discussions about non-self. It is definition number 4 that is being > > refuted, that there is a "self" that knows, etc. There is knowing > but no > > knower. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "yu_zhonghao" > > To: > > Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 12:56 PM > > Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta > > > > > > > Hi Ray, > > > > > > Ray, you are trying to explain how the term "self" is used by > > > delineating what self is. You presented your self-view even > though I > > > didn't ask for it. > > > > > > What are the definitions of the word "self" in the dictionary? In > > > what way do people normally use it? In what way did the Buddha > and > > > his disciples use it as recorded in the Pali Canon? > > > > > > Metta, > > > Victor > 17316 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Sat Nov 30, 2002 3:41am Subject: RE: [dsg] question Thank you very much dear Kom, Pin to you, with meththa ranil >But besides learning about the dhamma directly or by >contemplation of the dhammas, we can learn by situations >too... This is why it is nice to read the >Tipitakas, and read about how all these wise people learned >from situations in their daily life. > > if another person misunderstands us, > > on the misunderstanding builds more and scolds us, > > how should we handle the situation? > > what thoughts should we have towards that person? 17317 From: James Date: Sat Nov 30, 2002 7:49am Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Ray Hendrickson" wrote: > Considering the nature of this group, I wish I could put things into > Abhidhamma terms, but I will do the best I can and hope others could expand > or detract within the framework of the Abhidhamma. I do not see any notion > of 'I am' at the center of kamma or rebirth. I see something much more > fundamental, a subtle basic desire or thirst for becoming. Not necessarily > becoming any self, just becoming. Let me give some examples....if you have > never had an experience which you felt was life threatening there can arise > a very fundamental, basic desire to live. This sensation or feeling that > arises is not the desire for Ray to live, but just a basic fear of death and > a longing for life. After this comes the notion of I may not live, my > family needs me, etc. But before that I have felt just a overwhelming > desire for life that was not related to self per say. I think this is > something of the nature of the thirst for being. > As for something receiving karma, I don't see it that way. Take the > example of a caterpillar metamorphosing into a butterfly. Probably most of > what the caterpillar ate and perhaps some of what was experienced, will go > into what will become the butterfly. But the butterfly does not really > receive this, that is putting the cart in front of the horse, but rather > develops from it. Thus I would not say that the caterpillar becomes the > butterfly, the butterfly is not the caterpillar with wings, but rather the > caterpillar becomes the cause for the development of the butterfly. They are > not two separate beings, nor are they one. Ray, Okay, now I think I understand where you are coming from. You are, to borrow a phrase, "Towing the Buddhist party line." You are looking at what the Buddha stated in various suttas about anatta, applying modern understanding to his statements, and forming a conclusion. However, though what you state sounds profound and esoteric, I find what you state lacking 'the big picture'. You don't seem to include the context in which the Buddha taught the reality of non-self, why he taught it, and where it was supposed to lead. Let's go back to before the Buddha came on the scene, in ancient India. (If I repeat anything you already know, please don't take offense. I have to give some background to lead to my point.) The Vedic belief in atman (self) was that atman was a physical entity, about the size of a thumb, which resided in the heart. This atman was eternal, was reincarnated into body after body, held all of the memories, consciousness, and desires of the body, had created the body and had control over it. Along those lines, the spiritual goal was to have the atman leave the body through the top of the head, join with the `Head God' Brahma, and exist for eternity as `self', with all the memories, characteristics, etc. Later, the Hindu belief, into which the Buddha was born, took this original thinking and applied some elaborations of many atmans existing in the body to join with Brahma and that everything was Brahma so that atman was everything-but still individual self. No one could come to a definitive answer, but many were rushing to find it, therefore ascetics, cults, and religions abounded in the Buddha's time. The Buddha discovered that everyone was `barking up the wrong tree', that atman (atta in Pali) did not exist. Human life was not caused by an atman (self/soul) which created it, it came about due to this/that conditionality (dependent origination). And just as it came about due to causation, that causation could be ceased or halted. The Buddha compared this process to a fire. Ignorance, desire for existence, and craving are the things that fuel the fire, and when those things are removed the fire goes out (nirvana). When the last glowing embers finally die, meaning the body dies, the fire is no more (parinibbana). Okay, along these lines, when the Buddha said that ultimate reality was non-self, what he was saying is that atta (atman) doesn't exist. There isn't a `builder of the house', except the ego (lust, desire for existence, and ignorance… rolled up into one). Does ego exist? Well, yes and no. It obviously exists to fuel the fire, but it doesn't exist as something that is eternal. Ego is also impermanent. So `self' does exist, but as something that is impermanent, not something that is eternal…or has control over existence. Our difficulty lies in the fact that the mind tells us `existence' equals `permanence'. The Buddha learned and taught otherwise. I hope this is an adequate response to our differences in understanding of 'self'. Take care. Metta, James 17318 From: nidive Date: Sat Nov 30, 2002 8:28am Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi robmoult, Is this stream something which is reality (dhamma) according to the Abhidhamma? Or is it merely a concept? Is this stream citta, cetasika or rupa? Or is this stream neither citta, nor cetasika, nor rupa? If this stream is merely a concept that does not mirror what is reality RIGHT NOW, then this stream doesn't exist and is purely imagination, with time and memory as parameters feeding into it. Don't you agree? NEO Swee Boon --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Howard, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > =========================== > > Could you explain how kamma / rebirth works *with* a > self? ;-) What is > > self is permanent, unchanging, fixed. > > In this case, self is seen as the stream of kamma. > > In a conventional sense, the water in the stream keeps changing, but > it is still has an identity as a stream. > > At this moment, I create kamma. The vipaka from that kamma will > impact what? Answer: My stream, not your stream. It is easy to > associate the stream of kamma with a self. Intellectually, I feel > that this is wrong view, but I haven't had the "ah-ha" moment that > allows me to proceed with an anatta perspective. > > Perhaps it is unreasonable to expect two "ah-ha" moments in the same > week :-). > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17319 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Sat Nov 30, 2002 9:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Towing the Buddhist party line seems like a big chore, if fact I do not think there is such a thing. There are certainly more than one Buddhist party :) The majority of Buddhist I have talked to online agree with your view of a temporary self. Probably not a majority who use this email group, but in general I have found it a popular approach. I do not think the primary reason the Buddha taught non-self was to deny a eternal/permanent self. Certainly that was part of it, as it is directly stated within some Suttas. But I think the main reason he taught it was to help others develop disenchanted with the aggregates, and through such disenchantment one would develop dispassion towards the aggregates and with dispassion comes release. Here is what I am talking about from the Samyutaa Nikaya: ""[He reflects:] ''I am now being chewed up by feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness. But in the past I was also chewed up by consciousness in the same way I am now being chewed up by present consciousness. And if I delight in future consciousness, then in the future I will be chewed up by consciousness in the same way I am now being chewed up by present consciousness.' Having reflected in this way, he becomes indifferent to past consciousness, does not delight in future consciousness, and is practicing for the sake of disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation with regard to present consciousness. "What do you think, monks -- Is form constant or inconstant?" "Inconstant, lord." "And is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful?" "Stressful, lord." "And is it fitting to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?" ..... ......."Seeing thus, the instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'" You can read the full Sutta at this link. In fact that whole section is about the aggregates and an excellent section to read. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-079.html When Victor wrote back to me, after I tried to explain what folks normally mean by the term self, that I was just giving him my self-view, I was ready to pull out the quotes and do dhamma battle. Luckily I did not take that road. In the next message Victor wrote this..... "The Buddha's teaching on each and every aggregate being not self is a simple yet profound and liberating teaching. Self-views are entangling. One would never get close to understand the Buddha's teaching if he or she tries to understand it with a self-view." I think Victor makes a good point here. There is a big difference between debating self-views and looking at our feelings, thoughts, body, etc and seeing what is there. For me this is the main value of the Abhidhamma, to help us break down what is happening in the moment. Thus we start to get to the point the Buddha is talking about above. Thanks for your response I think we have a fair understanding of how we differ :) Gassho >>>>> >>>Ray, Okay, now I think I understand where you are coming from. You are, to borrow a phrase, "Towing the Buddhist party line." You are looking at what the Buddha stated in various suttas about anatta, applying modern understanding to his statements, and forming a conclusion. However, though what you state sounds profound and esoteric, I find what you state lacking 'the big picture'. You don't seem to include the context in which the Buddha taught the reality of non-self, why he taught it, and where it was supposed to lead. Let's go back to before the Buddha came on the scene, in ancient India. (If I repeat anything you already know, please don't take offense. I have to give some background to lead to my point.) The Vedic belief in atman (self) was that atman was a physical entity, about the size of a thumb, which resided in the heart. This atman was eternal, was reincarnated into body after body, held all of the memories, consciousness, and desires of the body, had created the body and had control over it. Along those lines, the spiritual goal was to have the atman leave the body through the top of the head, join with the `Head God' Brahma, and exist for eternity as `self', with all the memories, characteristics, etc. Later, the Hindu belief, into which the Buddha was born, took this original thinking and applied some elaborations of many atmans existing in the body to join with Brahma and that everything was Brahma so that atman was everything-but still individual self. No one could come to a definitive answer, but many were rushing to find it, therefore ascetics, cults, and religions abounded in the Buddha's time. The Buddha discovered that everyone was `barking up the wrong tree', that atman (atta in Pali) did not exist. Human life was not caused by an atman (self/soul) which created it, it came about due to this/that conditionality (dependent origination). And just as it came about due to causation, that causation could be ceased or halted. The Buddha compared this process to a fire. Ignorance, desire for existence, and craving are the things that fuel the fire, and when those things are removed the fire goes out (nirvana). When the last glowing embers finally die, meaning the body dies, the fire is no more (parinibbana). Okay, along these lines, when the Buddha said that ultimate reality was non-self, what he was saying is that atta (atman) doesn't exist. There isn't a `builder of the house', except the ego (lust, desire for existence, and ignorance. rolled up into one). Does ego exist? Well, yes and no. It obviously exists to fuel the fire, but it doesn't exist as something that is eternal. Ego is also impermanent. So `self' does exist, but as something that is impermanent, not something that is eternal.or has control over existence. Our difficulty lies in the fact that the mind tells us `existence' equals `permanence'. The Buddha learned and taught otherwise. I hope this is an adequate response to our differences in understanding of 'self'. Take care. Metta, James 17320 From: James Date: Sat Nov 30, 2002 10:17am Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Ray Hendrickson" wrote: > Towing the Buddhist party line seems like a big chore, if fact I do not > think there is such a thing. There are certainly more than one Buddhist > party :) The majority of Buddhist I have talked to online agree with your > view of a temporary self. (I have yet to speak to any Buddhists who embrace the possibility of a temporary self. Most I encounter say that there is no self, temporary or otherwise. Actually, that is what you stated in the post that inspired this post. Now I am confused as to where you stand.) Probably not a majority who use this email group, > but in general I have found it a popular approach. (Has a survey been conducted of the members of this group as to their beliefs in anatta, dukkha, Abhiddhamma and karma? There are 260 some odd members and we only hear from a handful; I have no idea what most are thinking. How can you be so sure? Has there been a survey I don't know about? If not, maybe one would be a good idea. This group does have a 'Polls' feature.) > I do not think the primary reason the Buddha taught non-self was to deny a > eternal/permanent self. Certainly that was part of it, as it is directly > stated within some Suttas. But I think the main reason he taught it was to > help others develop disenchanted with the aggregates, and through such > disenchantment one would develop dispassion towards the aggregates and with > dispassion comes release. (First, I am not going to assume the motivations of Lord Buddha for what he taught. He taught differently to different people at different times. Good illustration of impermanence. :-) Additionally, I don't see a difference between teaching the impermanence of self and the unsatisfactoriness of self. They go hand-in-hand in my mind. I hope I didn't imply otherwise with my post.) Here is what I am talking about from the Samyutaa > Nikaya: > > ""[He reflects:] ''I am now being chewed up by feeling... perception... > fabrications... consciousness. But in the past I was also chewed up by > consciousness in the same way I am now being chewed up by present > consciousness. And if I delight in future consciousness, then in the future > I will be chewed up by consciousness in the same way I am now being chewed > up by present consciousness.' Having reflected in this way, he becomes > indifferent to past consciousness, does not delight in future consciousness, > and is practicing for the sake of disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation > with regard to present consciousness. (This was a 'meditation exercise' and 'alternative viewpoint' to self. Obviously the Buddha encouraged this viewpoint because there was a 'self' in his monks keeping them attached to rebirth and karma. If they couldn't get rid of it with direct knowledge, he suggested they could see it as 'chewing' them up. Could be effective for some, but not reality. For example, an eye can't chew itself, it needs something from the outside to chew...so a 'self' can't 'itself'. [obviously this metaphorical outlook/exercise couldn't work for me...I'm too literal. ;-)])> > "What do you think, monks -- Is form constant or inconstant?" "Inconstant, > lord." "And is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful?" "Stressful, > lord." "And is it fitting to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject > to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?" ..... (The Buddha is asking the monks to evaluate their current 'selves' and to reject that notion because it is stressful, dukkha, not because it doesn't exist. The self does exist as an attachement to that which is impermanent.) > > ......."Seeing thus, (Notice this important phrase. The Buddha is talking about changing perception, not about a reality of non-self. If the Buddha was talking about an ultimate reality, he would have said, 'Seeing this reality', or 'With this knowledge'. The Buddha is encouraging an artifical viewpoint to change perception. Nothing negative, but it should be seen for what it really is or one is likely to go crazy taking unreality for reality.) > > When Victor wrote back to me, after I tried to explain what folks normally > mean by the term self, that I was just giving him my self-view, I was ready > to pull out the quotes and do dhamma battle. (I hope you don't view this as dhamma battle. I view this as constructive dialogue to reach higher understanding. Right or wrong doesn't matter really...the truth will eventually be found by us each as individuals. It is the asking of questions that leads to further insight.) Luckily I did not take that > road. In the next message Victor wrote this..... "The Buddha's teaching on > each and every aggregate being not self is a simple yet profound and > liberating teaching. Self-views are entangling. One would never get close > to understand the Buddha's > teaching if he or she tries to understand it with a self-view." I think > Victor makes a good point here. (I think only a Buddha is able to view anything seperate from self- view. If you and Victor have this ability, you are Buddhas) There is a big difference between debating > self-views and looking at our feelings, thoughts, body, etc and seeing what > is there. (It is through dialogue that we will do this more readily. Learning in a vacuum is very difficult, and not recommended by Lord Buddha.) For me this is the main value of the Abhidhamma, to help us break > down what is happening in the moment. Thus we start to get to the point the > Buddha is talking about above. (For some yes, for some no. I see the Abhidhamma as overkill, but to each their own.) > Thanks for your response I think we have a fair understanding of how we > differ :) (I would rather have an understanding of how we relate) Metta, James Gassho 17321 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Sat Nov 30, 2002 11:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta James says:. > > (I have yet to speak to any Buddhists who embrace the possibility of > a temporary self. Most I encounter say that there is no self, > temporary or otherwise. Actually, that is what you stated in the > post that inspired this post. Now I am confused as to where you > stand.) > > Probably not a majority who use this email group, > > but in general I have found it a popular approach. > > (Has a survey been conducted of the members of this group as to their > beliefs in anatta, dukkha, Abhiddhamma and karma? There are 260 some > odd members and we only hear from a handful; I have no idea what most > are thinking. How can you be so sure? Has there been a survey I > don't know about? If not, maybe one would be a good idea. This > group does have a 'Polls' feature.) > I am not aware of any survey. My comment about other Buddhist I have talked to online is based on my experience of chatting with folks in various Buddhist Chats, I help organize Buddhist Chats on AOL. My comment about this group is based on an assumption that those who study the Abhidhamma would be less prone to such a view. You are correct about my view of self, i.e.. no self temporary or otherwise. 17322 From: James Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 3:19am Subject: Emptiness? Hello All, During my sutta studies (BTW, I have been searching for the sutta where Ananda attains arahantship. I haven't read it directly, only parts. Can anyone help?) I have come across a sutta that is perplexing to me. Let me quote the sutta, since it is very short, and then address my confusion: Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.85 Suñña Sutta Empty Then Ven. Ananda went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One, "It is said that the world is empty, the world is empty, lord. In what respect is it said that the world is void?" "Insofar as it is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self: Thus it is said, Ananda, that the world is empty. And what is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self? The eye is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self. Forms... Eye- consciousness... Eye-contact is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self. "The ear is empty... "The nose is empty... "The tongue is empty... "The body is empty... "The intellect is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self. Ideas... Intellect-consciousness... Intellect-contact is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self. Thus it is said that the world is empty." First, I had stated in an earlier post that the suttas don't state anything like `eye-consciousness' etc, this sutta obviously does so I was mistaken about that assumption (I still don't know what it is…but then again, I don't know what any consciousness is either, not really ;-) But, to get to the point of this post, I don't understand the use of `emptiness' in this sutta. Could anatta be considered emptiness? The Buddha goes so far as to state that `contact' is empty of self. Would anyone assume otherwise? What is intellect- contact? What could an intellect possibly contact? Is the Buddha saying the world is empty and void because it is anatta? Is he saying that nothing really exists? Can anyone help my understanding of this profound sutta? Lots of questions I know. Thanks. Metta, James ps. The Buddha states this information about the world like it should be easily seen and understood. The Abhidhamma also does this. Am I missing something here? I don't easily see or understand this. Just as the Abhidhamma states, like it is simply common knowledge or something, that all dhammas are non-self, dukkha, and impermanent, and then takes off from there. Excuse me. For example, if I didn't even know what a number was, how could I then be expected to understand advanced Calculus? 17323 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 5:40am Subject: Re: Emptiness? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > Is the Buddha > saying the world is empty and void because it is anatta? Is he > saying that nothing really exists? Can anyone help my understanding > of this profound sutta? Lots of questions I know. Thanks. ____________ Dear James, Yes, anatta and sunnata are the same. The world is utterly void (sunnatta) of self according to the Theravada: "Void is the world ... because it is void of a self and anything belonging to a self" (suññam attena vá attaniyena vá; S. XXXV, 85); See also M. 43, M. 106. Visuddhimagga . XXI, 55): "Eye ... mind, visual objects ... mind-objects, visual consciousness ... mind- consciousness, corporeality ... consciousness, etc., are void of self and anything belonging to a self; void of permanency and of anything lasting, eternal or immutable.. They are coreless: without a core of permanency, or core of happiness or core of self." __________________ James: The Buddha states this information about the world like it[anatta and sunnata] should > be easily seen and understood. The Abhidhamma also does this. Am I missing something here? I don't easily see or understand this. ______________ Could you point out the references in Abhidhamma or suttas where the Buddha indicated it should be easy to understand? As I understand it it is very difficult; because for so long the mind has run among concepts. Moha (ignorance) obscures the truth. Sammohavinodani: "The characteristic of no-self is unobvious, dark, unclear, dificult to penetrate, difficult to illustrate, difficult to make known. The characteristics of impermanence and pain are made known with or without the arising of the Tathagatas. The characteristic of no-self is not made known without the arising of the Englightened Ones; ......But those five aggregates are no-self because of the words "what is painful is no-self" (S iv 1). Why? Because there is no exercising power over them. The mode of insusceptibility to having power exercised over them is the characteristic of no-self." Robert > > Metta, James > ps. 17324 From: James Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 9:22am Subject: Re: Emptiness? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: Robert, Thank you for the explanation. I believe there is more for me to explore here. I am going to post on another matter. I would appreciate your input if you would like. Thanks. Metta, James ps. I didn't mean that the suttas state that emptiness, void, and non-self are easy to understand, they just state it as if it is easy to understand. Much like Jon using a few words to describe a matter I would need to write pages about ;-) As far as the Abhidhamma, for example, Nina's book The Abhidhamma in Everyday Life, the first chapter describes that all dhammas are non-self, dukkha, impermanent. Doesn't explain these things, just states them. Then the second chapter starts to describe the classifications of rupa. I was thinking, at the time, and what brought me to this group, and has yet to be answered, "Whoa there! Put on the brakes! I cannot possibly understand anything after this point if I don't understand what you are saying. If we don't have a common frame of reference for the characteristics of all dhammas, it is useless to even discuss the matter." Could you imagine trying to solve the equation: 2x + 4= 14 for x, when you and I are not in agreement what 2 equals or what 4 equals?!! It would be impossible. And it is not feasible to say, well, work on the problem anyway, even if you don't know the meanings of the components, and eventually you may figure it out. Is this new math, dharma, or mental torture? ;-) 17325 From: James Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 9:54am Subject: Renunciation? Hello All, Sorry to keep `getting back to the basics', but I believe it is important. During my sutta studies, I also came across this sutta, which I found very fascinating. It isn't that long so I will quote it in its entirety: Anguttara Nikaya IV.170 Yuganaddha Sutta In Tandem On one occasion Ven. Ananda was staying in Kosambi, at Ghosita's monastery. There he addressed the monks, "Friends!" "Yes, friend," the monks responded. Ven. Ananda said: "Friends, whoever -- monk or nun -- declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of four paths. Which four? "There is the case where a monk has developed insight preceded by tranquillity. As he develops insight preceded by tranquillity, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity in tandem with insight. As he develops tranquillity in tandem with insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Whoever -- monk or nun -- declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of these four paths." The find this sutta fascinating for two reasons: First, it is Ananada describing how one achieves Nibbana; Second, his methodology is far more simple than the process described by the Lord Buddha. On the first matter, it is important to see how Ananada describes the process to Nibbana for `followers of the Lord Buddha's teaching'. You see, the Buddha had to discover the dharma on his own, so his path would naturally be a bit more complicated. Ananada has the perspective of seeing those achieve Nibbana who had the path laid out for them at the onset and the encouragement to follow it, so one would assume their methodology would be simpler. The second matter is what Ananda stresses as important as compared to what Lord Buddha stressed as important. Ananda stresses the practice of tranquility as crucial; the Buddha stressed the practice of renunciation as crucial. Which is correct? Perhaps, from this sutta, one could assume that if the teachings are available, renunciation isn't crucial anymore. In other words, the Buddha encouraged renunciation so that they could receive the teachings from him (and other reasons I assume), but if the teachings are available for the layperson, perhaps renunciation isn't necessary anymore. Perhaps being a monk isn't necessary, cultivating tranquility is the key. I know in my personal life, it is stress and chaos that pulls me away from the dharma more than the fact that I own a car and sleep on a high bed. Something interesting to consider and I am just thinking out loud. If anyone wants to comment, I would welcome insights. Are monks a tradition of the past and unnecessary to follow the Buddha's path to fruition in today's world? Metta, James 17326 From: Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 10:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Emptiness? Hi James, Here's something I was reading recently: Udana 4.1, Ireland trans.: ... the perception of impermanence should be cultivated for the removal of the conceit 'I am'. For when one perceives impermanence, Meghiya, the perception of not-self is established. When one perceives not-self the removal of the conceit 'I am' is accomplished, (and one attains) Nibbana here and now. L: I take this to mean we can't hold on to anything. The trick is to see what we are trying to hold. I usually start with what I like and dislike, and go from there. As you can see, no one really "gets it" until the end game, but it's good to know where the field of play is: anicca, dukkha, anatta. Many interesting philosophical thoughts about the nature of existence can be extrapolated from the basic insight into impermanence but they are only useful if they can prompt you to let go of something. Larry 17327 From: Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 10:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Renunciation? Hi again James, You are a veritable gold mine of interesting questions today. As to the relationship between renunciation and tranquility, in my own experience I would say renunciation precedes tranquility and tranquility deepens renunciation. Before I can practice tranquility I have to give up all sorts of activities and, once engaged in a tranquility practice, I have to let go of any 'interests' that may arise. Beyond that, there seems to be a logical progression of relinquishment based on insight in jhana practice, but I haven't really gotten into that. Larry 17328 From: James Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 11:31am Subject: Re: Renunciation? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi again James, > > You are a veritable gold mine of interesting questions today. As to the > relationship between renunciation and tranquility, in my own experience > I would say renunciation precedes tranquility and tranquility deepens > renunciation. Hi Larry, Well, I am long on questions, but short on answers ;-) Thank you for the two posts. They gave me additional food for thought. I do see the value of renunciation, but I also see that there is a specific difference between mental renunciation and actual renunciation. I was wondering about the amount of each needed for tranquility to grow and flourish. It seems to me, from this one sutta, that Ananda and Lord Buddha were different in their approach; however, I am unsure of the translation and what may have been lost in word meaning. But, one would assume, that this should be an extremely accurate statement of Ananda's position since he stated it, and the words of Lord Buddha are second-hand. Of course the extrapolation could be reached that Ananda didn't stress renunciation because he was addressing monks and nuns…those already in a position of renouncement. However, that never stopped the Lord Buddha from preaching renunciation to monks and nuns quite frequently. He was always aware that actual renunciation doesn't equal mental renunciation. Hmmmm…things to ponder. I hope you had a nice holiday weekend. I hope you enjoy what's left...but hope you don't get too attached! ;-) Metta, James 17329 From: peterdac4298 Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 3:32pm Subject: Re: Renunciation? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > Hello All, -snip- > Something interesting to consider and I am just > thinking out loud. If anyone wants to comment, I would welcome > insights. Are monks a tradition of the past and unnecessary to > follow the Buddha's path to fruition in today's world? > > Metta, James Hi James Even at the time of the Buddha, the Bhikkhu life was seen as an advantage rather than a necessity. The Good Lord did teach the Sattipathana Sutta for the benefit of layfolk after all! In todays world this still holds true, with the special role of preserving the Dhamma for the next and future generations. Bhikkhus have an advantage that is quite hard for lay people to duplicate. Cheers Peter 17330 From: James Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 5:40pm Subject: Re: Renunciation? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "peterdac4298" wrote: > Hi James > > Even at the time of the Buddha, the Bhikkhu life was seen as an > advantage rather than a necessity. The Good Lord did teach the > Sattipathana Sutta for the benefit of layfolk after all! > > In todays world this still holds true, with the special role of > preserving the Dhamma for the next and future generations. Bhikkhus > have an advantage that is quite hard for lay people to duplicate. > > Cheers > Peter Hi Peter, I would agree with you, and have always held that position as well, I was just wondering why Ven. Ananda didn't state as much. This sutta is a very strong statement of major importance. I don't think I have seen a teaching of Ananda where he states his own position, rather than restating a teaching of the Buddha, like he does in this sutta. It is significant and I think it should be considered carefully, from many different angles. I think Ananda, through whom we get most of the Buddha's teachings, is an under-recongnized figure in Buddhism. That was why I was looking for the sutta regarding his enlightenment. It occurred after much concentrated effort where he was unsuccessful, and it wasn't until he 'gave up' that he did reached enlightenment. I would like to know the details. I feel there is much to learn from the life, perspective, and teachings of Ananda. Metta, James 17331 From: James Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 5:55pm Subject: 'Reason's Traces' Rob M, I have begun to read a book titled Reason's Traces: Identity and Interpretation in Indian and Tibetan Buddhist Thought by Matthew T. Kapstein, Widsom Publications, 2001. I was wondering if you, or anyone else in this group has read it. What did you (they) think? I will do a post on my findings/interpretations when I have finished the book. I would also like to know of other books or articles related to these issues of anatta and ultimate reality that might be of benefit in my studies. Here is a bit about this book: Professor Jay L. Garfield, Smith College "Kapstein brings great precision, insight and masterful scholarship to a range of important issues in Indian and Tibetan philosophy." Book Description Reason's Traces is a collection of essays by one of the foremost authorities on Indian and Tibetan Buddhism. Kapstein, who is also a scholar of the Western philosophical tradition, sheds light on the theoretical foundations of Buddhist thought. He examines aspects of Buddhist philosophy in India and Tibet, in particular, the questions of personal identity and ultimate reality, and the interpretation of Tantrism. About the Author Matthew Kapstein is Associate Professor, Divinity School, University of Chicago. Metta, James 17332 From: azita gill Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 8:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the Kang Krajan experience > hello dsg'ers and esp. Nina, lodewick, Jon, sarah, Sukin, Jaran,Num, Christine, Robert, Betty, Ell[the fast walker] such a delight to meet with all of you and have the opportunity to discuss the Dhamma with Khun Sujin. And to rejoice in Khun Duangdern's amazing generosity - Anumordana, Khun D. we arrived at Kang Krajan country club early afternoon and after a delicious lunch, a short recover-from-the-trip and time to breathe the fresh,clean air [a relief from BKK], we gathered together for discussion time at Khun D's house, or rather in the garden. here are some excerts from our talks over the next day and a bit: touching appears many times a day, but not yet experienced by satisampajanna [spelling?]. We will know when there is satisampajanna, it will be differrent to now, it will know the characteristic of touching as just touching, no me in there. we cannot escape from nama and rupa. Nama and rupa is all there is - citta, cetasika and rupa - all impermanent, too short to be object of pleasure, therefore Dukkha; and no 'me' only the arising and falling away[rapidly] of citta, cetasika and rupa. nothing else - no thing other than arise of citta, cetasika and rupa and then the falling away. more later. patience, courage and good cheer, and lots of sati Azita. > > > > 17333 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 9:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Renunciation? I think the key here is in how one develops tranquility. I think by tranquility here is meant the development of the jhanas, not just a general peace of mind. Thus we get from Ubhatobhaga Sutta IX.45 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an09-045.html#ananda . "[Ananda:] "There is the case, my friend, where a monk, withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He remains touching with his body in whatever way there is an opening there, and he knows it through discernment. It is to this extent that one is described in a sequential way by the Blessed One as released both ways. " You will notice that the Sutta starts with whoever -- monk or nun -- declares..... Thus I would say that what this Sutta is talking about is the development of liberation with concentration proceeded by insight or insight preceded by concentration, etc. This is a restatement of comments the Buddha makes in other Suttas within the Canon about the different emphasis of practice. I think that in the Sutta that renunciation is assumed, and is considered the forerunner to the development of concentration/tranquility. So it is assumed the monk has withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities, etc. ----- Original Message ----- From: "James" Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 9:54 AM Subject: [dsg] Renunciation? > Hello All, > > Sorry to keep `getting back to the basics', but I believe it is > important. During my sutta studies, I also came across this sutta, > which I found very fascinating. It isn't that long so I will quote > it in its entirety: > > Anguttara Nikaya IV.170 > Yuganaddha Sutta > In Tandem > On one occasion Ven. Ananda was staying in Kosambi, at Ghosita's > monastery. There he addressed the monks, "Friends!" > > "Yes, friend," the monks responded. > > Ven. Ananda said: "Friends, whoever -- monk or nun -- declares the > attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of > one or another of four paths. Which four? > > "There is the case where a monk has developed insight preceded by > tranquillity. As he develops insight preceded by tranquillity, the > path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he > follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are > abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. > > "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity > preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by insight, > the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As > he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are > abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. > > "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity in > tandem with insight. As he develops tranquillity in tandem with > insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues > it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his > fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. > > "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness > concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under > control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, > settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path is > born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows > the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, > his obsessions destroyed. > > "Whoever -- monk or nun -- declares the attainment of arahantship in > my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of these four > paths." > > The find this sutta fascinating for two reasons: First, it is > Ananada describing how one achieves Nibbana; Second, his methodology > is far more simple than the process described by the Lord Buddha. On > the first matter, it is important to see how Ananada describes the > process to Nibbana for `followers of the Lord Buddha's teaching'. > You see, the Buddha had to discover the dharma on his own, so his > path would naturally be a bit more complicated. Ananada has the > perspective of seeing those achieve Nibbana who had the path laid out > for them at the onset and the encouragement to follow it, so one > would assume their methodology would be simpler. > > The second matter is what Ananda stresses as important as compared to > what Lord Buddha stressed as important. Ananda stresses the practice > of tranquility as crucial; the Buddha stressed the practice of > renunciation as crucial. Which is correct? Perhaps, from this > sutta, one could assume that if the teachings are available, > renunciation isn't crucial anymore. In other words, the Buddha > encouraged renunciation so that they could receive the teachings from > him (and other reasons I assume), but if the teachings are available > for the layperson, perhaps renunciation isn't necessary anymore. > Perhaps being a monk isn't necessary, cultivating tranquility is the > key. I know in my personal life, it is stress and chaos that pulls > me away from the dharma more than the fact that I own a car and sleep > on a high bed. Something interesting to consider and I am just > thinking out loud. If anyone wants to comment, I would welcome > insights. Are monks a tradition of the past and unnecessary to > follow the Buddha's path to fruition in today's world? > > Metta, James > > > 17334 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 9:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Dear Larry, I am sorry not to respond sooner. It is the nature of my current schedule that i can only participate to a limited extent. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Robert, > > Nice to see you again. Sorry, but I can't discuss this with you until > you have read the commentary (and maybe some of our discussions) up to > as far as we have studied. Why is that? I'm not a part of the study group, but I am a member of dsg. I think that anyone on dsg can engage in discussion. so why the extra stipulation? Is there a separate private discussion taking place on these boards that is for study group members only? If so it should not be put into a public forum that includes members who are not committed to the reading. If you think I have misapprehensions in anything I say, why not deal with them directly? Of course you are free to make any conditions you want to, but I think it goes against the spirit of free and open discussion to make demands on members to study x, y or z before you will talk to them. After all, we are not each other's teachers here to give out homework assignments and to judge or grade each other's sources or knowledge in that sense. We are here as free participants. If I want to have another source of knowledge for my remarks rather than the Sutta and its commentary, I think I should be free to do so. if you think my remarks are ignorant, i would rather you say so, rather than tell me what i have to read in order to talk to you. If you want to have a study group list only for those who are willing to read the same assignments together, you ought to do so on a separate list, not tell dsg members that they are required to read your assignment before participating. I am interested in the sutta and its commentary in all of its specifics, some of which I have already read and re-read, but my schedule prohibits me from accepting such a prerequisite before i can read your posts or express my views in response. And it is certainly not a requirement of the guidelines of this group. Regards, Robert ====================== We have just touched on the first > "covetousness and grief" in the sutta: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html > > best wishes, Larry 17335 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 10:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Dear Sarah, Thanks for your responses to my points, and also to your always warm invitation to express my 'views', as deluded as they may be. I am glad when something potentially useful comes out of it, even if it is to just be properly criticized. It takes me too long to get back to posts and I apologize for the disruption. I am going on the theory that if I can post from time to time it is better than not posting at all. I at least am very glad to be able to drop in when I can. It feels at this point like visiting good friends -- not that there's any attachment there..... The theme in several of your comments, that the idea of self and desire for a result can easily creep in to one's concept of the path and the attempt to discern realities as well, is very well taken. It is easy to want to jump to the conclusion and feel the 'security' of a method that seems to guarantee enlightenment. All of this must be a denial of the current work of relaxing the clinging mind and submitting to the reality now, whether it seems like it's leading somewhere or not. A friend recently had the insight that all the things that occur in samsara really don't lead anywhere, all the causes and effects lead to just more causes and effects. i thought it was interesting. It removed the whole idea that one can 'get somewhere' by interacting with samsara in this or that way. Only discernment and progress in relation to wisdom does anything, and this only comes by cultivating the right conditions. Anyway, I'm rambling, but I'm happy to hear your reminders about the subtle idea of self. And thanks for letting me take part in this interesting discussion. Best, Robert Ep. ================================= --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > 7. Rob, I appreciate your comments about the rotten food, aversion and > non-reacting. > > Rob: "but I would think there has to be some interference, at least of the > intention to discern what is happening, in order for mindfulness attention > and insight upon its heels to take place." > > Again, I think the idea of self and the wishing for a result creeps in > very craftily. Only sati can be aware of the mind-states at these times. > > 8. Rob: "All of these seem to be developed > gradually by using all expedient means according to one's predisposition > and what works for an individual." > ..... > I agree about the value of seeing the benefit in all kinds of kusala and > thereby they are `developed gradually.' You raise many interesting and > helpful points. As I was discussing with James, seeing the cancer of > desire and ignorance of it at these times is the key, I think. > ***** > Thanks for the many helpful points in both your posts. I apologise if I'm > stepping on any bare toes with these comments. Look forward to hearing > more from you both or others. > > Sarah > ==== 17336 From: Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 5:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Emptiness? The Suttas were delivered to all sorts of individuals or groups with all sorts of different levels of understanding. I believe the best way to try to understand individual suttas is to read all of the suttas over and over. If that is done and they are seriously contemplated, the "puzzle" starts fitting together. As far as this particular sutta is concerned...emptiness does exactly mean -- "empty of self." Empty of self simply means that conditioned phenomena (all phenomena except for Nibbana) arise due to conditions, alter due to conditions, and cease due to conditions. There is nothing that is "self made" or "self generated." When emptiness (no-self) is seen, objects and experiences are not seen as "things with their own identity," but rather they can be seen as -- "selfless formations that are continuously altering/mutating into different formations due to causal forces." TG 17337 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Sun Dec 1, 2002 10:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Renunciation? James I don't know if the material you are looking for is online. It comes from the Vinaya, Vin.2:284 ff. As noted in the book "Great Disciples of the Buddha" by Nyanaponika Thera and Hellmuth Hecker. I think it has the complete section, in as much as it relates to Ananda. I could not find it online, perhaps someone else has a complete source for the Vinaya online? Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "James" Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 5:40 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: Renunciation? > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "peterdac4298" wrote: > > Hi James > > > > Even at the time of the Buddha, the Bhikkhu life was seen as an > > advantage rather than a necessity. The Good Lord did teach the > > Sattipathana Sutta for the benefit of layfolk after all! > > > > In todays world this still holds true, with the special role of > > preserving the Dhamma for the next and future generations. > Bhikkhus > > have an advantage that is quite hard for lay people to duplicate. > > > > Cheers > > Peter > > Hi Peter, > > I would agree with you, and have always held that position as well, > I was just wondering why Ven. Ananda didn't state as much. This > sutta is a very strong statement of major importance. I don't think > I have seen a teaching of Ananda where he states his own position, > rather than restating a teaching of the Buddha, like he does in this > sutta. It is significant and I think it should be considered > carefully, from many different angles. I think Ananda, through whom > we get most of the Buddha's teachings, is an under-recongnized > figure in Buddhism. That was why I was looking for the sutta > regarding his enlightenment. It occurred after much concentrated > effort where he was unsuccessful, and it wasn't until he 'gave up' > that he did reached enlightenment. I would like to know the > details. I feel there is much to learn from the life, perspective, > and teachings of Ananda. > > Metta, James 17338 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 2, 2002 1:24am Subject: Re: 'Reason's Traces' Hi James, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > I have begun to read a book titled Reason's Traces: Identity and > Interpretation in Indian and Tibetan Buddhist Thought > by Matthew T. Kapstein, Widsom Publications, 2001. I was wondering > if you, or anyone else in this group has read it. What did you > (they) think? I will do a post on my findings/interpretations when > I have finished the book. I would also like to know of other books > or articles related to these issues of anatta and ultimate reality > that might be of benefit in my studies. Thanks for the heads up. I am behind on my posts as I have come down with a flu for the past few days (it is my vipaka, it was pre- destined to happen :-) ). I will look for the book next time I am in a Buddhist bookshop. The closest that I have is "The Buddha's Doctrine of Anatta" by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu. It is a small book of 100 pages. I recently picked it up at a place that prints free Dhamma books. Once I recover, I will stop in again to see if they have any more copies and I will send it to you. Metta, Rob M :-) 17339 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Dec 2, 2002 4:50am Subject: Dear Charles Dear Charles, _____________________ C.B. :I hope your children learn English fast because it has a lot of grammer and learn it well because my sister took the test for a good school in England and she only just past. _____________ Well they speak good English but Alex (age 10) is bad at spelling and he doesn't like homework much. _________ How old are your two children? What Boarding School do yo want them to go to? _____________ Roxanne is 12 and my 3rd one, Mei-ling (age 14), lives with my mother in NZ as she found Japanese school too hard because she didn't know the language.We spend lots of money on long distance calls. Roxy and Mei don't want to go to boarding school but Alex does as he wants to sleep in a room with all the other boys and play with them everyday. His favourite game is marbles (after playstation2) ___________ C.B;What do your children think about Buddhism and do they like it? ________ Yes they like it, and they believe in kamma and rebirth like you, so they try to be good. Robert 17340 From: James Date: Mon Dec 2, 2002 5:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Renunciation? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Ray Hendrickson" wrote: > I think the key here is in how one develops tranquility. I think by > tranquility here is meant the development of the jhanas, not just a general > peace of mind. Ray, The problem here is language. I don't know Pali but I am thinking that `tranquility' and `jhanic states' are two quite different things. At least in English they are. I will try to find the sutta in Pali later. Right now, I am deep into studies of anatta. Which, mentioning translation, at this point in my studies I am wondering if anatta is being traditionally translated the best way. Instead of `no-self', maybe it should be `no-essence'?? Thanks for the prospective. You gave me something valuable to ponder. Take care. Metta, James 17341 From: James Date: Mon Dec 2, 2002 6:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Emptiness? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., TGrand458@a... wrote: >snip< > As far as this particular sutta is concerned...emptiness does exactly mean -- > "empty of self." Empty of self simply means that conditioned phenomena (all > phenomena except for Nibbana) arise due to conditions, alter due to > conditions, and cease due to conditions. There is nothing that is "self > made" or "self generated." >/snip< TG, This is an interesting perspective. I don't think I have read this definition previously. I am searching for a way to explain anatta using 'reason' instead of 'intuition'. After all, my intuition and your intuition don't match, but 'reason', by it's very nature, has to match. Then, while we may not agree on definitions, at least we both understand the meaning of the message communicated when discussing anatta (as much as possible ;-). Thank you for this valuable perspective. I will keep it in mind. Metta, James 17342 From: James Date: Mon Dec 2, 2002 6:05am Subject: [dsg] Re: Renunciation? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Ray Hendrickson" wrote: > James I don't know if the material you are looking for is online. It comes > from the Vinaya, Vin.2:284 ff. As noted in the book "Great Disciples of the > Buddha" by Nyanaponika Thera and Hellmuth Hecker. I think it has the > complete section, in as much as it relates to Ananda. I could not find it > online, perhaps someone else has a complete source for the Vinaya online? > Ray Dear Ray, Thank you so much for this information! No wonder I couldn't find it, I was looking in the wrong place! (Hmmmm...story of my life! ;-) I will redirect my attention to the Vinaya. Thanks again. Metta, James 17343 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 2, 2002 6:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Renunciation? Dear James, Ray & All, Delighted to be catching up with yours and everyone’s posts after a really inspiring dhamma-packed weekend....more later. (Azita, thanks for setting a good example with your short summary - look f/w to others;-)) I think you’ll find most the details you’re asking about regarding Ananda in the link to an old post from the series I mentioned before based on the intro to the commentary to the vinaya by Buddhaghosa. The account in the Mahavamsa is almost identical from memory. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/9810 I’m interested to follow the reference in the vinaya itself, but can’t find it at present (and not on line as far as I know). As Ananda’s arahatship occurred after the parinibbana of the Buddha, it makes sense to me that we read about it in the commentaries rather than the suttas. Sarah Pls note that references to ‘Dhamma’ in dhamma-vinaya refer to the Suttanta and Abhidhamma Pitakas as I understand. ===== --- Ray Hendrickson wrote: > James I don't know if the material you are looking for is online. It > comes > from the Vinaya, Vin.2:284 ff. As noted in the book "Great Disciples of > the > Buddha" by Nyanaponika Thera and Hellmuth Hecker. I think it has the > complete section, in as much as it relates to Ananda. I could not find > it > online, perhaps someone else has a complete source for the Vinaya > online? 17344 From: James Date: Mon Dec 2, 2002 7:21am Subject: [dsg] Re: Renunciation? Sarah, Thanks for the reference. Hmmm...those are all the details huh? How disappointing. But thank you for the reference. Okay, I have finally read this commentary you have been pressing! ;-) Let me give you my first impressions and then do some follow-up research. This commentary by Buddhagosa seems to me to be a reactionary piece. He is writing after schisms have already been formed in the Sangha; which would later become many factions of Buddhism. He wanted to hold the Tipitaka up as the definitive word, no question about it, and anyone who questions is a heretic to The Triple Gem. This reminds me of the Old Testament and the writings of the Major and Minor prophets proclaiming that God knew that some would break away from the tradition of the Jews, later becoming Christians, and that God will smite those heretics in due course. Take for example this section from Buddhaghosa: "...the words uttered by Subhadda who had taken to the ascetic life in old age, namely, `Away with it friends, grieve not, lament not, we are well rid of the Great Recluse who was wont to tell us what was befitting and what was not and hence made our lives miserable; but now we will do whatever we please and not do what we please not'; kindled the enthusiasm among the Order of monks to bring about a rehearsal of the Dhamma and Vinaya and further reflected, `It may be that the occasion would arise for evil-minded monks to think that the Sacred-word is such, that its Teacher is no more, to form factions and before long make the Good Teaching disappear for ever." (Question: In what sutta did Subhadda state this?) I don't view this as scholarship on the authority of the Tipitaka, I see this is an attempt at building guilt and blaming. I mean really, to use the phrase `evil-minded monks' is very questionable; and the term `Sacred-word' to describe the teachings run contrary to how the Buddha saw them and described them. Of course the monks wanted to recite/assemble the teachings at the first Council, but I am skeptical that the main intention was due to paranoia over 'evil- minded monks'-just the reasonable intention of making sure the teachings weren't lost due to the passage of time. Could you imagine this monk is basically saying to the Sangha, "Okay, we have to record all of these teachings because I know that some of you are evil-minded, or will be evil-minded, and might try to destroy them." That's quite a pep talk! ;-) And since when is disagreement being evil-minded? Are all Non-Thera Buddhists supposed to be considered 'evil-minded' now? Again, my first impression is that this is a reactionary piece, but I will do more historical research and get back to you. Metta, James 17345 From: immerschlafgut Date: Mon Dec 2, 2002 10:02am Subject: HANDBOOK FOR MANKIND Authored by the Ven.Buddhadasa who is well known for the readiness with which he gives non-literal interpretations to the Buddhist texts. Giving more weight to meditative experience and everyday observation than to philology, he finds meaning in many otherwise obscure points of doctrine. He does not hesitate to reject as naïve a word-for-word interpretation that has no bearing on real life. In this book, he has made the point the point that the whole Buddha- Dhamma is nothing but the teaching dealing with "what is what". He says that Buddhism is the religion which teaches one to know just this much : "what is what". All the chapter in this book dealing with five= aggregates, the four kinds of attachment, intuition in a natural way, intuition by methodical practice, and other topics all point to "what is what". To order the book, Visit www.thaidistinctive.com Click under Books:Religion Category or Contacts immerschlafgut@y... 17346 From: Mom Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala Date: Mon Dec 2, 2002 7:32pm Subject: Re: Yuganaddha Sutta Dear James, Have been a lurker, as Sarah calls it, for far too long, and so, after an absolutely wonderful weekend of Dhamma discussions with Achaan Sujin and others from dsg and our English discussion group in Bangkok, and with encouragement from Sarah (condition for cetana -volition-and chanda-"wish to do"-cetasikas to arise), I decided to write a bit. Several people have asked which of the 4 kinds of methods mentioned by Ven. Ananda in the Yuganaddha sutta is best. The answer depends on "our" accumulations. Each of us, in the course of all "our" numerous lifetimes, have accrued various tendencies, habits, that make up what we call a personality and which incline us towards certain types of actions, either generally kusala (wholesome), or akusala (unwholesome). The fact that you are interested in the Dhamma means that "you" have accumulated tendencies to be interested in and study the Dhamma from various previous lifetimes. However, there is no "you" doing this from lifetime to lifetime. There are only cittas and cetasikas arising which condition various actions, kamma or result (vipaka) or kiriya (cittas that are neither kamma or vipaka, but aid in a citta process) to take place. All those accumulations are "stored" in each citta that arises, and get passed on to the next citta when the previous one has arisen and fallen away. Only "you" can know which method is best for you. "I" tried the method of doing samatha (tranquil) meditation for many years and found that "I" got nowhere that way since there was no understanding arising. For others, that may be best for them, but for me the development of insight (understanding) through satipatthana brings on the development of calmness. But more importantly, it provides for the conditions to bring about awareness and understanding. When we read about, listen to, discuss and contemplate about the Dhamma, this creates conditions for sati (awareness is an inadequate term in English) and panna (insight, understanding) to arise. Other forms of kusala (wholesome actions), generosity and the following of sila (morality) also create conditions for sati and panna to arise. However, "we" have no control over this process and cannot determine when "it" will happen, when understanding will arise. It happens in very small increments, and occurs when "we" have a kind of "ah-ha" experience of the nature of a particular reality arising and of the anattaness of it. This "ah-ha" is different from just reading about it; it is a deep understanding from within. However, it took Lord Buddha eons to perfect "his" stream of cittas and cetasikas to the point that all defilements were eliminated and total understanding arose. "We" certainly cannot expect to achieve it in a shorter time. So, whichever method seems right for you, that is the one to follow. However, the "doing" of kusala actions (bhavana, dana and sila) should accompany you in your daily life, so that the conditions for sati and panna to arise can be developed. metta, Betty _______________________ Mom Bongkojpriya Yugala 38 Soi 41 Phaholyothin Road Bangkok 10900, Thailand tel: 662-579-1050; 661-826-7160 e-mail: beyugala@k... 17347 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 2, 2002 10:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the Kang Krajan experience Dear Azita, Betty & All, It’s a pleasant surprise to ‘re-connect’ and ‘see’ you again so soon on line with good reminders. Hopefully some of the others will follow the example......Yesterday, Jon went straight from the airport around mid-day into legislation drafting in the office while Chris and I have had softer landings and a chance for more leisurely time to catch up with DSG. She’ll be flying back to Brisbane tonight from Hong Kong. It’s always interesting to reflect on what makes most impression after a very memorable dhamma-packed weekend and it is often quite unpredictable . I hope others elaborate on what they found most useful. I know Rob K asked one or two people, so hopefully a few comments will be shared with us all . Perhaps what hit home most for me were the reflections on attachment as the cause of suffering and particularly clinging to self (not necessarily with any wrong view most of the time). I think this was prompted by a comment K.Sujin made to me after the first afternoon’s discussion. So many of our concerns and questions relate to ‘my’ or ‘our’ particular problems, difficulties, fears, worries, progress (or lack of), discouragement, long stories, situations, objects of lobha/dosa according to accumulations, working out intellectual details and so on. Whilst being preoccupied with these issues, there is no understanding of paramattha dhammas at this moment. Knowing the difference at any time, even during dhamma discussion, of the precise characteristics of kusala and akusala cittas and of the various dhammas arising without concern for ‘oneself’ is so very essential. In contrast to these ‘precoccupations’, were the inspiring examples given by K.Sujin, our hosts and by all of kindness, selfless giving and sharing of dhamma help and hospitality at every opportunity. Just a little more glimmer of appreciation of what it means when we talk about attachment being the cause of dukkha. As we read in the Udana (ch 5, 1 ‘Dear’),The Buddha reminds us: “Searching all directions with one's awareness, one finds no one dearer than oneself. In the same way, others are fiercely dear to themselves. So one should not hurt others if one loves oneself.” ***** Many thanks to everyone for making it such a special time. Sarah p.s Thanks Betty for all your tireless help with planning and arrangements. ========================== --- azita gill wrote: > > hello dsg'ers and esp. Nina, lodewick, Jon, > sarah, Sukin, Jaran,Num, Christine, Robert, Betty, > Ell[the fast walker] > such a delight to meet with all of you and have > the opportunity to discuss the Dhamma with Khun Sujin. > And to rejoice in Khun Duangdern's amazing generosity > - Anumordana, Khun D. 17348 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 2, 2002 11:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Renunciation? Hi James, --- James wrote: > Sarah, > > Thanks for the reference. Hmmm...those are all the details huh? > How disappointing. But thank you for the reference. Okay, I have > finally read this commentary you have been pressing! ;-) ..... Actually, what you read from the earlier post was just my summary and quotes from the commentary (not on line). If you read the other posts in the series (before and after) you may get more detail, though I know it may be confusing. If you post any quotes or extracts from any of the segments like you’ve done before for further discussion, that would be good and I’m happy to add any further notes or footnotes from the text;-);-) ..... >Let > me give you my first impressions and then do some follow-up research. > > This commentary by Buddhagosa seems to me to be a reactionary > piece. > Take for example this section from Buddhaghosa: > > "...the words uttered by Subhadda who had taken to the ascetic life > in old age, namely, `Away with it friends, grieve not, lament not, > we are well rid of the Great Recluse who was wont to tell us what > was befitting and what was not and hence made our lives miserable; > but now we will do whatever we please and not do what we please > not'; kindled the enthusiasm among the Order of monks to bring about > a rehearsal of the Dhamma and Vinaya and further reflected, `It may > be that the occasion would arise for evil-minded monks to think that > the Sacred-word is such, that its Teacher is no more, to form > factions and before long make the Good Teaching disappear for ever." > (Question: In what sutta did Subhadda state this?) ..... As Rob K mentioned before, don’t be put-off by English translation terms such as ‘sacred’(after all it is translated in the ‘Sacred Books of the Buddhists’ series;-)) or ‘evil-minded’. Use whatever language is helpful to you. I’ve just checked the reference for Subhadda in Dict of PPN. We read here that Subhadda was a barber. “He entered the Order and resented having to observe various rules, great and small. When the Buddha died and the monks stood weeping, Subhadda asked them to rejoice instead, saying: “We are well rid of the Mahasamana; we shall now do just as we like.” Maha Kassapa heard this while he was on his way from Pava to Kusinara, and it was this remark which made him decide to hold the First council after the Buddha’s Death.” Footnote gives these refs : Vin ii 284f; Dii 162; Mhv iii 6 The reference to Digha Nik is to the Mahaparinibbana Sutta (p.274 in the Walshe transl). More details also in DAii,599 (comm. to DN). ..... > I don't view this as scholarship on the authority of the Tipitaka, I > see this is an attempt at building guilt and blaming. I mean > really, to use the phrase `evil-minded monks' is very questionable; > and the term `Sacred-word' to describe the teachings run contrary to > how the Buddha saw them and described them. Of course the monks > wanted to recite/assemble the teachings at the first Council, but I > am skeptical that the main intention was due to paranoia over 'evil- > minded monks'-just the reasonable intention of making sure the > teachings weren't lost due to the passage of time. ..... OK, perhaps we can just agree that the intention was the preservation of the Teachings so that people like ourselves would have access.Being rehearsed in minute detail and later preserved in writing has meant that they have not been adulterated or altered for the main part to this day. ..... >Could you > imagine this monk is basically saying to the Sangha, "Okay, we have > to record all of these teachings because I know that some of you are > evil-minded, or will be evil-minded, and might try to destroy > them." That's quite a pep talk! ;-) And since when is disagreement > being evil-minded? Are all Non-Thera Buddhists supposed to be > considered 'evil-minded' now? .... Well, James, there have always been and always will be rule-breakers and those who like to rock the boat;-) For my part, I’m glad that Subhadda propmpted Maha Kassapa to hold the First Council and rehearse the Teachings in such detail. I think it’s very apparent that Subhadda’s intentions and disrespect for the Buddha and Dhamma were very unwholesome or whatever expression you find helpful to use. .... > Again, my first impression is that this is a reactionary piece, but > I will do more historical research and get back to you. ..... Good. As I understand the ancient commentaries (and abhidhamma) to be the most authoritative sources to support the suttas and you don’t, we just have to agree to differ at times. Sarah ===== 17349 From: James Date: Mon Dec 2, 2002 11:39pm Subject: Re: Yuganaddha Sutta --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Mom Bongkojpriya \(Betty\) Yugala" wrote: > Dear James, > Have been a lurker, as Sarah calls it, for far too long, and so, after an > absolutely wonderful weekend of Dhamma discussions with Achaan Sujin and > others from dsg and our English discussion group in Bangkok, and with > encouragement from Sarah (condition for cetana -volition-and chanda-"wish to > do"-cetasikas to arise), I decided to write a bit. > >snip< > > Only "you" can know which method is best for you. "I" tried the method of > doing samatha (tranquil) meditation for many years and found that "I" got > nowhere that way since there was no understanding arising. For others, that > may be best for them, but for me the development of insight (understanding) > through satipatthana brings on the development of calmness. But more > importantly, it provides for the conditions to bring about awareness and > understanding. > > When we read about, listen to, discuss and contemplate about the Dhamma, > this creates conditions for sati (awareness is an inadequate term in > English) and panna (insight, understanding) to arise. Other forms of kusala > (wholesome actions), generosity and the following of sila (morality) also > create conditions for sati and panna to arise. > > However, "we" have no control over this process and cannot determine when > "it" will happen, when understanding will arise. It happens in very small > increments, and occurs when "we" have a kind of "ah-ha" experience of the > nature of a particular reality arising and of the anattaness of it. This > "ah-ha" is different from just reading about it; it is a deep understanding > from within. However, it took Lord Buddha eons to perfect "his" stream of > cittas and cetasikas to the point that all defilements were eliminated and > total understanding arose. "We" certainly cannot expect to achieve it in a > shorter time. > > So, whichever method seems right for you, that is the one to follow. > However, the "doing" of kusala actions (bhavana, dana and sila) should > accompany you in your daily life, so that the conditions for sati and panna > to arise can be developed. > > metta, > Betty > _______________________ > Mom Bongkojpriya Yugala > 38 Soi 41 Phaholyothin Road > Bangkok 10900, Thailand > tel: 662-579-1050; 661-826-7160 > e-mail: beyugala@k... Betty, Thank you for the post. I think that you are trying to tell me something that I have just begun to figure out. Perhaps you have a connection with me, beyond this Internet, and I want to encourage you to keep it. According to this very important sutta by Ananda, some achieve Nibbana through samatha, some through vipassana, some through both in tandem, and a few, a very few, through the power of the mind alone…through reasoning. I have been a Buddhist for 15 years and have practiced meditation for most of those years. Samatha didn't do much for me, vipassana did a bit more but I still felt that it was lacking for me, and now I have given up both and begun to apply the power of my mind alone to dharma. This is how Ananda describes it: "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness concerning the Dhamma well under control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, and pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. I should be obvious to everyone in this group that I have a great deal of restlessness concerning the Dhamma. Why? I must understand Dhamma with my mind, with my cognitive thought, in order for insight to arise in me. That is just the way my mind is. I can accept that now, before I could not. I kept meditating and not much was happening. I study the suttas and read everything I can get my hands on now because that is how I `meditate'. During the Buddha's time, many monks achieved Nibbana simply from listening to the Buddha speak. This wasn't magic, they just had a mind similar to mine. Why can't I achieve Nibbana just from reading the suttas? Two reasons: One, they aren't spoken by Lord Buddha, so a lot is lost there; Two, I am finding that the Pali language simply doesn't match English and most of the suttas are translated improperly/incompletely. Recently, I have begun to focus my cognitive thoughts on the question of anatta/ultimate reality, since that is the heart of the Buddha's insight/teaching. I am not sure of my progress, but I think I understand a bit more than I did before. Consequently, I have had very real, brief visitations these past three days from a very short, pale figure dressed all in black (black cloak and hat, and walking stick) who raises a fear in me unlike I have experienced before. I don't think I need to say more, maybe you know what I mean. I will move forward. I wish you well in your practice as well, Betty. Thank you for coming out of the woodwork to address me. Metta, James 17350 From: Sarah Date: Tue Dec 3, 2002 1:53am Subject: Freewill is out?!;-)?!:-) Hi Rob M, Hope you’re recovering and let me say how delighted we all were to read your wonderful posts and insights over the weekend and particularly the kind and encouraging manner in which they were written - a fine example for us all. I expect bits and pieces will come back to all of us in due course. Sometimes there were informal or meal-time discussions as well, so we may have learnt from different reflections too. I’ll just mention a few bits now which may be of relevance to comments you’ve made. We were all very aware of how you had tried to join us. I’ll leave the texts for now. 1. In passing I raised your question about the extent of the Buddha’s knowledge regarding the future and future conditions. K. Sujin’s response was that we could never over-estimate the wisdom and knowledge. Anything at all that he put his mind to, he would know for so many aeons into the future (implication that sth like 9/11 would be nothing at all IF it were attended to). We cannot use ‘predetermined’, only ‘conditioned’, but it’s quite useless to speculate about the future or these matters. The more understanding there is, the fewer the conditions to think about ‘predetermined’, ‘freewill’ and so on. ***** 2. I also raised the qu about votthapanna (determining) consciousness and predominant cetasikas such as manasikara. As we discussed before, yoniso manasikara (wise attention) and ayoniso manasikara (unwise attention) only arise during the javana process, prompting kusala and akusala states. Determining consciousness is just one citta. “Who knows what is predominant and what’s the use of speculating”, she asked. In other words, it’s more useful to understand the reality appearing at the present moment than to speculate on details in processes that cannot be known. ***** 3. At one point on the first day, I was trying to ‘work out’ a detail on ayatanas (bases) intellectually. Very appropriately she reminded me that this was just thinking and speculating and not understanding anything about the present moment - the namas and rupas which can be experienced and known now. It was such a helpful reminder for me. So easily we can go off-track, lost in intellectual speculation which is not even wise consideration - just being lost in pannatti (concepts) without any sati. ***** 4. We also had some discussion on the first day (Rob or others may add details) about the recollection of the past or of past good deeds. K.Sujin was reminding us that sati can arise even at moment of recalling or thinking about the past. The citta arises with sanna (as always), recalling the past and if there is awareness of satipatthana, the present object,e.g thinking is the object. There can be recalling with lobha or panna according to accumulations at that moment. She also stressed often that when satipatthana is clearly understood, whatever we read in the texts is understood accordingly and without doubt. It has to be the “path of detachment from the very beginning”. ***** 5. There was also quite a lot of discussion over the weekend on kamma and kamma-patha (bringing results) and the intricacies. Someone else may fill in more details, but what I appreciated was the reminder that the concern should be for the akusala cittas at this moment rather than the possible results. There was also a little more on ayuhana (kammic accumulation). K.Sujin suggested she usually prefers not to use the term because it’s impossible to see “the complexity at each moment’, but it’s more useful to ‘see’ it or reflect on it when referring to rebirth.(I don’t think I can add more on that, but again others may;-)) ***** 6. Rob M, I’ve appreciated all the discussions you and others have been having on anatta, though I’m still catching up. Whether we’re sitting or walking, so very often we’re “enslaved by the idea of a self”. At this moment or reading or listening, understanding can begin to know ‘our’ accumulations’ - conditioned mental factors of lobha, dosa, moha and so on. Larry, she was stressing that we putthujanas (worldlings) have all combinations of carita (character), i.e all the different types discussed in detail in some texts. Many more details are given in the Netti (the Guide) where I was quoting the details about proximate cause from before. (That reminds me, if any of your or anyone else’s qus or comments went unanswered when we all dashed off, do repost them for us to look at again). ***** That’s it for now. Thanks again for helping to inspire our discussions with questions and also all the great posts in our absence. Nina has gone to Cambodia with sets of print-outs of posts we made just as we were setting off on Friday;-).If others have any different recollections on any of the points I’ve mentioned and are able to elaborate or add others, pls do. Sarah ====== 17351 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Tue Dec 3, 2002 7:46am Subject: Re: Yuganaddha Sutta Dear James, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: According to this very important sutta by Ananda, some achieve Nibbana through samatha, some through vipassana, some through both in tandem, and a few, a very few, through the power of the mind alone…through reasoning. I have been a Buddhist for 15 years and have practiced meditation for most of those years. Samatha didn't do much for me, vipassana did a bit more but I still felt that it was lacking for me, and now I have given up both and begun to apply the power of my mind alone to dharma. KKT: Allow me to pop in here to give my observation. I think it's very difficult (if not impossible) to achieve Nibbana through the power of the mind alone, i.e. through reasoning. On the beginning of the Path, one needs << reasoning >> to << see >> clearly the Path like one has a map. But the map is not enough, one has to walk the Path. Again, while one walks the Path, the walking becomes << really >> effective only when one has the first << Insight >>. After this first insight, walking the Path is no other than the deepening of this insight. In Zen they call this first insight Satori and because Satori is often sudden, the process of walking the Path is called << sudden enlightenment/gradual cultivation >> But the first Satori is crucial. Peace, KKT 17352 From: James Date: Tue Dec 3, 2002 11:35am Subject: Re: Yuganaddha Sutta --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "phamdluan2000" wrote: > > Dear James, > KKT: Allow me to pop in here > to give my observation. > > I think it's very difficult > (if not impossible) to achieve > Nibbana through the power of > the mind alone, i.e. through reasoning. > > On the beginning of the Path, > one needs << reasoning >> to << see >> > clearly the Path like one has a map. > > But the map is not enough, > one has to walk the Path. > > Again, while one walks the Path, > the walking becomes << really >> effective > only when one has the first << Insight >>. > > After this first insight, > walking the Path is no other > than the deepening of this insight. > > In Zen they call this first insight Satori > and because Satori is often sudden, > the process of walking the Path is called > << sudden enlightenment/gradual cultivation >> > > But the first Satori is crucial. > > > Peace, > > > KKT KKT, Let me ask you a question: How many stands of hair do I have on my head? Think about the question and get back to me. Metta, Jame 17353 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Tue Dec 3, 2002 1:38pm Subject: Re: Yuganaddha Sutta --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: Let me ask you a question: How many stands of hair do I have on my head? Think about the question and get back to me. Metta, Jame KKT: Don't know, James. Just don't know. Peace, KKT 17354 From: peterdac4298 Date: Tue Dec 3, 2002 1:56pm Subject: Re: Renunciation? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > Hi Peter, > I don't think > I have seen a teaching of Ananda where he states his own position, > rather than restating a teaching of the Buddha, like he does in this > sutta. It is significant and I think it should be considered > carefully, from many different angles. I think Ananda, through whom > we get most of the Buddha's teachings, is an under-recongnized > figure in Buddhism. That was why I was looking for the sutta > regarding his enlightenment. It occurred after much concentrated > effort where he was unsuccessful, and it wasn't until he 'gave up' > that he did reached enlightenment. I would like to know the > details. I feel there is much to learn from the life, perspective, > and teachings of Ananda. > > Metta, James Hi James I have just looked at "The Life of the Buddha in the Words of the Pali Canon" by ~Naanamoli, where he gives as good an account as will probably be found anywhere. Ananda, whilst still a stream winner, was under pressure from the Elders to attain sainthood in order to be admitted to the first council, and as you said, it was not until he decided to mindfully lay down in order to get some sleep, that it finally happened: during that brief moment of transition. ~Naanamoli was quoting from the Cullavagga Cv. 11: 1-10 and not a great deal seems to be said, probably just as well too. It could never be the same for anyone else and there would be no point in detailing the event beyond giving it as one example of the many ways such a thing can happen. A little latter in the book, ~Naanamoli gives a hint at the very early days of the embryonic Sangha by quoting from Majima 108, where Ananda has to answer questions put to him, by no less a person than the Defence Minister for that region. Questions that made a direct quote from the Suttas rather awkward. I personally feel that his answers illustrate the general attitude of many Buddhists ever since, and that not much is to be gained by searching for further "insights" into Ananda's mind set. It seems to me that it is more than enough trying to figure out what the Buddha said and then mapping that onto our own daily experiences. Having said that however, I would not be at all surprised if Anada contributed as much as anyone else to the earliest commentaries. Cheers Peter 17355 From: Date: Tue Dec 3, 2002 3:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Freewill is out?!;-)?!:-) Hi Sarah, Good to have you back and read all your interesting comments. You wrote: "Larry, she was stressing that we putthujanas (worldlings) have all combinations of carita (character), i.e all the different types discussed in detail in some texts." It seems that no modern teachers are interested in this aspect of the commentary. Did K. Sujin, or do you, have any alternate ideas on why 4 satipatthanas? Larry 17356 From: robmoult Date: Tue Dec 3, 2002 4:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Freewill is out?!;-)?!:-) Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Good to have you back and read all your interesting comments. You wrote: > > "Larry, she was stressing that we putthujanas (worldlings) have all > combinations of carita (character), i.e all the different types > discussed in detail in some texts." > > It seems that no modern teachers are interested in this aspect of the > commentary. Did K. Sujin, or do you, have any alternate ideas on why 4 > satipatthanas? The *other* "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" by Ashin Janakabhivamsa has an interesting chapter on carita (Chapter 5). http://www.geocities.com/ekchew.geo/Abhidhamma.htm Metta, Rob M :-) 17357 From: robmoult Date: Tue Dec 3, 2002 4:37pm Subject: Re: Freewill is out?!;-)?!:-) Hi Sarah, Yes! I can finally say that "Free Will" is out. I have replaced it with the word "choice" and stressed that "choice" is a result of conditions, not an external factor such as a self. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hope you're recovering and let me say how delighted we all were to read > your wonderful posts and insights over the weekend and particularly the > kind and encouraging manner in which they were written - a fine example > for us all. I am recovering slowly. I am in India for the next couple of days and I am not sure that this is going to speed my recovery. I am still a couple of posts behind. > ***** > 2. I also raised the qu about votthapanna (determining) consciousness and > predominant cetasikas such as manasikara. As we discussed before, yoniso > manasikara (wise attention) and ayoniso manasikara (unwise attention) only > arise during the javana process, prompting kusala and akusala states. > Determining consciousness is just one citta. "Who knows what is > predominant and what's the use of speculating", she asked. In other words, > it's more useful to understand the reality appearing at the present moment > than to speculate on details in processes that cannot be known. I am polishing my Class Notes. A new class starts on Jan 5th and I want to print out a complete set for each student. I am de-stressing the idea of "predominant" cetasikas, but FYI, I just ran across this interesting quote in Nyanatiloka's Dictionary (under manasikara): "It is, therefore, the prominent factor in two specific classes of consciousness: i.e. 'advertence at the five sense doors' and at the mind-door." I remind myself that Narada wrote that "free will arose during the determining consciousness" and the problems that got me into. A single comment by a single author has to be taken with a grain of salt. > ***** > 3. At one point on the first day, I was trying to `work out' a detail on > ayatanas (bases) intellectually. Very appropriately she reminded me that > this was just thinking and speculating and not understanding anything > about the present moment - the namas and rupas which can be experienced > and known now. It was such a helpful reminder for me. So easily we can go > off-track, lost in intellectual speculation which is not even wise > consideration - just being lost in pannatti (concepts) without any sati. > ***** Been there, done that! Many times. Guilty as charged :-) Metta, Rob M :-) 17358 From: azita gill Date: Tue Dec 3, 2002 8:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kang Krajan again > dear all, "Monks, just as the dawn is the forerunner, the harbinger of the arising of the sun, even so is Right Understanding the forerunner, the harbinger of fully comprehending the 4 Ariyan Truths. Of one who has Right Understanding it may be expected that he/she [my add.-for you know who!!]will understand as it really is...this is Dukkha...this is the arising of Dukkha...this the cessation [Nibbana]...and this the path leading to cessation." S.N. Maha-Vagga - Kindred sayings about the Truths, ch.IV para7. While in Kang Krajan, we talked a lot about the development of right understanding that knows realities as they appear thro. the 6 doorways of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body sense and mind. Quote from Khun Sujin: "usually one knows the characteristics of reality but one takes all realities for oneself. Irritation cannot change its characteristic at all bec. it has a reason to be like that; but there can be understanding of that which appears as a characteristic of a reality. In a day, everything should be known, should be made aware of as a characteristic of a reality" From this w/e a Kang Krajan, I understand, at least theoretically, a little more about Anatta. At the moment of sotapattimagga [stream entry], the idea of self really no longer exists, there is no more reasons for it to arise bec Panna has been developed to the level where Anatta is truly known, where Anicca is truly known and therefore Dukkha also is also truly known. I understand to reach this level, it takes a long, long, long time, and patience and courage, and why not, lets have good cheer as well- it feels better than being despondent. Azita > > > 17359 From: Date: Tue Dec 3, 2002 4:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Yuganaddha Sutta Hello KKT, >Again, while one walks the Path, >the walking becomes << really >> effective >only when one has the first << Insight >>. > >After this first insight, >walking the Path is no other >than the deepening of this insight. > >In Zen they call this first insight Satori >and because Satori is often sudden, >the process of walking the Path is called ><< sudden enlightenment/gradual cultivation >> > >But the first Satori is crucial. It's not, perhaps, really so difficult to see. An opening can happen all sorts of ways. How to stay in the seeing; how to be the seeing. You're exactly right. (The Buddha's omniscience was permanent awareness James, not knowing all the prime numbers ;-). metta, stephen 17360 From: Sarah Date: Wed Dec 4, 2002 1:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Rob Ep, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > It takes me too long to get back to posts and I apologize for the > disruption. I am going on the theory that if I can post from time to > time it is better than not posting at all. I at least am very glad to > be able to drop in when I can. It feels at this point like visiting > good friends -- not that there's any attachment there.... ..... No disruption and ‘from time to time’ is definitely better than ‘not at all’. .....and for us it’s like having ‘good friends’ drop in, even if there is attachment;-) don’t be put off by the occasional bark - we all get them at times, esp. if we’re long-winded as I often am;-). There aren’t any bites and we’re all very grateful to Larry for his tireless efforts with the extracts and considerations they lead to. He’s having a well-earned break now from the Way commentary til Nina returns. ..... > The theme in several of your comments, that the idea of self and desire > for a result can easily creep in to one's concept of the path and the > attempt to discern realities as well, is very well taken. It is easy > to want to jump to the conclusion and feel the 'security' of a method > that seems to guarantee enlightenment. All of this must be a denial of > the current work of relaxing the clinging mind and submitting to the > reality now, whether it seems like it's leading somewhere or not ..... Yes, I had a chat with Christine at the weekend about how there really are no ‘sweeteners’ in the path of detachment. Even when we talk about ‘relaxing the clinging mind and submitting to reality now’, attachment and clinging to self or results can creep in. She may add more. ..... > A friend recently had the insight that all the things that occur in > samsara really don't lead anywhere, all the causes and effects lead to > just more causes and effects. i thought it was interesting. It > removed the whole idea that one can 'get somewhere' by interacting with > samsara in this or that way. ..... No ‘one’ to get anywhere or interact in anyway. ..... >Only discernment and progress in relation > to wisdom does anything, and this only comes by cultivating the right > conditions. ..... Yes and no self to cultivate conditions either. ..... > Anyway, I'm rambling, but I'm happy to hear your reminders about the > subtle idea of self. ..... I think it’s useful for us all. There are 20 kinds of sakkaya-ditthi (self view), i.e 4 types for each of the khandhas. K.Sujin was reminding us that it’s useful to know about these and to understand how they can arise at any time, even whilst ‘practising’ or discussing dhamma. ..... > And thanks for letting me take part in this interesting discussion. .... This is an open forum as you said. For my part, I always enjoy chatting to you and miss your contributions when you disappear. I’ve always appreciated your kind support for DSG too. Look f/w to anymore anatta discussion. As James says, it’s the 'heart' of the Teachings. Sarah p.s Did you see the following quote from TG? I thought it was very good: “The Suttas were delivered to all sorts of individuals or groups with all sorts of different levels of understanding. I believe the best way to try to understand individual suttas is to read all of the suttas over and over. If that is done and they are seriously contemplated, the "puzzle" starts fitting together. As far as this particular sutta is concerned...emptiness does exactly mean -- "empty of self." Empty of self simply means that conditioned phenomena (all phenomena except for Nibbana) arise due to conditions, alter due to conditions, and cease due to conditions. There is nothing that is "self made" or "self generated." “ ======================================== 17361 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 4, 2002 1:31am Subject: vipaka, conditions, and the puppet Dear All, HK was ablaze with lights and movement when I left last night - surely one of the Great Cities of the world. It seems so long ago now (just over a week?) since meeting Paul and RobM on the way through HK to BKK - both warm, intelligent, enthusiastic dsgers. Photos are great, but there is nothing like the real thing. :) Hopefully, we'll meet again soon - S.E. Asia or East Coast Oz ... no worries. Wonderful posts over the last week or two from 'regulars', 'irregulars', and new voices. Usually (at home) I read posts by myself - so it was such a lovely experience to hear the posts with Dhamma friends - usually Jon reading aloud - and be able to discuss or clarify different points immediately. I think Jon is getting used to someone interjecting, agreeing/disagreeing and making other exclamations during the readings.:) Seeing old friends, some in person for the first time, was a happiness though a little overwhelming. Don't think I contributed much to the Dhamma discussions, but enjoyed the Listening. I've learned a great deal and owe so much to all those who continue to share and explain the Dhamma. Nina and Lodewick, it was delightful being in your company - and Nina! you still ask a lot of questions too! :-) The interest you both have in the Dhamma is contagious. ...A small confession - sometimes I find Abhidhamma a little too technical, a little (!) 'hard going' - though I notice when I'm with others who value and understand the Abhidhamma that it becomes much more vital, interesting and relevant to everyday life and the present moment. Sukin - sorry if I 'talked your ear off' for hours - I promise to cease and desist if you'll try to post more often - I know you must be busy though, so don't feel 'oppressed' by my selfish request. :) Betty - remember the rare non-dhamma discussion over dinner in the evening in the garden at Khun D's house (with those innovative candles hanging in all the trees), about names in general, and Texan names in particular? Just so you won't lead Jaran, Sukin and Num astray :) ... Google tells us there was an 'Ima' but not a 'Ura'. So, only half hogg-wash? :). KenH (and Andrew) - looking forward to seeing you all this weekend again at Cooran - but, KenH, I need to tell you that Azita has been delegated as Congee recipe collector. (I think she knows ...). She has had actual hands-on creative experience in this area - I only eat it! And I've got (somewhere) tapes of our dhamma discussions in BKK that can be copied. :) And to get back to a Dhamma focus - the flight left HK at midnight, and incomprehensibly, the seats allocated to five or six crying babies and misbehaving toddlers were in my row and the rows in front and behind. Which made me wonder "Why Me?" If vipaka is not just the big things like winning the lottery, having your house burn down, being murdered or becoming Prime Minister - then the hearing of unpleasant sounds is 'vipaka through the ear door'. (?) In other words, there was no use all of us feelling irritated and commiserating with each other by glances, facial expressions and gestures. Being kept awake all night by 'the unpleasant object' (sound) was not the result of crying babies or unskillful parenting, but because of kamma each of us committed somewhere back in beginningless time? The crying babies in the plane is 'just the story'? I used to think 'There is nothing bad except thinking makes it so' - but Jon and I had a part conversation about unpleasant visible object which seemed to bring accumulations and conditions into the mix - sorry Jon if I misunderstood completely - probably did? So - sinking further into the quicksand (my excuse is thirty six hours without sleep :)) - can hearing a sound as 'unpleasant' also be because of accumulations and not kamma? Interesting that some of the topics raised by James, RobM and Victor on dsg paralleled the reflections that BKK Dhamma discussions always stir up in me - like free will/no control, conditionality, anatta, impermanence and 'personal pronouns' :) - you know, just the usual old stuff. RobK - I wonder if you can recall the time you wrote about a Puppet with respect to the above 'usual old stuff'? I initially had a hard time (just as RobM does), and I recall being upset at the very idea when you mentioned it (there was a sutta, I think?) - but like most things that upset me it is only because I'm clinging to 'something' - usually 'self' or 'ego'. I might have a look at the puppet/conditions/anatta thing again - it still troubles me sometimes - it is the heart of Buddhism, I agree with James. And I think it was a Bhikkhuni talking to Mara about the puppet ... metta, Christine 17362 From: Sarah Date: Wed Dec 4, 2002 1:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Freewill is out?!;-)?!:-) Hi Rob M, --- robmoult wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Yes! I can finally say that "Free Will" is out. I have replaced it > with the word "choice" and stressed that "choice" is a result of > conditions, not an external factor such as a self. ..... hmmm......not sure about the “choice” replacement.....we’ll see;-) ..... > I am polishing my Class Notes. A new class starts on Jan 5th and I > want to print out a complete set for each student. I am de-stressing > the idea of "predominant" cetasikas, but FYI, I just ran across this > interesting quote in Nyanatiloka's Dictionary (under manasikara): > "It is, therefore, the prominent factor in two specific classes of > consciousness: i.e. 'advertence at the five sense doors' and at the > mind-door." .... Right....just checked. Thanks for pointing this out and also Vis X1V, 152 which emphasises its controlling function. Not sure if this is the same as prominent. .... > I remind myself that Narada wrote that "free will arose during the > determining consciousness" and the problems that got me into. A > single comment by a single author has to be taken with a grain of > salt. .... I think that is a very wise attitude, Rob, no matter how well-respected the author may be. In the end, however, it is the ignorance and wrong-view that will latch onto whatever it’s convenient to latch onto;-( .... > Been there, done that! Many times. Guilty as charged :-) .... Well, this is the way to learn about accumulations and carita at the present moment. I’m sure everyone (even those who don’t agree) must have been impressed by the sincerity and open-mindedness to listening and considering in your posts (also in those by Ray, Swee Boon, James and several others). I’ve read most and particularly appreciated your long one to the LURKERS on kamma, vipaka and anatta. If it doesn’t sound condescending in anyway, I’d like to say you’ve really got the point and explained it beautifully. For those who skipped through or were away, please read it carefully:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/17285 A few minor points: 1. there seemed to be a suggestion that all “active” consciousness will produce results. Of course, not all kamma is kamma patha (bringing results). I hope I didn’t misunderstand.We discussed more on this at the weekend too. 2. As you know, I think the term ‘thought processes’ for sense door and mind door processes is particularly misleading, but I know it is commonly used. 3. I’m not sure it is useful to refer to ‘internal’ and ‘external’ processes. There may be one or two more minor quibbles, but that’s all they are. It’s a very helpful post reflecting the growth of understanding. I particularly appreciated your comment in another post when you said “I now look around and start to see how ubiquitous and insiduous this self-view is; it disorts almost everything....” I have one or two comments to add on the vipallassa thread, but will leave it for now. Get well soon and look f/w to seeing you again in Hong Kong without any free-will baggage;-);-) Sarah ======= 17363 From: James Date: Wed Dec 4, 2002 6:41am Subject: wake up Hey All, Some reflections I wrote this morning. Thought I would share: The universe is anatta (no-essence) and the mind is anatta. Both are forever shifting and changing. But the samsara mind is a liar and a cheat—trickery is its weapon. The samsara mind clings to each single moment and gathers them up, holds them close, and stitches them together—creating a blanket of illusion under which it sleeps. The problem is not that an anatta mind cannot know an anatta universe; the problem is that a samsara mind cannot know an anatta universe. A samsara mind only knows a samsara universe, which is of its own making. Like a grumpy, sleeping child, the samsara mind must be woken with patience and caring. If too lax, the mind will go back to sleep quickly; if too harsh and abrupt, the mind will cry, scream, and fight…and then go back to sleep in defiance. Like a mother singing to her little child: "Wake up, Wake up, Wake up You little sleepy head Get up, Get up, Get up Get out of bed..." Metta, James 17364 From: nidive Date: Wed Dec 4, 2002 6:55am Subject: Is this a contradiction? Please help... In the Abhidhamma, we have (1) kusala citta (kamma) (2) akusala citta (kamma) (3) vipaka citta (result of kamma) (4) kiriya citta (neither kamma nor result of kamma) And in 'A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas by Sujun Boriharnwanaket', (under Files/z-Survey6.pdf), Page 50, second last paragraph: It has been explained in the Commentary that the cetasikas that accompany the vipakacitta are vipaka cetasikas, but since citta is the "leader" the word vipakacitta is used; the accompanying cetasikas are also vipaka. -> This means that 'feelings' which accompany -> a vipaka citta are also vipaka ('feeling' being cetasikas). In Abhidhamma parlance, anything that 'happens to us' is the result of kamma, aka vipaka. -> 'happens to us' meaning that in sequence, using eye-sense as an example, (a) seeing-consciousness arises, which is vipaka (b) receiving-consciousness arises, which is vipaka (c) investigating-consciousness arises, which is vipaka And in Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.21, "There are, revered Gotama, some ascetics and brahmans who have this doctrine and view: 'Whatever a person experiences, be it pleasure, pain or neither-pain-nor-pleasure, all that is caused by previous action.' Now, what does the revered Gotama say about this?" "Produced by (disorders of the) bile, there arise, Sivaka, certain kinds of feelings. That this happens, can be known by oneself; also in the world it is accepted as true. Produced by (disorders of the) phlegm... of wind... of (the three) combined... by change of climate... by adverse behavior... by injuries... by the results of Kamma -- (through all that), Sivaka, there arise certain kinds of feelings. That this happens can be known by oneself; also in the world it is accepted as true. "Now when these ascetics and brahmans have such a doctrine and view that 'whatever a person experiences, be it pleasure, pain or neither- pain-nor-pleasure, all that is caused by previous action,' then they go beyond what they know by themselves and what is accepted as true by the world. Therefore, I say that this is wrong on the part of these ascetics and brahmans." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn36-021.html **-> The contradiction is that in the Abhidhamma, the part of 'what happens to us' is always the result of kamma (or vipaka). **-> Whereas in Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.21, the Buddha seems to imply that 'what happens to us' is not always the result of kamma (or vipaka). **-> Are we going beyond what we know and is accepted as true by the world when we say 'what happens to us' is always vipaka? **-> Are we going beyond what we know and is accepted as true by the world when we say that a person who is being pricked by the needle while sewing a piece of cloth is vipaka? I mean, an injury is an injury. Being pricked by the needle is just that, an injury. I don't construe that such an injury is vipaka. Because I do not see any moral causation in that. Having wind in my intestines is uncomfortable. But wind is just wind. I don't construe that such a physical discomfort in my stomach/intestine is vipaka. Because I do not see any moral causation in that. Releasing wind from my intestines through the rectum brings comfort. But releasing wind is just releasing wind. I don't contrue that such a physical comfort by releasing wind from the intestines through the rectum is vipaka. Because I do not see any moral causation in that. **-> Having said all these, I could be wrong. So, please help. 17365 From: nidive Date: Wed Dec 4, 2002 7:32am Subject: Re: Is this a contradiction? Please help... (continued...) **-> The weather becoming too cold/hot causes physical discomfort. But the change in the climate is just that. I don't contrue that such a physical discomfort due to changes in the climate is vipaka. Because I do not see any moral causation in that. NEO Swee Boon 17366 From: James Date: Wed Dec 4, 2002 7:44am Subject: Re: Is this a contradiction? Please help... --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > (continued...) > > **-> The weather becoming too cold/hot causes physical discomfort. > But the change in the climate is just that. I don't contrue > that such a physical discomfort due to changes in the climate > is vipaka. Because I do not see any moral causation in that. > > > NEO Swee Boon Hello NEO Swee Boon, This will be a banner day, I am going to defend the Abhidhamma! But don't get too excited, I am also going to question it. I think the question you have about kamma is the result of confusion over mundane kamma and ultimate kamma. Basically, kamma is the result of conditions (this/that conditionality) and since our entire samsara existence is a conditioned one, everything is kamma. What the Buddha was speaking against in this sutta you quote is the tendency for some people to view mundane kamma as ultimate kamma. For example, to say, "I have `wind' because last week I cut someone off in traffic." That is not something that someone can know directly, it has no basis in accepted reality, and therefore the Buddha spoke against that view of kamma. However, with that said, I also don't believe that cittas (mind moments) fall neatly into four categories such as: kusala, akusala, vipaka, kiriya. How many categories do I think there are? Answer: Infinitival. Each one is so unique and non-repeated that I find the use of categories for such things oxymoronic. Metta, James ps. 'Gas X' works great for those 'wind' problems. :-) 17367 From: Date: Wed Dec 4, 2002 3:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Is this a contradiction? Please help... Hi, Nidive - Vipaka means kamma vipaka, the result of volition/volitional action. It would seem to me that what the Buddha might have been addressing in the Samyutta Nikaya that you reference below is the matter of primary/direct conditionality. Certainly not all that happens in, to, and through us is primarily the result of our own volition. Typically, person A's attacking person B is an act of kamma on the part of person A, and not directly/primarily the fruition of the kamma of person B, else A could be construed as just an innocent vehicle for the fruition of B's kamma. However, how could some element of kamma vipaka fail to be a participant in each mind-moment of a person? After all, the very fact that we experience anything at all is mainly based on prior volition as also are the realm of experience in which we "dwell", the kind of body we have acquired, and many of the conditions in which we find ourselves. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/4/02 9:57:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, nidive@y... writes: > In the Abhidhamma, we have > > (1) kusala citta (kamma) > (2) akusala citta (kamma) > (3) vipaka citta (result of kamma) > (4) kiriya citta (neither kamma nor result of kamma) > > And in 'A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas by Sujun Boriharnwanaket', > (under Files/z-Survey6.pdf), Page 50, second last paragraph: > > It has been explained in the Commentary that the cetasikas that > accompany the vipakacitta are vipaka cetasikas, but since citta is > the "leader" the word vipakacitta is used; the accompanying > cetasikas are also vipaka. > > -> This means that 'feelings' which accompany > -> a vipaka citta are also vipaka ('feeling' being cetasikas). > > In Abhidhamma parlance, anything that 'happens to us' is the result > of kamma, aka vipaka. > > -> 'happens to us' meaning that in sequence, > using eye-sense as an example, > (a) seeing-consciousness arises, which is vipaka > (b) receiving-consciousness arises, which is vipaka > (c) investigating-consciousness arises, which is vipaka > > And in Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.21, > > "There are, revered Gotama, some ascetics and brahmans who have this > doctrine and view: 'Whatever a person experiences, be it pleasure, > pain or neither-pain-nor-pleasure, all that is caused by previous > action.' Now, what does the revered Gotama say about this?" > > "Produced by (disorders of the) bile, there arise, Sivaka, certain > kinds of feelings. That this happens, can be known by oneself; also > in the world it is accepted as true. Produced by (disorders of the) > phlegm... of wind... of (the three) combined... by change of > climate... by adverse behavior... by injuries... by the results of > Kamma -- (through all that), Sivaka, there arise certain kinds of > feelings. That this happens can be known by oneself; also in the > world it is accepted as true. > > "Now when these ascetics and brahmans have such a doctrine and view > that 'whatever a person experiences, be it pleasure, pain or neither- > pain-nor-pleasure, all that is caused by previous action,' then they > go beyond what they know by themselves and what is accepted as true > by the world. Therefore, I say that this is wrong on the part of > these ascetics and brahmans." > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn36-021.html > > > **-> The contradiction is that in the Abhidhamma, the part > of 'what happens to us' is always the result of kamma > (or vipaka). > **-> Whereas in Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.21, the Buddha seems to imply > that 'what happens to us' is not always the result of kamma > (or vipaka). > **-> Are we going beyond what we know and is accepted as true by > the world when we say 'what happens to us' is always vipaka? > > **-> Are we going beyond what we know and is accepted as true by > the world when we say that a person who is being pricked by > the needle while sewing a piece of cloth is vipaka? > > I mean, an injury is an injury. Being pricked by the needle > is just that, an injury. I don't construe that such an injury > is vipaka. Because I do not see any moral causation in that. > > Having wind in my intestines is uncomfortable. But wind is > just wind. I don't construe that such a physical discomfort > in my stomach/intestine is vipaka. Because I do not see any > moral causation in that. > > Releasing wind from my intestines through the rectum brings > comfort. But releasing wind is just releasing wind. I don't > contrue that such a physical comfort by releasing wind from > the intestines through the rectum is vipaka. Because I do > not see any moral causation in that. > > **-> Having said all these, I could be wrong. > So, please help. > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17368 From: peterdac4298 Date: Wed Dec 4, 2002 0:49pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Renunciation? Hi All Don't know if this is helpful, but it was passed on to me by the site webmaster, whom had been quite a regular contributor to the dhamma-list discussion group a couple of years or so ago. http://evinaya.cjb.net/about.html http://www.geocities.com/venkumara/evinaya/ Hope it helps in this context, if not now then maybe latter. Cheers Peter --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Ray Hendrickson" > wrote: > > James I don't know if the material you are looking for is > online. It comes > > from the Vinaya, Vin.2:284 ff. As noted in the book "Great > Disciples of the > > Buddha" by Nyanaponika Thera and Hellmuth Hecker. I think it has > the > > complete section, in as much as it relates to Ananda. I could not > find it > > online, perhaps someone else has a complete source for the Vinaya > online? > > Ray > > Dear Ray, > > Thank you so much for this information! No wonder I couldn't find > it, I was looking in the wrong place! (Hmmmm...story of my life! ;- ) > I will redirect my attention to the Vinaya. Thanks again. > > Metta, James 17369 From: peterdac4298 Date: Wed Dec 4, 2002 3:13pm Subject: Re: Renunciation? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear James, Ray & All, > As Ananda's > arahatship occurred after the parinibbana of the Buddha, it makes sense to > me that we read about it in the commentaries rather than the suttas. > > Sarah Hi Sarah Especially since we are given that Ananda died at the grand age of 120years, he had quite a significant period of time, following the parinibbana, in which to make such contributions. I have also wondered whether Sariputa may have made any similar contributions during the Buddha's lifetime: he may have even initiated this tradition? However, by the time of Buddhaghosa, the commentaries appear to have been in such disarray that following his editorial work, almost all the earlier collections seem to have been rather neglected so as to have disappeared altogether. Cheers Peter 17370 From: James Date: Wed Dec 4, 2002 8:05pm Subject: Vajira and Mara Hello All, I wanted to post a rather brief sutta, but very good, concerning anatta. This sutta also contains the subject of Mara. I would like to know if anyone in this group believes he/she has been visited by Mara and what the experience was like. You can write to me publicly or privately. Metta, James Vajira Sutta Vajira Setting at Savatthi. Then, in the morning, the bhikkhuni Vajira dressed and, taking bowl and robe, entered Savatthi for alms. When she had walked for alms in Savatthi [135] and had returned from her alms round, after her meal she went to the Blind Men's Grove for the day's abiding. Having plunged into the Blind Men's Grove, she sat down at the foot of a tree for the day's abiding. Then Mara the Evil One, desiring to arouse fear, trepidation, and terror in the bhikkhuni Vajira, desiring to make her fall away from concentration, approached her and addressed her in verse: "By whom has this being been created? Where is the maker of the being? Where has the being arisen? Where does the being cease?" Then it occurred to the bhikkhuni Vajira: "Now who is this that recited the verse -- a human being or a non-human being?" Then it occurred to her: "This is Mara the Evil One, who has recited the verse desiring to arouse fear, trepidation, and terror in me, desiring to make me fall away from concentration." Then the bhikkhuni Vajira, having understood, "This is Mara the Evil One," replied to him in verses: "Why now do you assume 'a being'? Mara, have you grasped a view? This is a heap of sheer constructions: Here no being is found. Just as, with an assemblage of parts, The word 'chariot' is used, So, when the aggregates are present, There's the convention 'a being.' It's only suffering that comes to be, Suffering that stands and falls away. Nothing but suffering comes to be, Nothing but suffering ceases." Then Mara the Evil One, realizing, "The bhikkhuni Vajira knows me," sad and disappointed, disappeared right there. 17371 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 4, 2002 10:20pm Subject: Re: Vajira and Mara James, Thank you for the sutta about the Bhikkhuni Vajira and Mara. In following up your quote I found the one I was wondering about yesterday. It is the Bhikkhuni Sela to whom Mara used the simile of the puppet, and who was as equally unimpressed as Vajira by Mara the tempter. "This puppet is not made by itself, Nor is this misery made by another. It has come to be dependent on a cause, When the cause dissolves then it will cease. <<>> Just so the aggregates and elements, And these six bases of sensory contact, Have come to be dependent on a cause; When the cause dissolves they will cease." Then Mara the Evil One, realizing, "The bhikkhuni Sela knows me," sad and disappointed, disappeared right there. I don't recall any visitation that I could name Mara, but the Buddha and the Arahats knew they had been visited by him. Perhaps like unusual occurrences, sights, sounds etc. in meditation it is best not to place too much importance on it? Just set aside and get on with studying Dhamma, increasing wisdom and eradicating defilements where and when possible.... The fact that the being Mara is a deva on the highest deva plane accentuates the truth that the gods are not necessarily wise or good. Mara also stands for death and defilements. Mara's task is to prevent beings from being won over to the Dhamma, to keep them trapped in the cycle of birth and death, his own personal domain. It seems that Mara is a real Being, he is mentioned too many times in the Tipitaka to be dismissed as a myth or superstition imo - as well as being a term used for kilesa and dukkha. Could it be that like any other scary obstacle, the devaputta Mara simply has to be known at that moment in order to become powerless.? In the Marasamyutta (p.195 of Bodhi's Samyutta Nikaya) there are 25 instances of the Buddha defeating Mara. Oftentimes it says that Mara makes an attempt to arouse fear, trepidation, and terror in the Blessed One. Always it ends "Then Mara the Evil One, realising, "The Blessed One knows me, the Fortunate One knows me," sad and disappointed, disappeared right there." It seems he has power when there is no understanding that he is involved, and when we feel fear - can one feel fear if there is concentration on and confidence in the Dhamma? The Bhikkhunisamyutta follows immediately after (p. 221) and has 10 instances of Mara being defeated by the Bhikkhunis. Each of the nuns is an arahat and has seen so deeply into the truth of the Dhamma that she is utterly unimpressed by Mara. Once Mara realizes that he is known, he vanishes immediately, "sad and disappointed." Though we are not yet arahats, can't we also know Mara in whatever form he takes, and so disarm him? See also Nina's message to Rahula at:: "Maara has many meanigs: the person of Maara, devaputta, and then: kilesa maara, the defilements, and also: all conditioned realities which are impermanent and thus dukkha. Maara is a name that can be used for all that is dukkha. Birth, old age and death are Maara. The PTS dict gives: death, maara can be applied to all conditioned realities: realm of rebirth, opposed to nibbana. Khandha, dhatu, ayatana, they are maara. S, I, Maara Samyutta." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16439 metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > Hello All, > > I wanted to post a rather brief sutta, but very good, concerning > anatta. This sutta also contains the subject of Mara. I would like > to know if anyone in this group believes he/she has been visited by > Mara and what the experience was like. You can write to me publicly > or privately. > > Metta, James 17372 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 2:30am Subject: Forgiveness Hello all, I was wondering what the Theravada teachings say about 'forgiveness'. Christianity has a lot to say about this .. about asking for one's own forgiveness from others and from the Lord, about forgiving others, about forgiving oneself. Maybe I'm still 'trailing clouds of glory' from that faith, but forgiveness would seem to me to be quite an important thing to ask for and give, and I wonder why I can't find any teachings. There seems to be some teachings in Mahayana writings - e.g. Bodhicitta. I looked but I couldn't find much in Theravada ... accesstoinsight doesn't even have 'forgiveness' under the subject headings in the sutta listings. Perhaps it's called something else? If someone did a wrong to me, would my forgiving them affect the kammic fruit of their act? Would my not forgiving them affect my kammic fruit? Somehow I feel the answer is 'no' to the first and 'yes' to the second. The mechanism of forgiveness would seem to involve 'acceptance of self and other', 'metta to both other and self (oops)', 'compassion for both', 'equanimity', 'putting oneself in the position of the other', and 'anatta'. Maybe that's why there is a 'forgiveness- shaped' blank in Theravada - no simple one word topic? metta, Christine 17373 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 2:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Is this a contradiction? Please help... Dear Swee Boon & All, I’m very impressed by your considerations of subtle, but important points in many of your posts. We had quite a lot of discussion on the Sivaka sutta before and Nina translated the commentary. Please see: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/13094 Also, if you were to go to escribe and type in Sivaka, you’d be referred to all the previous discussion on this sutta;-) (James & All, you may also find it helpful to read a post of Nina’s on the Yuganaddha Sutta being discussed at:) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14225 Swee Boon, I think James makes a good point when he suggests that sometimes when kamma is being discussed, we are just using conventional terms. If we say anything that happens to us is the result of kamma, it’s a generalisation. There are always many conditions having effect and even the vipaka cittas caused by kamma need other conditions to condition the result. Sometimes (as in the sutta) the results of kamma referred to are indirect results. For example, unpleasant feelings brought about on account of various akusala vipaka through the sense doors may be those accompanying dosa-mula-cittas (cittas rooted in aversion), following the vipaka cittas. ***** Taken from Nina’s post above: Trasnl from the commentary: “N: Here, with reference to the feelings arisen from the seven causes mentioned before, the feelings connected with the body can be warded off, but as to the feelings that are the results of kamma, all medicines and all ways of protection are not suitable for warding them off. In this sutta conventional language has been used.” ..... Transl from the sub-commentary: “N: This sutta is spoken from the standpoint of worldly convention; (the feelings) arisen from bile, and so on, are designated in the manner of worldly convention. The feelings connected with the sensuous body are actually produced by kamma, but by way of the present condition there is thus this worldly convention; accepting what is thus said, it should be understood that the opponents doctrine is refuted.” ***** If we say that being pricked by a needle is vipaka, we are also speaking conventionally. In reality (or in abhidhamma terms), strictly speaking, there is no person, no pricking and no needle. There must be moments of akusala vipaka through the body sense, but these are so very brief. There are also many other cittas and rupas being experienced - seeing, visible object, unpleasant feeling, aversion, thinking, and so on. The moments of vipaka citta, must have been conditioned for the main part by kamma, but there are many other conditions at work for these and the subsequent cittas to arise. I don’t think it’s helpful or necessary to try to see the connection between the physical discomfort and moral causation as you put it. On the otherhand, I think it’s very helpful to be aware of hardness, softness or the element of motion as rupas (not self) and distinct from the aversion, unpleasant feelings or thinking which arise on their account. I think your questions are very useful and I also appreciated Howard’s and James’ input as well. Sarah p.s Rob M: By ‘whatever a person experiences’, I understand ‘whatever namas or rupas arise to experience or be experienced’ in paramattha dhamma terminology;-) Again from the text: “`ya.m ki~ncaaya.m purisapuggalo pa.tisa.mvedeti sukha.m vaa dukkha.m vaa adukkhamasukha.m vaa sabba.m ta.m pubbekatahetuu'ti. idha bhava.m gotamo kimaahaa''ti? 'Whatever a person experiences, be it pleasure, pain or neither-pain-nor-pleasure, all that is caused by previous action.' Now, what does the revered Gotama say about this?" “ ================================================ 17374 From: ajahn_paul Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 3:36am Subject: Re: Forgiveness Dear christine, i think the whole concept and system is different. god says that every single person has sin due to adam and his wife bla bla bla, i think u know better than me about what the bible says. and, bcoz of that SIN, we have to ask forgiveness from god. in my own point of view, it just like a man giving u some posion at the first place, then he would like u to beg him for the medician. ^_~ but, in buddhism, the first thing we have to learn is kamma, u deserved for what u had done. so, even u r forgiven, kamma wont change. im not sure if u know the story.... one of the Buddha's followers, i dont know his name in english or pali. >.< he found his mom had been gone to hell, so he tried to save her and give food to her, but failed. then he asked Buddha to help, and Buddha said he can do nothing about that. i guess thats why! ^_~ --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello all, > > I was wondering what the Theravada teachings say > about 'forgiveness'. Christianity has a lot to say about this .. > about asking for one's own forgiveness from others and from the Lord, > about forgiving others, about forgiving oneself. Maybe I'm > still 'trailing clouds of glory' from that faith, but forgiveness > would seem to me to be quite an important thing to ask for and give, > and I wonder why I can't find any teachings. There seems to be some > teachings in Mahayana writings - e.g. Bodhicitta. I looked but I > couldn't find much in Theravada ... accesstoinsight doesn't even > have 'forgiveness' under the subject headings in the sutta > listings. Perhaps it's called something else? > If someone did a wrong to me, would my forgiving them affect the > kammic fruit of their act? Would my not forgiving them affect my > kammic fruit? Somehow I feel the answer is 'no' to the first > and 'yes' to the second. > The mechanism of forgiveness would seem to involve 'acceptance of > self and other', 'metta to both other and self (oops)', 'compassion > for both', 'equanimity', 'putting oneself in the position of the > other', and 'anatta'. Maybe that's why there is a 'forgiveness- > shaped' blank in Theravada - no simple one word topic? > > metta, > Christine 17375 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 5:28am Subject: [dsg] Re: Is this a contradiction? Please help... In reality (or in abhidhamma terms), strictly speaking, > there is no person, no pricking and no needle. If someone was being pricked by a needle, how would speaking strictly in abhidhamma term "there is no person, no pricking, and no needle" help him or her? Metta, Victor 17376 From: James Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 5:36am Subject: Re: Forgiveness --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello all, > > I was wondering what the Theravada teachings say > about 'forgiveness'. Christine, I think that the Buddha did practice Tonglin/Bodhicitta meditation, and that his meditation contained an aspect of forgiveness. True forgiveness means recognizing the reason someone has done something, the pain that drove him/her to do that bad thing, and to have sympathy for that person. Metta and compassion are different than sympathy. Metta and compassion are like an embracing acceptance, very general and all encompassing; but sympathy involves looking deeply into people's pain, the reasons that cause it, with an aspect of almost `wishing it away' so that the pain will disappear. I think this is forgiveness, Buddhist style. And yes it does recognize `existent beings', but they still have no permanent essence (don't ask me to fully explain that yet ;-) Allow me to quote the sutta, since it isn't very long, where the Buddha is practicing this Tonglin/Bodhicitta meditation. Metta, James Ps. Thanks for the words about Mara. They are well stated and I will consider them deeply. Sakalika Sutta The Stone Sliver I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Rajagaha at the Maddakucchi Deer Reserve. Now at that time his foot had been pierced by a stone sliver. Excruciating were the bodily feelings that developed within him -- painful, fierce, sharp, wracking, repellent, disagreeable -- but he endured them mindful, alert, & unperturbed. Having had his outer robe folded in four and laid out, he lay down on his right side in the lion's posture -- with one foot placed on top of the other -- mindful & alert. Then Mara the Evil One went to the Blessed One and recited this verse in his presence: "Are you lying there in a stupor, or drunk on poetry? Are your goals so very few? All alone in a secluded lodging, what is this dreamer, this sleepy-face?" The Buddha: "I lie here, not in a stupor, nor drunk on poetry. My goal attained, I am sorrow-free. All alone in a secluded lodging, I lie down with sympathy for all beings. Even those pierced in the chest with an arrow, their hearts rapidly, rapidly beating: even they with their arrows are able to sleep. So why shouldn't I, with my arrow removed? I'm not awake with worry, nor afraid to sleep. Days & nights don't oppress me. I see no threat of decline in any world at all. That's why I sleep with sympathy for all beings." Then Mara the Evil One -- sad & dejected at realizing, "The Blessed One knows me; the One Well-Gone knows me" -- vanished right there 17377 From: Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 1:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vajira and Mara Hi, Christine (and James) - What a great post! Whether or not there is a Mara who is more than metaphor, I think that the metaphorical sense of 'Mara' as temptation is the important one, and I think that you have pointed out the crux of the matter when you pointed out that knowing Mara, knowing him well - knowing fully the delusive and dangerous nature of temptation, defeats him. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/5/02 1:20:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > > James, > > Thank you for the sutta about the Bhikkhuni Vajira and Mara. In > following up your quote I found the one I was wondering about > yesterday. It is the Bhikkhuni Sela to whom Mara used the simile of > the puppet, and who was as equally unimpressed as Vajira by Mara the > tempter. > "This puppet is not made by itself, > Nor is this misery made by another. > It has come to be dependent on a cause, > When the cause dissolves then it will cease. > <<>> > Just so the aggregates and elements, > And these six bases of sensory contact, > Have come to be dependent on a cause; > When the cause dissolves they will cease." > Then Mara the Evil One, realizing, "The bhikkhuni Sela knows me," sad > and disappointed, disappeared right there. > > I don't recall any visitation that I could name Mara, but the Buddha > and the Arahats knew they had been visited by him. Perhaps like > unusual occurrences, sights, sounds etc. in meditation it is best not > to place too much importance on it? Just set aside and get on with > studying Dhamma, increasing wisdom and eradicating defilements where > and when possible.... > The fact that the being Mara is a deva on the highest deva plane > accentuates the truth that the gods are not necessarily wise or good. > Mara also stands for death and defilements. Mara's task is to prevent > beings from being won over to the Dhamma, to keep them trapped in the > cycle of birth and death, his own personal domain. It seems that > Mara is a real Being, he is mentioned too many times in the Tipitaka > to be dismissed as a myth or superstition imo - as well as being a > term > used for kilesa and dukkha. Could it be that like any other scary > obstacle, the devaputta Mara simply has to be known at that moment > in order to become powerless.? In the Marasamyutta (p.195 of Bodhi's > Samyutta Nikaya) there are 25 instances of the Buddha defeating > Mara. Oftentimes it says that Mara makes an attempt to arouse fear, > trepidation, and terror in the Blessed One. Always it ends "Then > Mara the Evil One, realising, "The Blessed One knows me, the > Fortunate One knows me," sad and disappointed, disappeared right > there." It seems he has power when there is no understanding that he > is involved, and when we feel fear - can one feel fear if there is > concentration on and confidence in the Dhamma? > The Bhikkhunisamyutta follows immediately after (p. 221) and has 10 > instances of Mara being defeated by the Bhikkhunis. > Each of the nuns is an arahat and has seen so deeply into the truth > of the Dhamma that she is utterly unimpressed by Mara. Once Mara > realizes that he is known, he vanishes immediately, "sad and > disappointed." > Though we are not yet arahats, can't we also know Mara in whatever > form he takes, and so disarm him? > > See also Nina's message to Rahula at:: > "Maara has many meanigs: the person of Maara, devaputta, and then: > kilesa > maara, the defilements, and also: all conditioned realities which are > impermanent and thus dukkha. Maara is a name that can be used for all > that > is dukkha. Birth, old age and death are Maara. The PTS dict gives: > death, > maara can be applied to all conditioned realities: realm of rebirth, > opposed > to nibbana. Khandha, dhatu, ayatana, they are maara. S, I, Maara > Samyutta." > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16439 > > metta, > Christine > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17378 From: Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 2:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Forgiveness Hi, Christine - Certainly you are correct about the divine abidings fostering forgiveness. Likewise, the perfection of dana might well include the inclination to forgive. Also, I think that the perfection of khanti (patience/forbearance) is close in meaning and effect to forgiveness. There is the following from the web site http://www.watpa.iirt.net/development/parami.html ****************************** Khanti  As important as Viriya is Khanti. It is the patient endurance of suffering inflicted upon oneself by others, and the forbearance of others’ wrongs.  A Bodhisatta practices patience to such an extent that he is not provoked even when his hands and feet are cut off. In the Khantivadi Jataka (No.313), it appears that not only did the Bodhisatta cheerfully endure the torture inflicted by the drunkard king, who mercilessly ordered his hands and feet, nose and ears to be cut off, but requited those injuries with a blessing. Lying on the ground, in a deep pool of his own blood, with mutilated limbs, the Bodhisatta said, "Long live the king, whose cruel hand my body thus has marred.  Pure souls like mine such deeds as these with anger ne’er regard." Of his forbearance it is said that whenever he is harmed, he thinks of the aggressor:  "This person is a fellow-being of mine. Intentionally or unintentionally I myself must have been the source of provocation, or it may be due to a past evil kamma of mine. As it is the outcome of my own action, why should I harbour ill-will towards him?"  It may be mentioned that a Bodhisatta is not irritated by any man’s shameless conduct either.  Admonishing his disciples to practice forbearance, the Buddha says in the Kakacupana Sutta:  "Though robbers, who are highway men should sever your limbs with a two handled saw, yet if you thereby defile your mind, you would be no follower of my teaching".  "Thus should you train yourselves: ‘Unsullied shall our hearts remain. No evil word shall escape our lips. King and compassionate, with loving-heart, harbouring no ill will shall we abide, enfolding even these bandits with thoughts of loving-kindness. And forth from them proceeding, we shall abide, radiating the whole world with thoughts of loving-kindness, vast, expansive, measureless, benevolent and unified."  Practising patience and tolerance, instead of seeing the ugliness in others, a Bodhisatta tries to seek the good and beautiful in all. ******************************** With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/5/02 5:32:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > > Hello all, > > I was wondering what the Theravada teachings say > about 'forgiveness'. Christianity has a lot to say about this .. > about asking for one's own forgiveness from others and from the Lord, > about forgiving others, about forgiving oneself. Maybe I'm > still 'trailing clouds of glory' from that faith, but forgiveness > would seem to me to be quite an important thing to ask for and give, > and I wonder why I can't find any teachings. There seems to be some > teachings in Mahayana writings - e.g. Bodhicitta. I looked but I > couldn't find much in Theravada ... accesstoinsight doesn't even > have 'forgiveness' under the subject headings in the sutta > listings. Perhaps it's called something else? > If someone did a wrong to me, would my forgiving them affect the > kammic fruit of their act? Would my not forgiving them affect my > kammic fruit? Somehow I feel the answer is 'no' to the first > and 'yes' to the second. > The mechanism of forgiveness would seem to involve 'acceptance of > self and other', 'metta to both other and self (oops)', 'compassion > for both', 'equanimity', 'putting oneself in the position of the > other', and 'anatta'. Maybe that's why there is a 'forgiveness- > shaped' blank in Theravada - no simple one word topic? > > metta, > Christine > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17379 From: Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 2:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Is this a contradiction? Please help... Hi, Victor - In a message dated 12/5/02 8:29:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > In reality (or in abhidhamma terms), strictly speaking, > >there is no person, no pricking and no needle. > > If someone was being pricked by a needle, how would speaking strictly > in abhidhamma term "there is no person, no pricking, and no needle" > help him or her? > > Metta, > Victor > ============================ Actually, what *does* help is realizing that "this is just a sharp and strong series of unpleasant stinging and pressure sensations". (What also helps, of course, is removing the cause! And there lies the extreme usefulness of concepts.) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17380 From: Frank Kuan Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 8:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Forgiveness Hi Chris, "forgiveness" teachings in the theravada tradition are plentiful, just not explicitly stated as such. "Forgiveness" works on a higher level domain, presupposing the existence of a "self to be forgiven", "others to be forgiven", "actions that need to be forgiven". As with many other high level emotions, buddhism heads off the problems at lower levels (lust, anger, delusion) and doesn't reinforce even a conventional notion of "self" to eradicate defilements. The problem with most conventional religious teachings on "forgiveness" is it reinforces clinging to notions of "self", clinging to notions of "others", clinging to even the actions that require forgiven. Trying to work through and relieve sufferings of complex emotions (with conventional teachings) creates much more suffering and delusion in the process! The whole basis for the notion of forgiveness (as understood conventionally) is counter to anatta. Between the teachings of anatta and the noble 8fold path factor of "right effort", it's a brilliant and comprehensive solution that not only solves all the issues of "forgiveness", including the baggage added from the conventional religious teachings on forgiveness, but also systematically chips away at the underlying root at the cause of our actions that would lead to situations requiring "forgiveness". There is a multitiered solution system in Buddhism's strategy (equivalent of "forgiveness"): 1) ideally "right view" would completely head off any action that would require forgiveness. 2) "right effort" (especially the part of guarding the sense doors) would head off defilements as they arise in the mind, as they inevitably would when "right view" is not mature. 3) "right effort" - two parts that strive to eliminate arisen defilements, and unarisen defilements! Eliminating unarisen defilements is especially interesting. How does one do this? (left as an exercise to the reader) 4) If the defilements continue to proliferate and give rise to complex unwholesome emotions despite our "right effort", then we should simply resort to damage control at this point and not allow ourselves to perform unwholesome action/speech. ("right speech", "right action", "right livelihood") -fk --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hello all, > > I was wondering what the Theravada teachings say > about 'forgiveness'. Christianity has a lot to say > about this .. > about asking for one's own forgiveness from others > and from the Lord, > about forgiving others, about forgiving oneself. > Maybe I'm > still 'trailing clouds of glory' from that faith, > but forgiveness > would seem to me to be quite an important thing to > ask for and give, > and I wonder why I can't find any teachings. There > seems to be some > teachings in Mahayana writings - e.g. Bodhicitta. > I looked but I > couldn't find much in Theravada ... accesstoinsight > doesn't even > have 'forgiveness' under the subject headings in > the sutta > listings. Perhaps it's called something else? > If someone did a wrong to me, would my forgiving > them affect the > kammic fruit of their act? Would my not forgiving > them affect my > kammic fruit? Somehow I feel the answer is 'no' to > the first > and 'yes' to the second. > The mechanism of forgiveness would seem to involve > 'acceptance of > self and other', 'metta to both other and self > (oops)', 'compassion > for both', 'equanimity', 'putting oneself in the > position of the > other', and 'anatta'. Maybe that's why there is a > 'forgiveness- > shaped' blank in Theravada - no simple one word > topic? > > metta, > Christine 17381 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 1:47pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta/pronouns Hello Victor,Ray,and all, Sorry I wasn't here to join in this thread. And as I haven't yet caught up with all the previous posts, I hope I am not repeating something, or entirely off the point. Somehow I feel you'll point it out if I am, Victor. ;-) This excerpt and link may be of interest about pronouns: from Dialogues of the Buddha {The Dîgha-Nikâya} Translated from the Pâli by T. W. Rhys Davids London, H. Frowde, Oxford University Press [1899] Vol. II of The Sacred Books of the Buddhists "It was the refusal to allow any place for this universal belief in a semi-material soul in his own system that is the most striking, and perhaps the most original feature in Gotama's teaching. No other religion of which we have sufficient records to enable us to form an opinion on the point has been constructed without the 'soul.' Where the others said 'soul,' Gotama said usually 'Action,' which comes to much the same as character. In this respect he came very near to our modern use of the word in such expressions as 'a high-souled man' or 'a soul for music.' And it is worth calling attention to the fact that even in Shakspere more than half the times the word is used it is in this secondary, ethical, emotional sense. Even in the old authorised translation of our Bible, in which the word occurs altogether 449 times, it is used 55 times merely in the sense of person, only 85 times in the animistic sense, and 306 times in the sense of emotional or intellectual qualities or disposition This will make Gotama's position, which is really very simple; more clear. He rejected entirely the use of the word in the old animistic sense. He retained it in a personal sense, in the meaning of 'oneself, himself,' And though, of course, he acknowledged the reality of the emotional and intellectual dispositions, he refused absolutely to look upon them as a unity. The position is so absolute, so often insisted on, so fundamental to the right understanding of primitive Buddhism, that it is essential there should be no mistake about it. Yet the position is also so original, so fundamentally opposed to what is usually understood as religious belief, both in India and elsewhere, that there is great temptation to attempt to find a loophole through which at least a covert or esoteric belief in the soul and in future life (that is of course of a soul), can be recognised, in some sort of way, as part of so widely accepted a religious system. There is no loophole, and the efforts to find one have always met with unswerving opposition, both in the Pitakas themselves and in extra-canonical works." http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/dob/dob-06in.htm metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi Ray, > > Do you know that the word "self" is also a pronoun? I believe most > dictionaries have that definition. Other definitions for the > word "self" are mostly on what self is. The definition you > mentioned "the ego; that which knows, remembers, desireds, suffers, > etc." is one of them. > > When it comes to understand the word "self", most people either think > in terms of what self is or assume it implicitly. They are entangled > in one self-view or another. > > When I asked you how the term "self" is normally used, I did not ask > you to define what self is. Instead, I was trying to get you see how > the word "self" is used as pronoun. If you examine the Pali Canon > closely, you will see that is how the Buddha and his disciples used > it as well. > > Do you see how the dictionary define the word "self" as pronoun? > Instead of giving definition of what self is, it gives example to > show how the word "self" is used. > > The Buddha's teaching on each and every aggregate being not self is a > simple yet profound and liberating teaching. Self-views are > entangling. One would never get close to understand the Buddha's > teaching if he or she tries to understand it with a self-view. > > Metta, > Victor 17382 From: James Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 5:01pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Vajira and Mara --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Christine (and James) - > > What a great post! Whether or not there is a Mara who is more than > metaphor, I think that the metaphorical sense of 'Mara' as temptation is the > important one, and I think that you have pointed out the crux of the matter > when you pointed out that knowing Mara, knowing him well - knowing fully the > delusive and dangerous nature of temptation, defeats him. > > With metta, > Howard > Howard, I do not agree with your perspective of Mara. Maybe I would before actually experiencing him, but not now. Thinking of Mara as metaphor for temptation is useless and not how the Buddha spoke of Mara at all…I agreed with Christine's words and perspective, but not the quote she quoted from Nina. Nina has obviously never met Mara or she wouldn't have written those statements. I am not sure why you both feel compelled to write about a subject with a stance plainly in contradiction to all of the Tipitaka. The Buddha, his monks, his nuns, NEVER spoke of Mara as a metaphor, and yet you and Nina say that is the most important way to view him. That is very misleading and not proper dhamma. I have just remained quiet about such things until I knew them personally. Now that I know them personally, I don't think I need to be quiet anymore. Mara isn't temptation predominately; Mara is a blockade…a barrier. Mara isn't the one who keeps us attached to this samsara world lifetime after lifetime; our own ignorance does that. Mara simply finds it his duty to support this samsara existence. Anyone who appears as if they are going to break loose, he swoops down to try his best to stop them. He mainly does it with fear and confusion, and occassionally temptation. I speak from personal experience. I will post more in a bit. Metta, James 17383 From: James Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 5:38pm Subject: Mara Hey Everyone: First, before I begin what most of you may be skeptical about, I want to stress that everything in this post is the truth. It is what I have experienced directly with no flourishes or exaggeration. To post on such a subject, in even the most simple of deceitful ways, would bring me unimaginably bad kamma. I would not disrespect the Triple Gem in such a manner. Since no one is telling about any incidents with Mara, I am going to tell mine. But a few things first, as I wrote in an earlier post to this group, I have always been skeptical about Devas, Maras, etc. I won't accept something on someone else's word alone. And I also don't speak of things that I don't know for sure. Frankly, I didn't believe that Mara existed. I thought, and have often read, that he was just a metaphor for craving (and many other negative things). Now I know that I am wrong for thinking that previously. Mara is a real being—I have seen him, sensed him when unseen, and I have heard his voice. And the experiences were quite real each time. Mara first visited me after I had begun to read the book "Reason's Traces." I got through the forward and came across the alternative definition for anatta, "no-essence". A light bulb came on because this definition made so much more sense to me than `non-self'. After reading, I laid back in a recliner, and I was thinking about what this new definition meant in terms of the universe and myself. My eyes were closed, kinda dozing but not asleep, just pondering, when my thoughts were completely abducted. In an instant I saw in my mind me lying on the recliner and a very short (4'7" or so), pale skinned, humanoid appearing man (but with grotesque puffy eyes and shedding hair), dressed in a black cloak, a black hat (Fedora style), who walked past the right side of the recliner. I jumped up immediately out of my rest and recoiled from that side of the chair. I could sense that he was gone but I was extremely, extremely, extremely scared! And I didn't think to myself, "What was that?" I immediately, instinctively thought to myself, "Oh no, that was Mara!" Since then, I have had a few more visits…at least once if not twice per day. They occur when I am pondering anatta and its consequences in a deep fashion. When they occur, I can feel him walk past me, I don't see him during everyday awakefulness, and it makes me feel fear every time (though less so now). This morning, I heard his voice in my head as I lay half-asleep and half-awake. I was thinking about Anatta (yes I even think deeply while half-asleep). And I was thinking, "Okay, everything is impermanent. Everything is impermanent," when I head a second voice say, "Permanent." My mind immediately disagreed, and it did a quick search, and I realized that the thought wasn't mine. It had been put there. After a bit of confusion, my mind drifted to a vision of a classroom of kids, and I thought to myself, "They all have no essence." And a second voice said, "Souls…souls." Again, it wasn't my thought. The voice, which I could actually `hear', was a man's voice and much deeper and more rich than my `thinking voice'. Then I got out of bed. It seems that Mara works best during lucid dreaming, or perhaps meditation. It is then that he can get inside the mind of the person. Maybe everyday mind is not so easy for him and he can only give impressions. I wanted to share this for those who need the information. Does this entire happening to me mean I am enlightened? HA! I know that I am far from that. But I must be heading in the right direction, using the right method for me, or Mara wouldn't visit me. Does this visitation make me happy? No. I just wanted reaching Nibbana to be nice and easy; having an otherworldly stalker was not my goal or hope…and something I didn't even imagine happening. Metta, James 17384 From: peterdac4298 Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 6:40pm Subject: Re: Freewill is out?!;-)?!:-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > > The *other* "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" by Ashin Janakabhivamsa has > an interesting chapter on carita (Chapter 5). > > http://www.geocities.com/ekchew.geo/Abhidhamma.htm > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Hi Rob M I am sure most members would agree that your above link is most interesting and helpful, I'm sure many others will find it so also. I enclose the below quote from the front page of this site for further consideration. "...Cover story: On the seventh year after His Enlightenment, the Buddha preached the Abhidhamma (Higher Doctrine) in Tavatimsa Heaven. As a fulfillment of gratitude to his former mother, now a Santussita deva, the Buddha then delivered a sermon on the Higher Doctrine to thousands of Devas (Gods) and Brahmas (higher celestial beings) who attained the various stages of Noble Sainthood. ..." Can we deduce, in this example from the life of the Buddha, that a period of meditation, in which reflection on the intricacies of the Dhamma, is as worthy (i.e.. conducive for future development) as a similar period involved in cultivating jhanas or investigation of current processes would be? In simpler terms, would this period of clear reviewing (should it ever arise) be as useful as similar periods of either cultivation or investigation? Presumably it would depend on such things as the degree of clarity and compassion accompanying it, etc. Cheers Peter 17385 From: azita gill Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 6:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Is this a contradiction? Please help... --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Victor - > Actually, what *does* help is realizing that > "this is just a sharp and > strong series of unpleasant stinging and pressure > sensations". (What also > helps, of course, is removing the cause! And there > lies the extreme > usefulness of concepts.) > > With metta, > Howard > dear Howard, this comment made me smile, I think maybe you have a touch of dark humour. even the knowing that it is a 'sharp and strong series of unpleasant stinging.......' is already thinking. I think that if there was sati at that moment, there would be no naming the object that was experienced thro the body sense, and maybe this is what you are saying anyway, just the experience of unpleasant sensation thro the body doorway. As Khun Sujin said, we are experiencing realities all the time thro the 6 doorways but we take it for self, thro ignorance. I enjoy reading the part of the Diamond Sutta that u. put at the end of each of your posts, Howard. Cheers, Azita 17386 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 7:24pm Subject: Re: Mara Dear James, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: < snip > In an instant I saw in my mind me lying on the recliner and a very short (4'7" or so), pale skinned, humanoid appearing man (but with grotesque puffy eyes and shedding hair), dressed in a black cloak, a black hat (Fedora style), who walked past the right side of the recliner. KKT: One question: What does it mean << I saw in my mind >> ??? Thanks. KKT 17387 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 8:03pm Subject: Re: Mara James, I know you will have considered that there are other possibilities - like the half awake mind creating illusions, or mental strain from pondering too hard and too long on one point, or 'your self' fighting a last ditch battle for survival. And there is the possibility that you are correct in your assessment. Allow me to reiterate - perhaps it is better to put what has happened aside, not to give it too much importance, even avoid being in the same circumstances that seem to condition this visitation. It may or may not have any lasting significance, other than being more tolerant of others experiences. It will certainly have given you an altered outlook on the Teachings. Ultimately, though, it is not bringing you peace or freedom, it is causing you stress - dukkha, and is there any benefit in encouraging the experience to re-occur? I, too, find anatta a difficult subject. Sometimes I find with topics in Dhamma study that if I have a complete break for a while, I come back further advanced with new insights. I find the Nava Sutta a useful reminder for occasions when I am trying to force my mind to understand something quickly, and also as an encouragement when I begin to feel 'I'm never going to understand this!' When there are the right conditions right understanding will occur, whether we want it or not. And if the right conditions aren't there, no amount of wishing or thinking or forcing will achieve the goal. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-101.html Sometimes we can feel so close to understanding, on the brink of a break through, that we think a bit more intensive pondering, reasoning, mulling over a topic will have the desired result. It won't. This is just a self thinking. In this case, it is not the mind, the intelligence, that needs to understand facts and opinions - like chemistry or math or philosophy - it is panna that needs to arise to have insight into anatta. It cannot be forced. It is beyond control. Thanks for trusting us with what has occurred. much metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > Hey Everyone: > > First, before I begin what most of you may be skeptical about, I > want to stress that everything in this post is the truth. It is > what I have experienced directly with no flourishes or > exaggeration. To post on such a subject, in even the most simple of > deceitful ways, would bring me unimaginably bad kamma. I would not > disrespect the Triple Gem in such a manner. > > Since no one is telling about any incidents with Mara, I am going to > tell mine. 17388 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 10:19pm Subject: Re: Freewill is out?!;-)?!:-) Hello Sarah (and James at the end), Thanks for your reports on the Kang Krajan experience; many more to follow I hope. You wrote: > At one point on the first day, I was trying to `work out' a detail on ayatanas (bases) intellectually. Very appropriately [K Sujin] reminded me that this was just thinking and speculating and not understanding anything about the present moment - the namas and rupas which can be experienced and known now. It was such a helpful reminder for me. So easily we can go off-track, lost in intellectual speculation which is not even wise consideration - just being lost in pannatti (concepts) without any sati. > ------- Yet again, you have said what I needed to hear. So much of what I take for `Dhamma study' is just pannatti. (You'll never see that drafts folder now :-) ) Even the most pivotal questions (e.g., is there a self or is there not a self), are misguided when they don't address the present namas and rupas. Another case in point is the beautiful Sakalika-sutta that James has posted. It shows us the Buddha's perfect understanding of mara -- the five khandhas -- the conditioned namas and rupas. But if we see it in a conventional way, then all that beautiful imagery of a wounded `Blessed One' in conversation with `the Evil One,' is just so much pannatti. Christine, Andrew, Steven and I will be meeting with some other Dhamma friends at Andrew's this weekend. As was the case last time, I'll probably drive people mad with continual reminders of how there is only nama and rupa. I'll tell them to blame you. Kind regards Ken H PS James, I just saw your Mara post as I was about to send this. I wouldn't want to appear indifferent to experiences that are important to you. That there was ultimately nothing more than fleeting, conditioned phenomena, is the most meaningful thing I can say about them -- or about anything else in the world. KH 17389 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 10:26pm Subject: Re: Forgiveness Hi Paul, James, Howard and Frank, Thank you for your great thoughts and comments on this subject. I may come back to you about this on Sunday Oz time. I'm away for the weekend with the SEQdsg at Cooran. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "ajahn_paul" wrote: > Dear christine, > > i think the whole concept and system is different. > > god says that every single person has sin due to adam and his wife > bla bla bla, i think u know better than me about what the bible > says. and, bcoz of that SIN, we have to ask forgiveness from god. > in my own point of view, it just like a man giving u some posion at > the first place, then he would like u to beg him for the medician. ^_~ > > but, in buddhism, the first thing we have to learn is kamma, u > deserved for what u had done. so, even u r forgiven, kamma wont > change. > > im not sure if u know the story.... one of the Buddha's followers, i > dont know his name in english or pali. >.< > > he found his mom had been gone to hell, so he tried to save her and > give food to her, but failed. then he asked Buddha to help, and > Buddha said he can do nothing about that. > > i guess thats why! ^_~ > > 17390 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 11:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Is this a contradiction? Please help... Dear Victor, --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > If someone was being pricked by a needle, how would speaking strictly > in abhidhamma term "there is no person, no pricking, and no needle" > help him or her? .... This is a very good question.......;-) Depending on the understanding at any given time, it may lead to detachment from the idea of a self and may help to see the conditioned nature of present phenomena. What is being taken now for an experience or a situation is in reality a variety of conditioned phenomena (as I understood Howard to be suggesting) - hardness, heat, pain, consciousness, feeling. In other words, just the namas and rupas you originally were asking about (without any names;-)). To quote from what you wrote to Ray: “The Buddha’s teaching on each and every aggregate being not self is a simple yet profound and liberating teaching. Self-views are entangling. One would never get close to understand the Buddha’s teachng if he or she tries to understand it with a self-view.” Pls let me know if you have further comments/questions on this. As Howard also commented, understanding realities doesn’t mean abandoning concepts either;-) Sarah ===== 17391 From: James Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 11:04pm Subject: Re: Mara KKT, It means that I was thinking of something else, in a rather relaxed way (I believe I was pondering the nature of humans and planets), with my eyes closed, when I suddenly saw everything like my eyes were open. I saw, what I felt was Mara afterward, walk past the side of the chair looking straight ahead. When I opened my eyes in a fright, there was nothing there. I have never had experiences or visions like that. I was wholly unique and wholly real. Metta, James --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "phamdluan2000" wrote: > > Dear James, > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > < snip > > > In an instant I saw in > my mind me lying on the recliner and a very short (4'7" or so), pale > skinned, humanoid appearing man (but with grotesque puffy eyes and > shedding hair), dressed in a black cloak, a black hat (Fedora > style), who walked past the right side of the recliner. > > > > > KKT: One question: > > What does it mean << I saw in my mind >> ??? > > Thanks. > > > KKT 17392 From: Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 6:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vajira and Mara Hi, James - You might consider re-reading what I wrote. I never denied that there is a deva who spends his time as an adversary, attempting to thwart liberation. I simply don't know first-hand that there is. My point was that personal temptations constitute a more important impediment. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/5/02 8:02:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi, Christine (and James) - > > > > What a great post! Whether or not there is a Mara who is > more than > >metaphor, I think that the metaphorical sense of 'Mara' as > temptation is the > >important one, and I think that you have pointed out the crux of > the matter > >when you pointed out that knowing Mara, knowing him well - knowing > fully the > >delusive and dangerous nature of temptation, defeats him. > > > >With metta, > >Howard > > > > Howard, > > I do not agree with your perspective of Mara. Maybe I would before > actually experiencing him, but not now. Thinking of Mara as > metaphor for temptation is useless and not how the Buddha spoke of > Mara at all…I agreed with Christine's words and perspective, but not > the quote she quoted from Nina. Nina has obviously never met Mara > or she wouldn't have written those statements. I am not sure why > you both feel compelled to write about a subject with a stance > plainly in contradiction to all of the Tipitaka. The Buddha, his > monks, his nuns, NEVER spoke of Mara as a metaphor, and yet you and > Nina say that is the most important way to view him. That is very > misleading and not proper dhamma. I have just remained quiet about > such things until I knew them personally. Now that I know them > personally, I don't think I need to be quiet anymore. > > Mara isn't temptation predominately; Mara is a blockade…a barrier. > Mara isn't the one who keeps us attached to this samsara world > lifetime after lifetime; our own ignorance does that. Mara simply > finds it his duty to support this samsara existence. Anyone who > appears as if they are going to break loose, he swoops down to try > his best to stop them. He mainly does it with fear and confusion, > and occassionally temptation. I speak from personal experience. I > will post more in a bit. > > Metta, James > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17393 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 11:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Freewill is out?!;-)?!:-) Hi Ken H, --- kenhowardau wrote: > Thanks for your reports on the Kang Krajan experience; > many more to follow I hope. .... ;-) likewise those from the SEQld DSG gathering this weekend;-);-) ..... > Yet again, you have said what I needed to hear. So much > of what I take for `Dhamma study' is just pannatti. > (You'll never see that drafts folder now :-) ) Even the > most pivotal questions (e.g., is there a self or is there > not a self), are misguided when they don't address the > present namas and rupas. .... .....so much ‘self’ censorship...but hopefully the combination of Chrsitine’s inspirations and your wise reflections will lead to useful discussions for you all and some helpful titbits for the rest of us;-) ..... > Another case in point is the beautiful Sakalika-sutta > that James has posted. It shows us the Buddha's perfect > understanding of mara -- the five khandhas -- the > conditioned namas and rupas. But if we see it in a > conventional way, then all that beautiful imagery of a > wounded `Blessed One' in conversation with `the Evil > One,' is just so much pannatti. ..... wisely put.... .... > Christine, Andrew, Steven and I will be meeting with some > other Dhamma friends at Andrew's this weekend. As was > the case last time, I'll probably drive people mad with > continual reminders of how there is only nama and rupa. > I'll tell them to blame you. .... ;-) You have my full support - with the continual reminders (not with the driving people mad). We were sorry to miss Steve in Bkk and hope you can give him and Andrew a few prods about DSG at the same time..... Have a good weekend, Sarah ===== 17394 From: James Date: Thu Dec 5, 2002 11:26pm Subject: Re: Mara --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > James, > > I know you will have considered that there are other possibilities - > like the half awake mind creating illusions, or mental strain from > pondering too hard and too long on one point, or 'your self' fighting > a last ditch battle for survival. And there is the possibility that > you are correct in your assessment. Allow me to reiterate - perhaps > it is better to put what has happened aside, not to give it too much > importance, even avoid being in the same circumstances that seem to > condition this visitation. It may or may not have any lasting > significance, other than being more tolerant of others experiences. > It will certainly have given you an altered outlook on the > Teachings. Ultimately, though, it is not bringing you peace or > freedom, it is causing you stress - dukkha, and is there any benefit > in encouraging the experience to re-occur? > > I, too, find anatta a difficult subject. Sometimes I find with > topics in Dhamma study that if I have a complete break for a while, > I come back further advanced with new insights. I find the Nava > Sutta a useful reminder for occasions when I am trying to force my > mind to understand something quickly, and also as an encouragement > when I begin to feel 'I'm never going to understand this!' When > there are the right conditions right understanding will occur, > whether we want it or not. And if the right conditions aren't there, > no amount of wishing or thinking or forcing will achieve the goal. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-101.html > Sometimes we can feel so close to understanding, on the brink of a > break through, that we think a bit more intensive pondering, > reasoning, mulling over a topic will have the desired result. It > won't. This is just a self thinking. In this case, it is not the > mind, the intelligence, that needs to understand facts and opinions - > like chemistry or math or philosophy - it is panna that needs to > arise to have insight into anatta. It cannot be forced. It is > beyond control. > Thanks for trusting us with what has occurred. > > much metta, > Christine > Christine, LOL! What makes you think I am encouraging the visitations to recur? They are disturbing my thoughts. I have begun to do Chankra meditation to try to keep him away as much as possible. And I can tell you, with 100% certainty; it is not the result of me straining my brain. I have four college degrees, including a Masters; I have strained my brain under much more pressure than just thinking about Anatta, and I have never had visions before or experiences such as these. And I am not sure why you believe I should ignore them. Did the Buddha ignore them? Did his monks ignore them? Did his nuns ignore them? They are significant and should not be ignored. There are quite a few suttas about Mara for a reason. Mara must be confronted head-on, seen for who he is and the tricks he is playing, and to dismiss him. Frankly, he makes it so that it is impossible to ignore him. Not even the Buddha ignored him…every time Mara spoke, the Buddha answered. Of course, such things to us sound like fantasy. And to a Christian, Muslim, Atheist, etc., Nibbana sounds like a fantasy also. How do we know it is a reality? Because we do, and that is all. I also don't feel that I am being brave by talking about this, I am being honest. The Tipitaka makes no apologies for such realities; I don't think I should either. Many people in this group, and in the world, have too many views that they hold onto. All views should be abandoned and the world viewed with an open mind. In everyday reality, what you see is usually not what you see. Just take me at my word and send me good thoughts to help ward off this visitor. That is what would be helpful. Metta, James ps. This is the last post I will do on this matter. If anyone wants to discuss further, contact me off-list. 17395 From: Sarah Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 0:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi James, (Ray, Rob M, Rob K & All), I have several of your anatta’ posts in front of me and I’d like to pick up on a few issues - many of which have probably been clarified for you already by Ray, Rob M, Rob K and your own reflections. If you don’t mind, I’ll use point form this time (more or less in the order you raised them): ..... 1. You mentioned in a post to Rob M that “the only person who doesn’t have a ‘self’.....would be a Buddha”. We can say that everyone has wrong views concerning self (sakkaya ditthi) apart from the ariyans including sotapannas. Regardless of the views, there is no self. Realities don’t change, but the understanding of them does. ..... 2.You mentioned about ‘desire for existence’ in this connection. In Kang Krajan we had some discussion about the two kinds of bhava tanha (desire for existence).It can refer to bhava tanha with the wrong idea of self (eradicated by the sotapanna) or the more subtle clinging to life or rebirth which is only eradicated by the arahat. It depends on the context, As you mention it is one of the asavas (cankers). I think Ray clarified this point well and added helpful sutta references. James, there is no self (real or false) at any time. The sotapanna has no illusion of any kind. Whilst there is craving, life will continue, regardless of whether there is right or wrong view about it. I didn’t see anything erroneous in the extract you commented in the Nyantiloka dict (although I’ve seen a few other errors) or in your extract from Edward Thomas “The Hist of Bud Thought’. Pls give me a reference to the first if you still think it’s incorrect as I’m curious about it. ..... 3. I found Ray’s explanations (no need to put in Abhidhamma terms, Ray;-)) very helpful regarding kamma and rebirth. As you suggest, James, it’s not simple to appreciate that just as now there are only namas and rupas, so at the next moment, and the next and so on. This is the way to understand rebirth at each moment, results of kamma and kamma now and to appreciate it’s always been this way and always will within samsara. ..... 4. You raised in another post to Ray the questions of ‘the reality of non-self, why he taught it, and where it was supposed to lead’. You conclude by suggesting ‘ ‘self’ does exist, but as something that is impermanent, not self that is eternal..or has control over existence.’ (Apologies for taking your comments out of context). I think as Ken H was just suggesting, as there is more understanding right now of the characteristics of namas and rupas being experienced ,there is clearer comprehension of where the understanding leads and less confusion about self or non-self. Life and daily functioning don’t change. The use of concepts and conventional truths doesn’t change. Realities don’t change. The dust of ignorance and wrong view is gradually removed - very little by very little. As Ray explained so well (backed up by sutta from SN), understanding the anatta nature of all these namas and rupas is the way: ‘through such disenchantment one would develop dispassion towards the aggregates and with dispassion comes release’. We cling to an idea of self and see it as something fearful to relinquish, not realising that it is this very clinging that brings about the fear. ..... 5. Whether we refer to ‘chewed up by feeling, perception..’ and the rest or ‘ensnared’ or ‘captivated’ it doesn’t matter. These are not alternative viewpoints or meditation exercises but the truth of reality at this moment. Right now, aren’t ‘we’ captivated by felings, rupas...the 5 khandhas? Don’t we find these experiences important and cling to them as ‘mine’ or ‘me’? This is why the development of panna (wisdom) has to be the path of detachment. You suggest that the Buddha isn’t talking about ‘an ultimate reality’. I would suggest that he is always talking about ultimate realities, i.e. the truth, regardless of the language used according to context. Rather than being the way to go ‘crazy’, understanding ultimate realities whenever there are conditions for panna to arise, is the way to find ‘sanity’;-) Panna doesn’t need a Buddha’s wisdom to understand a nama or rupa for what it is (i.e no self). Right now, seeing can be understood as seeing, visible object as visible object and so on. (Of course, without considering the Buddha’s Teachings, there would be no conditions for this panna to arise). ..... 6. You mention that you’re not sure what ‘eye-consciousness’ is and I think when you raise these points and suggest a need to put on the brakes after the first couple of pages or chapters of ADL, it shows some very helpful reflection. It’s only too easy to think it’s all clear when it isn’t. Eye-consciousness (cakkhu vinnana) refers to this very moment of seeing now which sees just its object. If you close your eyes and then open them, there is seeing immediately. No self in it. By empty or void of a self, it justs means that at that moment of opening the eyes, there is only seeing. It has its own nature of characteristic for an instant and then has fallen away. This is true for all other phenomena including consciousness in the mind-door process. I think others like Rob K explained the Sunna Sutta in more detail. These are important and useful points for us all and not easy at all as you suggest. Pls ask for furthr clarifications if it’s helpful. ..... 7. “ ‘no-self’ vs ‘no-essence’.... I think it depends what is meant by the terms. Empty of self doesn’t mean there is nothing experienced. Seeing has its particular characteristic (lakhana or sabhava -s’times transl as essence), different from that of hearing or that of the visible object which is seen. It’s not James, however, who sees or hears and it doesn’t belong to James. James is a concept in the imagination only;-) ..... 8. I agree with Christine’s comments on Mara or any other special experiences. Anything is possible, but I would also encourage anyone not to cling to lucid dreaming experiences, nightmares, visitations, visions or other experiences. By clinging and thinking about the stories or experiences, it’s a condition for them to repeat and this can be an obstacle to the development of wisdom and detachment. We also had some discussion on this topic at Kang Krajan;-) ***** James, you’ve raised a lot of important points for everyone to consider. I’ve really appreciated the responses your reflections have generated as well. As Christine also said, thank you for sharing with us all. Sarah ====== 17396 From: peterdac4298 Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 4:51am Subject: [dsg] Re: Vajira and Mara --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, James - > > You might consider re-reading what I wrote. I never denied that there > is a deva who spends his time as an adversary, attempting to thwart > liberation. I simply don't know first-hand that there is. My point was that > personal temptations constitute a more important impediment. > > With metta, > Howard > Hi Howard I think that the point of the Mara mythology is that "personal temptation" is a manifestation of Mara's retinue, e.g. his daughters and his cohorts. I hope the following link puts it well. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/lee/demons.html Cheers Peter 17398 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 5:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Stephen --- oreznoone@a... wrote: .. .. .. > BTW, the old question remains open: abhidhamma recognizes both black > and white kamma, and mixed, but what about the kamma that ends kamma? > What is its classification? The Abhidhamma classifies kamma in a number of different ways, the most basic of which is the 2-fold classification of kusala and akusala. The various kinds of kamma referred to in the 'black and white' sutta are simply different combinations and levels of these 2 kinds of kamma. For example, the 'mixed' kamma of the sutta refers to the fact that both kusala and akusala kamma have been performed and accumulated and will bear their respective fruit (there is no 'mixed kamma' per se in the Abhidhamma). Likewise, the 'kamma that ends kamma' is a reference to a particular level, or sub-class, of kusala kamma. Jon 17399 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 5:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas James --- James wrote: .. .. .. <> If you have a problem as regards the Abhidhamma, I am happy to discuss this question purely on the basis of the suttas. (There are many who share your scepticism about the Abhidhamma for 1 reason or another.) <> As you have acknowledged in your post on the Sunna Sutta, this is not really so. Indeed, there is a whole section of suttas (the Salayatana-vagga of the Samyutta Nikaya) dealing with the 6 sense bases and their external objects, namely, visible object (sometimes translated as 'form'), sound, smell, taste and tangible objects (hardness and softness, heat and cold, motion and pressure). I have posted 3 of these suttas below. It is not important whether we refer to the external sense-objects as rupas or by some more conventional name; the important thing is to know that they are among the 'dhammas' that the Buddha said are capable of being directly experienced, should be known and are to be abandoned. <> According to these suttas, there are 6 types of consciousness corresponding to the experiencing through the 6 different doorways. <> All the 'external' dhammas are outside the body. They are mentioned repeatedly throughout the suttas. They are included in the things that are taken for "the world" and that are to be abandoned. In this and other respects they are in just the same category as consciousness and the mental states. <> Every dhamma, whether internal or external, has the same 3 characteristics of anicca, dukkha and anatta. <> I agree with this. The thing most directly leading to enlightenment is the knowledge of the true characteristic of the things we take for being permanent, satisfactory and self, and those things include the external dhammas that are experienced by one's consciousness. Jon Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.23 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-023.html Sabba Sutta (The All) Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. "Monks, I will teach you the All. "What is the All? "Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. "This, monks, is called the All. "Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." ------------------------------------------------------------------- Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.24 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-024.html Pahanaya Sutta (For Abandoning) Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. "Monks, I will teach you the All as a phenomenon for abandoning. "And which All is a phenomenon for abandoning? to be abandoned? "The eye is to be abandoned. Forms are to be abandoned. Consciousness at the eye is to be abandoned. Contact at the eye is to be abandoned. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye -- experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain -- that too is to be abandoned. "The ear is to be abandoned. Sounds are to be abandoned... "The nose is to be abandoned. Aromas are to be abandoned... "The tongue is to be abandoned. Flavors are to be abandoned... "The body is to be abandoned. Tactile sensations are to be abandoned... "The intellect is to be abandoned. Ideas are to be abandoned... "This is called the All as a phenomenon for abandoning." ------------------------------------------------------------------- Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.82 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-082.html Loka Sutta (The World) Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Then a certain monk went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One: "'The world, the world (loka),'it is said. In what respect does the word 'world' apply? "Insofar as it disintegrates (lujjati), monk, it is called the 'world.' "Now what disintegrates? "The eye disintegrates. Forms disintegrate. Consciousness at the eye consciousness disintegrates. Contact at the eye disintegrates. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye -- experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain -- that too disintegrates. "The ear disintegrates. Sounds disintegrate... "The nose disintegrates. Aromas disintegrate... "The tongue disintegrates. Tastes disintegrate... "The body disintegrates. Tactile sensations disintegrate... "The intellect disintegrates. Ideas disintegrate... "Insofar as it disintegrates, it is called the 'world.'" ------------------------------------------------------------------- 17401 From: peterdac4298 Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 5:57am Subject: Expressions of gratitude. Hi All, Just to say thanks for being out there. A positive force for spreading the Dhamma. Due to the absence of skillful friends, the practice has been not so good lately. Something of a problem ever since disrobing some thirteen odd years ago. The UseNet groups and mailing lists have gone someway towards redressing the balance, but newsgroups can be Dukkha, and mailing lists can be very Anicca. After a prolonged period of 'burnout', there was a definite need to come back into the on-line community, but finding a group that fitted in with the current predicament was no so easy. Even you guys seemed a bit too deep at first for this dyslexic, but having made a couple or few posts, the graft is beginning to take. The last few meditation sessions have shown a marked improvement due mainly to the content of random thoughts: they are much less worldly and more Dhamma related than before. Quite a relief, as it now seems as though the corner has been turned: there is hope for me yet! I especially appreciate the Abhidhamma interest, and more recently the Vinaya angle. Many of you seem to know each other personally due no doubt to sharing retreats etc, or even being fellow expats. This sense of community seems to be very rare in cyberspace. Just hope the Dukkha ain't too bad when these compounded things inevitably come to dissolution. No doubt these elements will come together in some other accumulation at some other time! Cheers Peter 17402 From: James Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 5:59am Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hi James, (Ray, Rob M, Rob K & All), > > I have several of your anatta' posts in front of me and I'd like to pick > up on a few issues - many of which have probably been clarified for you > already by Ray, Rob M, Rob K and your own reflections. If you don't mind, > I'll use point form this time (more or less in the order you raised them): Sarah, Wow! These ambush posts of yours will be the death of me! :-) just kidding. The question of anatta is not so cut and dry as you seem to state here. From a purely historical perspective, there have been four major schools of thought within Thera Buddhism concerning anatta since the Buddha's death. Of the two largest schools, one proposed a `synthetic self', a temporary self that receives the result of karma and rebirth, etc.; the other proposed no self at all, temporary or otherwise. I am undecided at this point. My thinking is evolving as I study more. When you look at past posts of mine, some of them may still reflect my current thinking, some of them may not. This is a slippery matter and my thoughts change daily. I write to learn, not to teach…and I have no views currently about anatta. You won't see anymore posts about it from me. Metta, James 17403 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 6:40am Subject: Re: Expressions of gratitude. --- Dear Peter, I've been appreciating your posts too. And thanks Robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "peterdac4298" wrote: > Hi All, > > Just to say thanks for being out there. A positive force for > spreading the Dhamma. > > Due 17404 From: Mom Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 6:53am Subject: Re: Yuganaddha Sutta con'd: intellectual understanding and psychic experiences Dear James, Please forgive the delay in replying to your very revealing letter. This past week was H.M. the King's birthday here in Thailand, and for me it means a lot of ceremonies to attend. As you rightly surmised I have had many of the same experiences that you have had, especially the psychic ones, such as seeing black shapes that incited fear. But I now find, after having studied with Achaan Sujin these last 2 1/2 years, that such experiences were "just thinking" and that they hindered rather than helped understanding to arise. They hinder the arising of understanding because such experiences encourage the laying on of more layers of "I-ness" to form over the already overloaded ego each of us already thinks we have. When I studied with my first teacher years ago, such experiences were subtly (and not so subtly) encouraged and his students liked to talk about them quite a bit. It became a real ego thing because the more experiences one had, the more one was "respected" by the group as being "advanced," etc. And even if you never tell anyone about them, they are still manifestations of the ego because it is always "I am experiencing such and such" and we tend to get carried away by the experiences themselves, losing track of the real reason for studying Dhamma. In such ways, the ego expands. If the ego, atta, expands, can understanding of its true nature arise? Can understanding of anatta arise? But think about it: was any understanding of the true nature of "us," "the mind" and "the world," reality, ever revealed through such experiences? Think about those last statements, check them out, that is, contemplate about them, see if they are true or not, for yourself. Contemplation on such questions is part of pariyati learning (see below). On a number of occasions, Lord Buddha told his students (sorry, I'm very weak on sutta references), that what he had taught them was only as much as a handful of leaves, out of a forest of uncountable numbers of leaves. But, and I'm just paraphrasing this from a rather faulty memory, that that handful was the basic information they needed, the Dhamma, and that all else was unnecessary. There is a lot of information and unexplainable phenomena "out there" that is unnecessary for understanding the way of letting go of defilements. And from my experience, the psychic stuff falls into that category. By the way, I no longer have such experiences, perhaps because "I" am no longer looking for them. When you speak about learning the Dhamma through the intellect, and contemplation, what you have described is the first step of a 3 part learning process. The 8 Fold Path begins with understanding. This is the type of understanding that is called pariyati, or intellectual learning. Sati (awareness, but more than that) cannot arise unless there is knowledge of the Realities that sati can be aware of (excuse the poor grammar). How can you know what anatta is if there is no basic intellectual understanding of it? (You asked, "Why can't I achieve nibbana...?" Your question reveals the answer) This type of learning is a necessary prerequisite, because it helps develop the conditions for the next level of learning, patipatti (practice, but not necessarily what many people refer to as meditation) to occur. These second and 3rd levels deal with the arising of sati and panna (understanding, insight) which truly starts to gradually understand the nature of anatta so that defilements can be gradually let go of. Pariyati learning can occur in various ways: reading, listening to tapes, cd's, etc., studying, discussing, reading the letters on this list and writing in to dsg (anomodhana to Jonothan and Sarah for providing this wonderful forum). The more kusala (wholesome) actions that are performed (and pariyati learning of the Dhamma is definitely kusala), the more chances there are for future kusala actions to occur. It accumulates with each citta. Thus, another way of saying this is that when kusala cittas and cetasikas arise, it creates conditions for more of the same to arise in future. It also works the other way around, unfortunately: when akusala (unwholesome) cittas and cetasikas arise, this also creates conditions for more of the same to arise in future, too. All this is repetition from my previous letter, but one can never hear enough of it. However, this is far too long and I have not even gotten to explaining patipatti and pativedha, the next 2 levels of learning. Others can explain it far, far better than I can ever hope to. Therefore, may I suggest that you go to the websites listed below where you can download the writings of Nina van Gorkom, who can best explain the Dhamma to English speakers. You are indeed fortunate because Nina herself is a regular participant in this forum, and should you then have any questions on anything found in her readings, you can ask her directly through dsg, or by writing to her e-mail address. Such reading will become part of your pariyati learning, which is the prerequisite for going further along the Path. metta, Betty May I suggest that you can continue "your" pariyati learning with the following of Nina's works: Buddhism in Daily Life Abhidhamma in Daily Life These can be found at the following sites: www.buddhadhamma.com www.abhidhamma.org www.zolag.co.uk _______________________ Mom Bongkojpriya Yugala 38 Soi 41 Phaholyothin Road Bangkok 10900, Thailand tel: 662-579-1050; 661-826-7160 e-mail: beyugala@k... > > Betty, > > Thank you for the post. I think that you are trying to tell me > something that I have just begun to figure out. Perhaps you have a > connection with me, beyond this Internet, and I want to encourage > you to keep it. According to this very important sutta by Ananda, > some achieve Nibbana through samatha, some through vipassana, some > through both in tandem, and a few, a very few, through the power of > the mind alone.through reasoning. I have been a Buddhist for 15 > years and have practiced meditation for most of those years. > Samatha didn't do much for me, vipassana did a bit more but I still > felt that it was lacking for me, and now I have given up both and > begun to apply the power of my mind alone to dharma. This is how > Ananda describes it: > > "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness > concerning the Dhamma well under control. There comes a time when > his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and becomes unified & > concentrated. In him the path is born. He follows that path, > develops it, and pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & > pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. > > I should be obvious to everyone in this group that I have a great > deal of restlessness concerning the Dhamma. Why? I must understand > Dhamma with my mind, with my cognitive thought, in order for insight > to arise in me. That is just the way my mind is. I can accept that > now, before I could not. I kept meditating and not much was > happening. I study the suttas and read everything I can get my > hands on now because that is how I `meditate'. During the Buddha's > time, many monks achieved Nibbana simply from listening to the > Buddha speak. This wasn't magic, they just had a mind similar to > mine. Why can't I achieve Nibbana just from reading the suttas? > Two reasons: One, they aren't spoken by Lord Buddha, so a lot is > lost there; Two, I am finding that the Pali language simply doesn't > match English and most of the suttas are translated > improperly/incompletely. > > Recently, I have begun to focus my cognitive thoughts on the > question of anatta/ultimate reality, since that is the heart of the > Buddha's insight/teaching. I am not sure of my progress, but I > think I understand a bit more than I did before. Consequently, I > have had very real, brief visitations these past three days from a > very short, pale figure dressed all in black (black cloak and hat, > and walking stick) who raises a fear in me unlike I have experienced > before. I don't think I need to say more, maybe you know what I > mean. I will move forward. I wish you well in your practice as > well, Betty. Thank you for coming out of the woodwork to address me. > > Metta, James > > > ADVERTISEMENT 17405 From: James Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 7:07am Subject: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > It is not important whether we refer to the external sense-objects as > rupas or by some more conventional name; the important thing is to > know that they are among the 'dhammas' that the Buddha said are > capable of being directly experienced, should be known and are to be > abandoned. Dear Jon, In what suttas does the Buddha define "Forms" as material objects existing outside of the body? I would like at least a few vague ones or one specific one. M. Buddhists, of which I tend to incline in regards to higher philosophical questions, states that 'Forms' are 'Forms of the mind', not forms outside the body. I agree with everything you wrote except your definition of 'Form'. Define that for me using suttas and I will reconsider the worth of rupa. Metta, James 17406 From: James Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 7:28am Subject: Re: Yuganaddha Sutta con'd: intellectual understanding and psychic experiences Dear Betty, Thank you for the e-mail. I have some things to discuss and some questions to ask, but I will not do it on this list. I will write to you privately. I have not seen others in this group say that they have encountered such things. Seeing Mara isn't a result of ego. The Buddha saw him frequently and he was void of ego. Metta, James ps. If one more person tries to push off Nina's book on me, I am going to scream! :-) Just kidding...but I may frown very seriously ;-) I have already read as much of that book as I care to. I have addressed questions to her in this group and she has blatantly ignored them while addressing others. If an author cannot defend his/her own book, from questions by an educated person, I don't hold that type of author in high regard. I don't even think that this book is published in paper form. It has not withstood the rigors of investigation for its scholarship, It has not been supported against critics. I know that this position won't make me extremely popular in this group, but I don't strive for popularity--I strive for truth. 17407 From: Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 2:40am Subject: Some Considerations Re: [dsg] Re: Vajira and Mara Hi again, James - In a message dated 12/6/02 2:10:39 AM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > Hi, James - > > You might consider re-reading what I wrote. I never denied that there > is a deva who spends his time as an adversary, attempting to thwart > liberation. I simply don't know first-hand that there is. My point was that > > personal temptations constitute a more important impediment. > > With metta, > Howard > > ============================ A thought occurred to me that I decided to pass on to you. I used to know an old Hindu man, a long-time grad student in my department, who talked a lot with me about his meditative practice. He had engaged in a regular samatha-type meditation for years. He felt he could be honest with me, and told me that one consequence of his type of meditation was the ability to see (but not hear in his case) "people" who were invisible to others. This was a common occurrence for him. I, myself, have, on a couple occasions, seen, or thought that I saw (I couldn't be certain which), shadowy persons "out of the corner of my eye". This business with me has been quite infrequent and also questionable as to its nature, but the experiences of the Hindu gentleman and your experiences seem to have far greater verisimilitude. One thing that I wonder is whether or not your meditation practice has been long in time and heavy in the samatha direction. If yes, possibly your mind and senses have developed a kind of sensitivity of the sort appropriate to such experience. Whether that is so or not, I would strongly suggest that you speak to a senior monk at your temple who is a knowledgeable and well practiced meditator before involving yourself on your own in chakra meditation. I think that pursuing that on your own, especially given the "visits" you have been having could be risky. If what you have been experiencing is not a mental projection of yours, an objectivization or exteriorization of adversarial tendencies of your own mind, then, it could be Mara, or it could be *a* mara, or it could be a spiteful, harmful "earthbound" character who is hounding you. In any case, whatever the source of your experiences may be, I think it could be a serious mistake to go it alone in this. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17408 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 8:23am Subject: [dsg] Re: Is this a contradiction? Please help... Hello Sarah, Let me ask you a question: If you were being shot by a poison arrow, would you claim that there is no poison arrow, no shooting, no one being shot? Would such claim be true or just a plain lie, a denial of what had actually happened to you? Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Victor, > > --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > > If someone was being pricked by a needle, how would speaking strictly > > in abhidhamma term "there is no person, no pricking, and no needle" > > help him or her? > .... > This is a very good question.......;-) > > Depending on the understanding at any given time, it may lead to > detachment from the idea of a self and may help to see the conditioned > nature of present phenomena. What is being taken now for an experience or > a situation is in reality a variety of conditioned phenomena (as I > understood Howard to be suggesting) - hardness, heat, pain, consciousness, > feeling. In other words, just the namas and rupas you originally were > asking about (without any names;-)). > > To quote from what you wrote to Ray: > > "The Buddha's teaching on each and every aggregate being not self is a > simple yet profound and liberating teaching. Self-views are entangling. > One would never get close to understand the Buddha's teachng if he or she > tries to understand it with a self-view." > > Pls let me know if you have further comments/questions on this. As Howard > also commented, understanding realities doesn't mean abandoning concepts > either;-) > > Sarah > ===== > > > 17409 From: Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 3:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vajira and Mara Hi, Peter - Thanks for the link. It's a good one. Of course what James is addressing is not Mara as psychological metaphor, but as the current holder of a devic job-category, the job-description of which involves temptation and misdirection. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/6/02 8:31:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, peterd@p... writes: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi, James - > > > > You might consider re-reading what I wrote. I never denied > that there > >is a deva who spends his time as an adversary, attempting to > thwart > >liberation. I simply don't know first-hand that there is. My point > was that > >personal temptations constitute a more important impediment. > > > >With metta, > >Howard > > > Hi Howard > > I think that the point of the Mara mythology is that "personal > temptation" is a manifestation of Mara's retinue, e.g. his daughters > and his cohorts. I hope the following link puts it well. > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/lee/demons.html > > Cheers > Peter > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17410 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 8:46am Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta We can say that everyone has wrong views > concerning self (sakkaya ditthi) apart from the ariyans including > sotapannas. Regardless of the views, there is no self. Realities don't > change, but the understanding of them does. Sarah, you are still entrenched in self-view; otherwise, you wouldn't claim that there is no self. It is hard to give up self-view, just like it is hard to give up wealth and sex. Metta, Victor 17411 From: James Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 9:19am Subject: Some Considerations Re: [dsg] Re: Vajira and Mara --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi again, James - > A thought occurred to me that I decided to pass on to you. I used to > know an old Hindu man, a long-time grad student in my department, who talked > a lot with me about his meditative practice. He had engaged in a regular > samatha-type meditation for years. He felt he could be honest with me, and > told me that one consequence of his type of meditation was the ability to see > (but not hear in his case) "people" who were invisible to others. This was a > common occurrence for him. I, myself, have, on a couple occasions, seen, or > thought that I saw (I couldn't be certain which), shadowy persons "out of the > corner of my eye". This business with me has been quite infrequent and also > questionable as to its nature, but the experiences of the Hindu gentleman and > your experiences seem to have far greater verisimilitude. > One thing that I wonder is whether or not your meditation practice has > been long in time and heavy in the samatha direction. If yes, possibly your > mind and senses have developed a kind of sensitivity of the sort appropriate > to such experience. Whether that is so or not, I would strongly suggest that > you speak to a senior monk at your temple who is a knowledgeable and well > practiced meditator before involving yourself on your own in chakra > meditation. I think that pursuing that on your own, especially given the > "visits" you have been having could be risky. If what you have been > experiencing is not a mental projection of yours, an objectivization or > exteriorization of adversarial tendencies of your own mind, then, it could be > Mara, or it could be *a* mara, or it could be a spiteful, harmful > "earthbound" character who is hounding you. In any case, whatever the source > of your experiences may be, I think it could be a serious mistake to go it > alone in this. > > With metta, > Howard Howard, Thank you for the letter. I will consider. For some reason I don't know, I feel quite safe today. I have been able to ponder anatta without getting the visitor Mara. Perhaps a lot of psychic energy is being projected to protect me. No, I have practiced Vipassana meditation as my teacher Ajahn Somporn taught me. Actually, he called it nama/rupa meditation and I was to label sensations from the outside and the body as rupa and mind moments as nama. I tried this for about a year and found that I could not truly distinguish between nama and rupa. I eventually saw all experience as nama in order to see how the mind perceives reality. I didn't try to figure out things I didn't know outside of my mind. I told my teacher and he said that was fine. Keep going with that. I don't practice samatha meditation. I practice awareness of breath-body-mind connection meditation, and its transient, all-encompassing nature. And chakra meditation is quite harmless. But I am speaking to others. The monks currently at my temple are not meditation monks, they are community monks. I am not going to call an exorcist yet! ;-) Metta, James ps. Thank you for your concern. Sorry if my other post seemed a little nasty. I really did misinterpret what you wrote as compared to what you were thinking. 17412 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 9:42am Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta/pronouns Hello Christine, Thank you for this helpful reference. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello Victor,Ray,and all, > > Sorry I wasn't here to join in this thread. And as I haven't yet > caught up with all the previous posts, I hope I am not repeating > something, or entirely off the point. Somehow I feel you'll point it > out if I am, Victor. ;-) > > This excerpt and link may be of interest about pronouns: from > Dialogues of the Buddha {The Dîgha-Nikâya} Translated from the Pâli > by T. W. Rhys Davids London, H. Frowde, Oxford University Press > [1899] Vol. II of The Sacred Books of the Buddhists > > "It was the refusal to allow any place for this universal belief in a > semi-material soul in his own system that is the most striking, and > perhaps the most original feature in Gotama's teaching. No other > religion of which we have sufficient records to enable us to form an > opinion on the point has been constructed without the 'soul.' Where > the others said 'soul,' Gotama said usually 'Action,' which comes to > much the same as character. In this respect he came very near to our > modern use of the word in such expressions as 'a high-souled man' > or 'a soul for music.' And it is worth calling attention to the fact > that even in Shakspere more than half the times the word is used it > is in this secondary, ethical, emotional sense. Even in the old > authorised translation of our Bible, in which the word occurs > altogether 449 times, it is used 55 times merely in the sense of > person, only 85 times in the animistic sense, and 306 times in the > sense of emotional or intellectual qualities or disposition > > This will make Gotama's position, which is really very simple; > more clear. He rejected entirely the use of the word in the old > animistic sense. He retained it in a personal sense, in the meaning > of 'oneself, himself,' And though, of course, he acknowledged the > reality of the emotional and intellectual dispositions, he refused > absolutely to look upon them as a unity. > > The position is so absolute, so often insisted on, so fundamental > to the right understanding of primitive Buddhism, that it is > essential there should be no mistake about it. Yet the position is > also so original, so fundamentally opposed to what is usually > understood as religious belief, both in India and elsewhere, that > there is great temptation to attempt to find a loophole through which > at least a covert or esoteric belief in the soul and in future life > (that is of course of a soul), can be recognised, in some sort of > way, as part of so widely accepted a religious system. There is no > loophole, and the efforts to find one have always met with unswerving > opposition, both in the Pitakas themselves and in extra-canonical > works." > > http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/dob/dob-06in.htm > > metta, > > Christine 17413 From: Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 5:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi, Victor - In a message dated 12/6/02 11:47:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > Sarah, you are still entrenched in self-view; otherwise, you wouldn't > claim that there is no self. > > It is hard to give up self-view, just like it is hard to give up > wealth and sex. > > Metta, > Victor > > ======================== C'mon, Victor - if someone says there are no unicorns is that being entrenched in unicorn-view? Are you saying that not to be entrenched in a view about some topic requires avoiding consideration of that topic? It seems so. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17414 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 1:18pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Howard, If you like, you might want to examine how the Buddha used the word "self" as recorded in the Pali Canon. Metta, Victor > ======================== > C'mon, Victor - if someone says there are no unicorns is that being > entrenched in unicorn-view? Are you saying that not to be entrenched in a > view about some topic requires avoiding consideration of that topic? It seems > so. > > With metta, > Howard 17415 From: peterdac4298 Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 2:51pm Subject: Re: Expressions of gratitude. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- > Dear Peter, > I've been appreciating your posts too. > And thanks > Robert > In dhammastudygroup@y..., "peterdac4298" wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Just to say thanks for being out there. A positive force for > > spreading the Dhamma. > > Thank you Robert, I was about to add a trailer to the message w.r.t. having just read the intorductory posts and banner paragraph. I do now realise that I have unintentionally trivialised the group founders, not realising the group's fine lineage. As such, I would like to apologise for any offence that may have arisen from this. Thirty plus years is a long time for someone to be in practice in the Theravada tradition, let alone a group of such people being actively in contact for that length of time. And to have such wonderful teachers right from the very begining is indeed a blessing for the world. I am so glad to have found this group, my only regret being not to have found it earlier! It is probably too ambitious to try to read all posts at all times. Being dyslexic, reading is hard work and I quickly drain. However, will try to contribute as much as I benefit from the reading that does get done. Cheers Peter 17416 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 6:08pm Subject: Re: Mara Dear James, --- "James" wrote: KKT, It means that I was thinking of something else, in a rather relaxed way (I believe I was pondering the nature of humans and planets), with my eyes closed, when I suddenly saw everything like my eyes were open. I saw, what I felt was Mara afterward, walk past the side of the chair looking straight ahead. When I opened my eyes in a fright, there was nothing there. I have never had experiences or visions like that. I was wholly unique and wholly real. Metta, James KKT: Mara is also the Lord of the Sixth Heaven (the highest) of the Desire Realm. Do you know this? Metta, KKT 17417 From: Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 10:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Victor, You wrote: "Sarah, you are still entrenched in self-view; otherwise, you wouldn't claim that there is no self." L: I've been studying and contemplating on "views" and have found that the Purification of View in the Path of Purification is basically an inventorying of reality with the result that a self is not found there-in. So saying "there is no self" or "there is no self in reality" or "this part of reality is not self and any other part of reality is not self"amounts to the same thing. However, for me, in order for this inventory to be convincing I need to recognize that grasping "I am" is the reality of grasping a usually meaningless concept. So, self-view is actually a reality even though a self is not found when sought. Also I should add there is a big difference between the Purification of View and the eradication of view that is Stream Entry. Purification of View is somewhat on the level of being 'politically correct' while Stream Entry is a glimpse of nibbana. For more info on Purification of View see ch. XVIII Visuddhimagga. Larry 17418 From: Sarah Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 10:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Is this a contradiction? Please help... Hello Victor, I'm always glad to know you're reading the posts carefully;-) --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hello Sarah, > > Let me ask you a question: If you were being shot by a poison arrow, > would you claim that there is no poison arrow, no shooting, no one > being shot? Would such claim be true or just a plain lie, a denial > of what had actually happened to you? ..... Let me ask you a question in return: Do we need to hear and consider the Buddha's Teachings and wisdom to understand conventional truths? Metta, Sarah ======= 17419 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 11:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] vipaka, conditions, and the puppet Chris Thanks for posting some thoughts on the weekend in Thailand. I am sure it was quite an experience for you, staying in a 'local' environment. I enjoyed the weekend myself, especially the dhamma shared batween friends. --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear All, ... > .... Being kept awake all night by 'the unpleasant object' > (sound) was not the result of crying babies or unskillful > parenting, > but because of kamma each of us committed somewhere back in > beginningless time? The crying babies in the plane is 'just the > story'? I used to think 'There is nothing bad except thinking > makes > it so' - but Jon and I had a part conversation about unpleasant > visible object which seemed to bring accumulations and conditions > into the mix - sorry Jon if I misunderstood completely - probably > did? OK, here is a quick recap of the discussion we had on the moving walkway at Hong Kong airport after our flight from Bangkok, when our brisk walk towards Immigration was checked by 2 other passengers in front who were standing across the walkway, chatting. AS I recall, we agreed that dosa on account of people who stand blocking the way, apparently without regard for those who might want to get past, is likely to be conditioned by mana (conceit). It should not be regarded as being conditioned by the visible object, since the visible object per se in that situation is no less pleasant/more unpleasant than if the people were standing to one side considerately. The pleasantness/unpleasantness of the visible object is determined not by the 'scene' before us but by other factors not associated with the 'story'. This is perhaps easier to see by taking one of the other doorways to consider first. If something that contacts us is too hot, that is an unpleasant object regardless of whether the 'too hot' is related to something we regard as pleasant or unpleasant. Likewise with smell, sound and the other sense-door objects. A lot of the dosa that arises in the course of a day is of this kind, conditioned by mana rather than by the unpleasantness of the sense-door object. Is this more or less how it went? To relate this to your later experience on the flight back to Oz, when there is the sound of babies crying, the reality of that moment is just sound. Ideas about 'why me', unskilful parenting, lack of sleep, etc, are aspects of thinking conditioned by that sound and one's inherent tendencies. At the precise moment that the sound is experienced at the sense-door, there is no such story in the sound or in the consciousness that experiences it. In this instance it is probably safe to assume that the object (sound of baby crying) is intrinsically unpleasant. Nevertheless, much of the dosa arising is still likely to be conditioned by mana (in my own experience, at any rate). In other words, the problem is much more likely to be our accumulated tendencies than the object. Jon 17420 From: Sarah Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 11:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Freewill is out?!;-)?!:-) Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Good to have you back and read all your interesting comments. .... I appreciate that, thanks. ..... You wrote: > "Larry, she was stressing that we putthujanas (worldlings) have all > combinations of carita (character), i.e all the different types > discussed in detail in some texts." > > It seems that no modern teachers are interested in this aspect of the > commentary. Did K. Sujin, or do you, have any alternate ideas on why 4 > satipatthanas? .... I’m not sure this is true in K. Sujin’s case. I can’t speak for other ‘modern teachers’. Indeed she encourages us all to read details in various texts and discusses these parts of the commentary at length. (There is a recorded discussion made recently on this topic - if you or anyone else would like to get a copy. I haven’t listened yet, but Rob K and Nina say it’s helpful and clear). Can we know ‘our’ carita or character at this moment? Is there any understanding of whether the citta is kusala or akusala, whether there is attachment of calm, for example? When we say we or someone else is a ‘greedy’ type or a ‘loving’ type, it’s just thinking and merely reflects the tendency to think in this way at this time. Understanding any realities is not so simple and very different from conventional understanding of character and type. I looked at the section on carita in the link Rob M gave : "The *other* "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" by Ashin Janakabhivamsa has an interesting chapter on carita (Chapter 5)." http://www.geocities.com/ekchew.geo/Abhidhamma.htm However, I find it somewhat simplified and generalised. For example, it says “One can generally identify a person’s carita by watching attentively his gestures and movements, his style of living...etc”. This is just thinking and speculating and may be of some value conventionally only. As carita is used in the texts however, I understand it to relate to characteristics and tendencies which can only ever be known at the present moment. For example, from the Netti, we read (ch3, p.149 PTS transl): “One of view temperament approaches form as self, approaches feeling...perception...determinations..consciousness as self. One of craving temperament approaches self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form...etc” Surely, one moment there is ‘view temperament’ and the next moment there is ‘craving temperament’. Who knows from observing us? Only panna can know the citta or kind of sakkaya ditthi(self view) at any moment. Why 4 satipatthanas? I did hear K.Sujin say this is to cover all realities. For myself, I don’t attach much importance to the number of categories in a classification. These are merely for convenience, I understand. For example, 5 hindrances, 4 floods, 4 kinds of clinging, 5 groups of clinging and so on.....Feelings are classified in many, many different ways with different numbers accordingly, depending on context and emphasis. Good to touch base with you again, Larry and looking f/w to the next stage of the Way with all its tricky points.I took my copy of B. Soma’s transl to Thailand and didn’t open it once;-) Sarah ===== 17421 From: Sarah Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 0:27am Subject: Ignored.... Dear Ignored (AKA James) & Betty, Look forward to more of your helpful discussions ;-) --- James wrote: > ps. If one more person tries to push off Nina's book on me, I am > going to scream! :-) Just kidding... .... James, Betty may not have read other messages recommending the same...I know she skips some and we all pay a price for post-hopping;-) Nina would be the first to say, no need to read her books if they don’t appeal...just read what is right for you at the time. As Rob Ep said, there’s no set reading list here. .... > I have > addressed questions to her in this group and she has blatantly > ignored them while addressing others. .... LOL, this really does sound just like my students, especially Philip who you commented was just like you. After he wrote his first letter and got no reply from you, he demanded to know why Jan had so many and you were writing to others but ignoring him ;-) ;-) We’re all like the kids in so many ways, aren’t we? On the way down to Krang Kajan, Nina and I were discussing posts on the list and she said how much she enjoyed your posts, even the ‘rupa is rubbish’ ones. So I know for a fact she is not ignoring them, just as I know you’re not ignoring those by Philip or little Sandy, just because you didn’t reply to their letters. What I tell the students, if they would particularly like to hear from you, is to address you by name, dirctly and politely and ask questions on Buddhism. Why not try this approach with Nina as Larry and others do? You may not get a response, just as the children sometimes don’t. As I tell them, ‘he may be busy’, ‘he may miss your message’, ‘he may be tired’ or there may be any other conditions at work. It doesn’t mean ‘you’ are being ignored or your points have no validity. Sometimes friends on the list comment that they become discouraged if they don’t receive a reply. Well, I’d never post if that were the case - I probably hold the record for lack of replies to posts;-). It doesn’t bother me at all and I would like anyone to feel they were under any obligation of any kind..There’so need to take it personally in anyway. I think it’s best to just write what one can with good intentions and without expectations and leave it at that. ..... >I I don't even > think that this book is published in paper form. ..... I forget which book you’re discussing. Some are available for free distribution (ADL, Realities & Concepts), some can be purchased from Wisdom (Cetasikas, Buddhism in Daily Life...) or other publishers and some are not yet published. ..... >....but I don't strive for > popularity--I strive for truth. ..... As you commented to Ray, there’s no ‘position’ in this group.....everyone has their own preferences, understandings and inclinations.....I’m sure we all respect yours and you’ll be no less popular if they are different from anyone else’s;-). Best wishes, Sarah p.s Betty, so nice to see TWO posts from you in a few days;-) Nina also mentioned you’d been raising some useful questions about points in ‘Survey’. After she leaves, Bkk, if you can, pls raise them here for us all to enjoy;-) ============================================== 17422 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 0:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas James --- James wrote: ... > In what suttas does the Buddha define "Forms" as material > objects existing outside of the body? I would like at least a few > vague ones or one specific one. M. Buddhists, of which I tend to > incline in regards to higher philosophical questions, states that > 'Forms' are 'Forms of the mind', not forms outside the body. I > agree with everything you wrote except your definition of 'Form'. > Define that for me using suttas and I will reconsider the worth of > rupa. I would not describe the term 'forms', as used in these suttas, as 'material objects existing outside the body'. I understand 'forms' here to be to the eye and seing what sound is to the ear and hearing, aromas are to the nose and smelling, etc. That is to say, it is the (mere) visible datum that is experienced by seeing consciousness, at this moment of seeing. This sounds simple but it's not. It's one of the most difficult things to grasp, even intellectually, for most people (including myself). Jon ------------------------------------------------------------------- Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.23 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-023.html Sabba Sutta (The All) Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. "Monks, I will teach you the All. "What is the All? "Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. "This, monks, is called the All. "Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." ------------------------------------------------------------------- Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.24 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-024.html Pahanaya Sutta (For Abandoning) Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. "Monks, I will teach you the All as a phenomenon for abandoning. "And which All is a phenomenon for abandoning? to be abandoned? "The eye is to be abandoned. Forms are to be abandoned. Consciousness at the eye is to be abandoned. Contact at the eye is to be abandoned. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye -- experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain -- that too is to be abandoned. "The ear is to be abandoned. Sounds are to be abandoned... "The nose is to be abandoned. Aromas are to be abandoned... "The tongue is to be abandoned. Flavors are to be abandoned... "The body is to be abandoned. Tactile sensations are to be abandoned... "The intellect is to be abandoned. Ideas are to be abandoned... "This is called the All as a phenomenon for abandoning." ------------------------------------------------------------------- Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.82 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-082.html Loka Sutta (The World) Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Then a certain monk went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One: "'The world, the world (loka),'it is said. In what respect does the word 'world' apply? "Insofar as it disintegrates (lujjati), monk, it is called the 'world.' "Now what disintegrates? "The eye disintegrates. Forms disintegrate. Consciousness at the eye consciousness disintegrates. Contact at the eye disintegrates. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye -- experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain -- that too disintegrates. "The ear disintegrates. Sounds disintegrate... "The nose disintegrates. Aromas disintegrate... "The tongue disintegrates. Tastes disintegrate... "The body disintegrates. Tactile sensations disintegrate... "The intellect disintegrates. Ideas disintegrate... "Insofar as it disintegrates, it is called the 'world.'" ------------------------------------------------------------------- 17423 From: Sarah Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 0:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rebirth-Immediate? Hi Ignored (AKA Rahula), I don't think anyone replied yet to this: --- rahula_80 wrote: > Hi, > > Is rebirth immediate? > > SN 4.400 At that time, Vaccha, when a being has laid down this body, > and that being (satto) has not yet taken up another (annataram) body > (kayam) in rebirth (anupapanno); therein I declare [that beings] fuel > to > be thirstfulness (tanhupadanam). At that time, Vaccha, I declare [the > beings] fuel to be thirstfulness. > > > This sutta seems to suggest that it is not. ..... Christine raised the same quote and Jim replied in this message w/ the Pali: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m12016.html You may like to check other posts in the thread. Sarah ======= 17424 From: James Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 0:49am Subject: Re: Mara --- "phamdluan2000 " wrote: > KKT: Mara is also the Lord > of the Sixth Heaven (the highest) > of the Desire Realm. Do you know this? > > > Metta, > > > KKT KKT, Yes, I know what you are driving at but you have your facts off a bit. Mara is simply a deva who resides in the 11th plane of existence of the The Sensuous World (kama-loka) (being Samsara, they all have 'Desire' so the lowest category isn't called the 'Desire Realm', Nibbana is the only thing that doesn't have desire). Mara is not a 'Ruler' of that Realm anymore that there exists a 'Ruler' of our `Human Beings Realm' (manussa loka). He is just a resident being (without an essence like the rest of us). His realm is officially called, "Devas Wielding Power over the Creation of Others (paranimmita-vasavatti deva)." I believe that, like the Buddha, he has the psychic power of `multiplicity.' In other words, he can create himself over and over again and each entity can do different activities (good proof of anatta…we could all repeat ourselves over and over again because there isn't a permanent core). The Buddha said that Mara came at him with his army a million strong before reaching enlightenment. I posit they were all Mara, duplicated a million times and each of the same strength. I hope this answers your question. I think you have some sort of unstated agenda for asking the question, but I will let you state it if you wish. It seems that leading questions based on circular logic are en vogue nowadays in this group. I hope that trend stops. Metta, James 17425 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 0:50am Subject: Re: Yuganaddha Sutta con'd: intellectual understanding and psychic experiences ------ > > . If one more person tries to push off Nina's book on me, > ;-) I have already read as much of that book as I care to. I have > addressed questions to her in this group and she has blatantly > ignored them while addressing others. If an author cannot > defend his/her own book, from questions by an educated > person, I don't hold that type of author in high regard. I don't even > think that this book is published in paper form. It has not > withstood the rigors of investigation for its scholarship, It has not > been supported against critics. I know that this position won't > make me extremely popular in this group, but I don't strive for > popularity--I strive for truth. ____________ Dear James, Nina has been in Thailand and Cambodia for the last 10 days and doesn't have access to the internet. I don't recall you asking her questions on this group, but as I don't read all your posts I suppose you may have. In any event most of us reply to posts only if we think it is beneficial. For example in my own case, someone may say something that I believe is incorrect but I don't try to correct it as I sense (rightly or wrongly) that the person is not open to correction or they are interested in dispute rather than Dhamma. Or I think they will sooner or later find out for themself. From my experience Nina is very open to questions and comments but also she gives priority to her translation work and writings .She unfortunately doesn't have time to respond to all posts. +++++++++++++ James: I don't hold that type of author in high regard. I don't even > think that this book is published in paper form. ++++++++ Buddhism in Daily life' has been through about 10 reprints in Thailnd over the years since it was first published in 1969 (all distributed for free). In addition Nina has 6 or 7 other books available for sale (distributed by Wisdom publications). As well as hardcopy these books are also available for free download on the internet. Some of her books have been translated into Thai and I think around 100,000 copies of the Thai versions have been printed and distributed to date. _________ I'd also like to comment on what Betty said:"""You > are indeed fortunate because Nina herself is a regular participant in this > forum, and should you then have any questions on anything found in her > readings, you can ask her directly through dsg, or by writing to her e-mail""". ______ I spoke to Nina just last week about off-list correspondence. As I said she gives priority to her writings and has relatively little time to devote to the internet. I believe that she prefers to answer publicly on dsg rather than answer private comments sent privately to her email address. As I understand it Bhikku Bodhi made similar comments to Sarah. This is simply a matter of limited time and naturally if someone had pressing reasons to write off-list I am sure Nina would understand. Robert > address. 17426 From: James Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 0:59am Subject: Re: Ignored.... --- Sarah wrote: So I know > for a fact she is not ignoring them, just as I know you're not ignoring > those by Philip or little Sandy, just because you didn't reply to their > letters. Dear Sarah, Oh my goodness! I thought I had answered every letter from Philip and I don't remember one from little Sandy. Give me the numbers for these posts and I will respond immediately. Since not replying is okay, I won't reply to the rest of this post ;-) (So There! :-P) Me childish!? HA! :-) Metta, James the Ignored :-( 17427 From: James Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 1:17am Subject: Sorry Nina Dear Nina, I apologize for a recent post of mine that jumped to some false conclusions. I now understand that you have not slighted me due to non-response concerning questions regarding your book "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" (which first brought me to this group). I also understand now that many of your books have been published by Wisdom publications (why they then allow free distribution on the Internet I have no idea, but a side issue). And I am glad that you enjoy my posts. I don't intend to make them enjoyable, but I am glad that members, including you, enjoy them. This medium is very limited and I am satisfied that I found out this information. I am not sorry that I brought the subject up, but it should have been more `questioning' than `reactionary'. I have been a bit out of sorts lately…but getting better. Sorry again. Metta, James 17428 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 1:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Forgiveness Chris My analysis of the 'forgiveness' scenarios you ask about would be as follows. As regards any wrong done by oneself, one is encouraged to acknowledge the error and resolve not to repeat it. In the order of monks, this takes the form of a confession procedure. As regards wrong done by others to oneself, the Buddha explained on many occasions the need to understand that people act the way they do because of their accumulated nature, that one is reaping the result of one's own previous deeds, that the wrongdoer will likewise reap the results of his/her deeds. In the well-known sutta on metta, the Buddha pointed our that even being sawn in two by robbers should not be seen as justification for aversion towards the 'wrongdoers'. No aversion, so no concept of 'wrong conduct by another' to be 'forgiven'. Jon --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hello all, > > I was wondering what the Theravada teachings say > about 'forgiveness'. Christianity has a lot to say about this .. > about asking for one's own forgiveness from others and from the > Lord, about forgiving others, about forgiving oneself. Maybe I'm > still 'trailing clouds of glory' from that faith, but forgiveness > would seem to me to be quite an important thing to ask for and > give, > and I wonder why I can't find any teachings. There seems to be some > teachings in Mahayana writings - e.g. Bodhicitta. I looked but I > couldn't find much in Theravada ... accesstoinsight doesn't even > have 'forgiveness' under the subject headings in the sutta > listings. Perhaps it's called something else? > If someone did a wrong to me, would my forgiving them affect the > kammic fruit of their act? Would my not forgiving them affect my > kammic fruit? Somehow I feel the answer is 'no' to the first > and 'yes' to the second. > The mechanism of forgiveness would seem to involve 'acceptance of > self and other', 'metta to both other and self (oops)', 'compassion > for both', 'equanimity', 'putting oneself in the position of the > other', and 'anatta'. Maybe that's why there is a 'forgiveness- > shaped' blank in Theravada - no simple one word topic? > > metta, > Christine 17429 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 1:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] question Ranil Being scolded is 1 of the 8 worldly conditions and hence part of the nature of life in this existence. The reason it is such a problem for us is that we are obliged to listen to words that we don't want to hear, that we react strongly to. This reaction is conditioned by our accumulated uwholesome tendencies. Usually, what is said is intended to condition aversion in us, and given the extent of our accumulated unwholesome tendencies (including, most importantly, conceit), this probably does not require much skill on the part of the 'scolder'. For the 'scolder', however, it is likely to be akusala kamma patha (completed action) through speech door. So however much we may find it an unpleasant experience at the time, the scolder is bringing similar or greater unpleasantness upon him/her self in the future. For this, they deserve our sympathy and understanding. Jon --- ranil gunawardena wrote: > > if another person misunderstands us, > on the misunderstanding builds more and scolds us, > how should we handle the situation? > what thoughts should we have towards that person? > > ~meththa > ranil 17430 From: Sarah Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 1:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Expressions of gratitude. Hi Peter, We’ve also been appreciating your posts, comments and links. Thankyou very much for telling us a little more about yourself and your background. It’s very encouraging when members feel they can share and find benefit. I’m so glad the ‘graft is beginning to take’ and realize it must be very confusing in the beginning. It’s true that a few of us have known each other personally for quite a long time (or what seems a long time in this life;-)). On the otherhand, I think I can say that some of us feel quite a strong bond, even though we’ve just had a cyber relationship for a relatively shorter time. After all, we ‘talk’ to each other almost daily and about the issues of greatest value in our lives. We plan to continue giving and receiving support in one form or other for as long as we can and have various safeguards in place to preserve the archives. ..... > I was about to add a trailer to the message w.r.t. having just read > the intorductory posts and banner paragraph. I do now realise that > I have unintentionally trivialised the group founders, not realising > the group's fine lineage. As such, I would like to apologise for > any offence that may have arisen from this. ..... Not at all and certainly nothing to apologise for. Like Rob, we just appreciated the kind sentiments and you’re as much a member of the ‘group’ as anyone else - nothing stuctured and no lineage.....;-) ..... > Thirty plus years is a long time for someone to be in practice in > the Theravada tradition, let alone a group of such people being > actively in contact for that length of time. And to have such > wonderful teachers right from the very begining is indeed a blessing > for the world. ..... For myself, I’d say there have been many ups and down and with Nina, for example, sometimes I’ve had more contact (like when I used to live in England or now with internet) than at other times. I was talking to Azita at the weekend. We knew over 20 years ago but only very recently resumed contact. We discussed how easily we’ve been led astray by lobha for all sorts of less worthy pursuits, even having been fortunate - as you say - to have wonderful teachers from early days. ..... > I am so glad to have found this group, my only regret being not to > have found it earlier! ..... I feel that way about internet and DSG, but we can make up for lost time now;-) Who knows whether we’d have really appreciated these resources if we’d had the access earlier? ..... > It is probably too ambitious to try to read all posts at all times. > Being dyslexic, reading is hard work and I quickly drain. However, > will try to contribute as much as I benefit from the reading that > does get done. ..... You seem to be doing really well so far, Peter....just what you’re able. Did you say before you live in England? If so, whereabouts? I may have imagined that. I’ve been reading I.B.Horner’s intro to ‘Book of the Discipline’ series as I was getting confused about the order and presentation in the ‘Vinaya Texts’ (SBE series) on the net which you gave a helpful link for (I'll explain separately). This led me into re-reading the parajika (defeat) accounts, i.e story leading to these rules, the patimokkha rule and penalty (in these cases usu. expulsion from the order), old commentary definitions of words, more stories and deviations and so on. I like to reflect on the relevance of the Vinaya in daily life a lot. James, Nina and perhaps others also have interest in ‘armchair’ vinaya, so maybe I’ll try to write more on what I found helpful as you have knowledge an interest too. Perhaps others will contribute as well. I was also interested in your comments on Sariputta. I believe that some of the suttas which he spoke would have originally been commentaries that became part of the Sutta Pitaka itself either at the 1st Council or soon after. The entire Patisambhidamagga and suttas in the MN and other Pitakas would be examples. I understand that possibly after Buddhaghosa’s editorial work, it was considered so comprehensive and was so well-received that there was no considered need to preserve the earlier collections. I’ll sign off now but leave you with an extract from an earlier post I wrote on a series about the origins of the commentaries and Abhidhamma - Sarah ====== “I’d just like to consider the question of the commentaries and the First Council. In the introduction to the translation of the Bahiranidana , Jayawickrama talks about Buddhaghosa’s ‘indebtedness to the Siihala A.t.thakathaa (Commentary) which he constantly refers to. Some references are also given in the vinaya itself. With regard to the commentaries (as we read them)., Malalasekera in ‘The Pali Literature of Ceylon’ suggests ‘The Elders had discussed the important terms at the First Council, and had decided on the method of interpreting and teaching the more recondite doctrines.’ In fact (according to this book) it seems that they were the utterances of disciples that had received particular approval from the Buddha that were ‘esteemed’ and ‘honoured as much as the words of the Buddha himself’. ‘These formed the nucleus of the commentaries. Often, when the Buddha preached a sermon in concise form on some aspect of the doctrine, the monks used to repair to one of the chief disciples and get the points explained in greater detail. Such was Maha-Kaccayana, for example, who was foremost in reputation for his power in giving detailed expositions of what the Buddha said in brief. ..’ “ *************** 17431 From: chase8383 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 2:46am Subject: Re: Emptiness? Hi James I'm new here, was reading through the messages, and found yours on emptiness. It is, as you say, a very profound and important subject to the Buddhist. And, very hard to grasp. If you try to get it as concept you will have trouble I think but, if you use a practice it may come easier. One such practice goes like this. Take an object, like your car. Than pick a place on your car and point to it. Say the drivers side door. Is that your car? Is that the "self" of you car? Or is it just a sheet of iron? If you go through your whole car, pointing to different places and things, will you ever find a spot that is the "self" of your car? Or will you just find a series of interconnected things that togather make up what we call a car? That is emptiness. There really is no car there. Just an object made up of interconnections. You may know all this. Dave 17432 From: peterdac4298 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 3:57am Subject: [dsg] Re: Expressions of gratitude. --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Peter, > You seem to be doing really well so far, Peter....just what you're > able. Hi Sarah Thanks > Did you say before you live in England? If so, whereabouts? I may > have imagined that. Yep! My current domicile is Watford, Hertfordshire, just North of London at the intersection of the M1 and M25. The M25 being the de facto boundary of the greater London area these days, for all practical purposes. > > > I've been reading I.B.Horner's intro to `Book of the Discipline' > series as This is most interesting. I would follow up on this material, but it would take up so much time that I would have to abandon virtually everything else that needs doing. Please don't take it as a disrespect. > > I'll sign off now but leave you with an extract from an earlier > post I wrote on a series about the origins of the commentaries and > Abhidhamma - > > Sarah > ====== > Thank you so much for bringing this material to my and everyone else's attention. It is positively fascinating, but I know from past experience, that perusing such avenues leads to disastrous distortions of immediate priorities. So I hope you guys don't mind if I hitch a ride on the back of all your superb endeavours and just enjoy the fruits of other peoples labours, with the occasional insertions of my own two pen'th worth. > "I'd just like to consider the question of the commentaries and > the First Council. In the introduction to the translation of the > Bahiranidana , Jayawickrama talks >about Buddhaghosa's `indebtedness to the Siihala A.t.thakathaa (Commentary) which he > constantly refers to. Some references are also given in the vinaya itself. > > With regard to the commentaries (as we read them)., Malalasekera in `The > Pali Literature of Ceylon' suggests `The Elders had discussed the > important terms at the First Council, and had decided on the method of > interpreting and teaching the more recondite doctrines.' > > In fact (according to this book) it seems that they were the utterances of > disciples that had received particular approval from the Buddha that were > `esteemed' and `honoured as much as the words of the Buddha himself'. > `These formed the nucleus of the commentaries. Often, when the Buddha > preached a sermon in concise form on some aspect of the doctrine, the > monks used to repair to one of the chief disciples and get the points > explained in greater detail. Such was Maha-Kaccayana, for example, who > was foremost in reputation for his power in giving detailed expositions of > what the Buddha said in brief. ..' > " > *************** > ~Naanmoli's "Word of the Buddha" seems to indicate such developments, especially wrt Sariputa: who would _not_ have been at the first council! Cheers Peter 17433 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 3:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama Rupa Victor Here is an alternative way of looking at this question. 'Nama' and 'rupa' are terms chosen by the Buddha to designate certain aspects of the knowledge gained by him in attaining enlightenment. They are not something that was there waiting to be 'discovered' by the Buddha. To my understanding, 'nama' and 'rupa' designate the dhammas/fundamental phenomena of which the world as we know it is comprised. In other words, they designate something about the present moment -- for me, the moment conventionally known as 'writing a post', for you, 'reading a post'. Writing/reading posts is the conceptual description of the present moment; the reality is various namas and rupas. Just to complicate things, the compound term nama-rupa has a slightly narrower meaning in certain contexts. But it still refers to specific aspects of the fundamental phenomena of which the present moment is comprised. In my view, the best place to find out more about the underlying phenomena designated by these terms is the Abhidhamma, the commentaries, and the Visuddhi-Magga. I do not think there is much to be gained by looking into the derivation of the terms themselves, since they are only labels (although the Visuddhi-Magga does give an explanation for each in terms of its derivation). Just my thoughts. Jon --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi all, > > I have been thinking for the last couple days about the meaning > of "nama-rupa" and would like to write down some ideas. > > 1. The Sanskrit/Pali word "nama", the English word "name", the German > word "Name", and the French word "Nom" all share the same root in the > linguistic family of Indo-European languages. The Chinese > translated "nama-rupa" as "ming-se", where "ming" means "name" in > English, and "se" literally means "color". The compound word "nama- > rupa" has been translated as "name-and-form" in some literature > and "mentality-materiality" in other. Whether the word "nama" is > translated as "name" or "mentality" in English, questions remain: > what does it mean by "nama"? What does it mean by "rupa"? > > 2. Name is representation. Rupa is what is being represented. There > are representations of representations. In other words, nama and > rupa are relational. They are not two categories with some number > of elements. > > 3. Representation of something is possible only when there is > consciousness, and representations are representation through six > modalities of senses (five modalities of bodily senses plus the > modality of intellect.) > > I look forward to some discussion on the meaning of nama-rupa. > > Have a good day, > Victor 17434 From: chase8383 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 3:58am Subject: Re: Yuganaddha Sutta con'd: intellectual understanding and psychic experiences James "Seeing Mara isn't a result of ego. The Buddha saw him frequently and he was void of ego." Mara is your ego. Remember, Buddha is mind. Mara is mind. Nirvana and samsara are mind. None exist anywhere but in your mind. And they are all of the same mind. There is only one mind. 17435 From: robmoult Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 4:15am Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Swee Boon, Sorry for the delay in responding. I am finally healthy again. I spent today at a "Global Conference on Buddhism 2002". About 1000 people in attendance. I sat at the back and managed to go through more than 100 back posts during the opening ceremony speeches. Yes, the stream is a concept. It does not mirror the present moment. I know "intellectually" that there is no self in the stream, but it is not yet "in my heart". In the past, I knew "intellectually" that there was no self behind the thought process, but now I can say with my heart, "There cannot be a self behind the thought process." I need to ruminate on the lack of self in the stream. At some point, I will "get it into my heart". Thanks for your attempt. I appreciate your effort. Metta, Rob M :-) PS: If there are others to whom I have not replied, please send me a reminder. --- "nidive" wrote: > Hi robmoult, > > Is this stream something which is reality (dhamma) according to the > Abhidhamma? Or is it merely a concept? Is this stream citta, > cetasika or rupa? Or is this stream neither citta, nor cetasika, nor > rupa? > > If this stream is merely a concept that does not mirror what is > reality RIGHT NOW, then this stream doesn't exist and is purely > imagination, with time and memory as parameters feeding into it. > Don't you agree? > > NEO Swee Boon > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi Howard, > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > =========================== > > > Could you explain how kamma / rebirth works *with* a > > self? ;-) What is > > > self is permanent, unchanging, fixed. > > > > In this case, self is seen as the stream of kamma. > > > > In a conventional sense, the water in the stream keeps changing, > but > > it is still has an identity as a stream. > > > > At this moment, I create kamma. The vipaka from that kamma will > > impact what? Answer: My stream, not your stream. It is easy to > > associate the stream of kamma with a self. Intellectually, I feel > > that this is wrong view, but I haven't had the "ah-ha" moment that > > allows me to proceed with an anatta perspective. > > > > Perhaps it is unreasonable to expect two "ah-ha" moments in the > same > > week :-). > > > > Metta, > > Rob M :-) 17436 From: robmoult Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 4:20am Subject: Re: Freewill is out?!;-)?!:-) Hi Sarah, --- Sarah wrote: > As we discussed before, yoniso > manasikara (wise attention) and ayoniso manasikara (unwise attention) only > arise during the javana process, prompting kusala and akusala states. I was still under the impression that yoniso manisakara / ayoniso manasikara arose during the determining stage and thereby conditioned either kusala or akusala at the javana stage. Did we discuss this before? Metta, Rob M :-) 17437 From: robmoult Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 4:57am Subject: Re: ATTENTION: DSG "LURKERS" Hi Swee Boon, --- "nidive" wrote: > Hi robmoult, > > You said: > Consciousness (citta) is grouped into four classifications according > to jati (birth): > - Kusala: active "good" states (generates kamma) > - Akusala: active "bad" states (generates kamma) > - Vipaka: passive result of past kusala or akusala (result of kamma) > - Kiriya: functional states, not associated with kamma > > How does that fit into SN XXXVI.21 ? ... > Please let me know if this is still a question. Sarah posted some info and the escribe function has a discussion on this Sutta. Interesting enough, one of the speakers at the conference today brought up this Sutta and said that it confused him. > Other Questions: > > If I am hurrying home and the rain started to pour halfway through > and I got all drenched, is 'being drenched by the rain' vipaka? What > is the cause of 'being drenched by the rain'? Need there be a cause > for it? It 'being drenched by the rain' necessarily vipaka even > though it is unpleasant? > > I am repairing a car. While I was repairing, I accidentally poked my > hand with the screwdriver. Blood oozed out from my hand and it was > painful bodily. Is this vipaka? What is the cause for it? Yes, they are both vipaka. Each microsecond, there are millions of thought processes. Each thought process has one javana citta that can create vipaka in this life, one javana citta that can create vipaka in the subsequent life and five javana cittas that can create vipaka for an indefinite number of lifetimes. At any one instant, there are approximately a gazillion vipakas that are waiting to happen. Conditions (storm clouds, etc.) determine which of the gazillion will arise. Obviously, if we put ourselves in a bad situation, conditions will allow more akusala vipaka. It says in the texts (can't remember where) that only a Buddha can understand the workings of kamma. I hope that I answered your question. Again, I apologize for the delay in responding. Metta, Rob M :-) 17438 From: robmoult Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 5:05am Subject: Re: Freewill is out?!;-)?!:-) Hi Peter, --- "peterdac4298" > "...Cover story: > On the seventh year after His Enlightenment, the Buddha preached the > Abhidhamma (Higher Doctrine) in Tavatimsa Heaven. As a fulfillment > of gratitude to his former mother, now a Santussita deva, the Buddha > then delivered a sermon on the Higher Doctrine to thousands of Devas > (Gods) and Brahmas (higher celestial beings) who attained the > various stages of Noble Sainthood. ..." > > Can we deduce, in this example from the life of the Buddha, that a > period of meditation, in which reflection on the intricacies of the > Dhamma, is as worthy (i.e.. conducive for future development) as a > similar period involved in cultivating jhanas or investigation of > current processes would be? > > In simpler terms, would this period of clear reviewing (should it > ever arise) be as useful as similar periods of either cultivation or > investigation? Presumably it would depend on such things as the > degree of clarity and compassion accompanying it, etc. I'm not sure that I would make that conclusion. At this point, the Buddha was already enlightened, so there was no need for further purification. However, for those of us who are not enlightened, I belive that contemplating on the Dhamma (or Abhidhamma) is probably kusala (depending on the motivation). Hard to make comparisions of the relative value of "one hour of cultivating jhana" vs. "one hour of vipassana" vs. "one hour of studying the dhamma". In general, the kammic weight depends on the strength of the volition. Hope that I understood and answered your question. Metta, Rob M :-) 17439 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 0:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas Hi, Jon (and James) - In a message dated 12/7/02 3:43:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > James > > --- James wrote: > ... > >In what suttas does the Buddha define "Forms" as material > >objects existing outside of the body? I would like at least a few > >vague ones or one specific one. M. Buddhists, of which I tend to > >incline in regards to higher philosophical questions, states that > >'Forms' are 'Forms of the mind', not forms outside the body. I > >agree with everything you wrote except your definition of 'Form'. > >Define that for me using suttas and I will reconsider the worth of > >rupa. > > I would not describe the term 'forms', as used in these suttas, as > 'material objects existing outside the body'. > > I understand 'forms' here to be to the eye and seing what sound is to > the ear and hearing, aromas are to the nose and smelling, etc. > > That is to say, it is the (mere) visible datum that is experienced by > seeing consciousness, at this moment of seeing. > > This sounds simple but it's not. It's one of the most difficult > things to grasp, even intellectually, for most people (including > myself). > > Jon > > ========================== Some thoughts. Yes, open your eyes and there's a lamp on a table on top of a carpet and next to a chair in the room. What is all that? It's as follows: Experience (by means of volition) the sequence of events we call "opening our eyes", and there is activated the operation of discernment [sankhara -> vi~n~nana]. Because the required discernment is operative, there can arise a visual object (an image) [vi~n~nana -> namarupa]. Because the required image is available the sight sense door can be activated [namarupa -> salayatana]; actually, the coming together of discernment (vi~n~nana), sense object (namarupa), and sense door *is* the contact. Contact is followed by feeling. Then things seem to become personal - what one feels one recognizes (and our concepts come into play, making us see "external objects" such as lamps etc). This is my understanding. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17440 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 5:56am Subject: Re: Sorry Nina --- "James " wrote: > Dear Nina, > > I apologize for a recent post of mine that jumped to some false > conclusions. I now understand that you have not slighted me due to > non-response concerning questions regarding your book "Abhidhamma in > Daily Life" (which first brought me to this group). I also > understand now that many of your books have been published by Wisdom > publications (why they then allow free distribution on the Internet > I have no idea, but a side issue). _____________ Dear James, Nina won't read your letters until late next week (if then as she has so many back posts to read). But knowing her I'm sure she is not offended at all (but appreciates the kusala of an apology nonetheless). Just to clarify her publisher in the west is Zolag not wisdom. Wisdom are only the distributor. I think although book sales are lessened because the books are on the net many people still like to purchase the very nicely printed hardcopy. They all used to be printed and distributed free in Thailand but it was very hard for people to get them in the west because obviously distributors aren't interested in giving books away. robert 17441 From: peterdac4298 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 6:02am Subject: [dsg] Re: Expressions of gratitude. --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Peter, > We've also been appreciating your posts, comments and links. > Thankyou very much for telling us a little more about yourself and > your background. It's very encouraging when members feel they can > share and find benefit. I'm so glad the `graft is beginning to > take' and realize it must be very confusing in the beginning. > Sarah Hi Sarah I started off in the late sixties, coming from a background in engineering, needing something to sort myself out with and dabbled in Hatha Yoga. From this I later dabbled a little further into Kundalini, just enough to have some idea of what and where the Chakras are. All this lead me, in 1970, by pure chance to the only Theravada teacher in London at that time, an amazing chap known as Kapilavaddho. In 1955 he had founded the English Sangha Trust which in 1970 was based at their property, the Hampstead Vihara aka Wat Dhammapadipa. After he died in early '71, his senior disciple Alan James and his wife Jaquie took over and continued my training and started me off with Sutta study, until I decided to go off on my first trip to India (as one did in those days!). When I finally got back, the Hampstead Vihara had no resident teacher, Alan and Jaquie having decided to start a group of their own in Bradford-on-Avon, Wiltshire, based at their House of Inner Tranquility. Meanwhile, Ajahn Cha came over at the invitation of the directors of the English Sangha Trust and decided to 'adopt' the Trust as a lay support facility for his Western monks to train local people in the Thai Forest Tradition. At this point in time I was in Sri-Lanka ordained as a Samanera at a Forest Monastery just out side of Colombo. Due to domestic problems at home, I disrobed and returned to UK so as to be of help to my family. When things stabilised somewhat I returned to the Hampstead Vihara and threw my lot in with Ajahn Sumedho and the Western disciples of Ajahn Cha, and was able to help out in the move to Chithurst Forest Monastery in W Sussex, and later the branching out to Amaravati in Hertfordshire. This lasted up until 1989, when I disrobed again and returned to lay life as a hotel porter where I have remained since. I count myself most fortunate in having had the chance to know Ajahn Cha for a year or so, most of which was spent in NE Thailand at Wat Ba Pong and local branches, whilst he was still active. It was a bit like being in the Scouts and having a spell at Camp. One learned all the techniques for making and dying robes, keeping out termites and other skills of living in the Forest as an Alms Mendicant under the Vinaya. However this only lasted a year, the original domestic problems resurrected, requiring my re-return to UK. When things where finally resolved I rejoined the Western Monks at Chithurst just in time for their expansion into Amaravati. I was again most fortunate at Amaravati in that Badanta Anandametreya stayed with us for a rains retreat. He led several courses during this time, one of which introduced us to the Abhidhamma, during which he skillfully resolved the confusion, that existed for many of us, as to the differences between Jahna and Nibbana: most useful indeed! Well, that's all I can think of for the moment. Hope it gives some idea of where I'm at. Cheers Peter 17442 From: chase8383 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 6:59am Subject: How I came to Buddism In June of 1968 I was at a Military Hospital, just outside of Boston Ma. USA. I was there to recover from wounds I had received in Vietnam. They were quite serious. I had been wounded on May 19th and by early June I had gone from 185lbs to under 100lbs. It would take one year and multiple surgical procedures for me to recover. As I lay on my bed, in early June, I thought of praying as a way of drawing enough strength to face my future. As I began to pray, I suddenly realized that no matter how much I prayed, it would still be me that had to face the operating table. It would still be me that would have to face the recovery. It would have to be me that was strong. It couldn't come from outside of me, from another being other than myself. No, it had to come from inside. And further more, it would have to come from my mind. After all, my body was damaged. Without knowing it, I was entering the Buddha's path. That turning of the mind on itself. That understanding of my impermanence. That taking of life, moment by moment. I had no place else to go. Fifteen years later I picked up a book on Buddhism in the library. As I read it I thought, I'll be damned. Here it is. Suffering, sickness, all of it and, the path out. The same path I had started all those years go, on my own. David 17443 From: nidive Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 7:04am Subject: 'Contradiction' resolved! Hi ALL, Thank you for your responses. I think I have resolved the 'contradiction'. If I am drenched by the rain, the event is not caused by kamma. But rather 'being drenched by the rain' is the condition that allows vipaka to come into force. Past kamma does not determine that I will be drenched by the rain at time X at place Y. But that the rain fell on me at time X at place Y is the condition for vipaka to come into force. If I poked my hand with the screwdriver, the event is not caused by kamma. But rather 'being poked by the screwdriver' is the condition that allows vipaka to come into force. Past kamma does not determine that I will be poked by the screwdriver at time X at place Y. But that the screwdriver poked my hand at time X at place Y is the condition for vipaka to come into force. If I am pricked by the needle, the event is not caused by kamma. But rather 'being pricked by the needle' is the condition that allows vipaka to come into force. Past kamma does not determine that I will be pricked by the needle at time X at place Y. But that the needle pricked my hand is the condition for vipaka to come into force. If I am disturbed by disorders of the bile, the event is not caused by kamma. But rather 'being disturbed by disorders of the bile' is the condition that allows vipaka to come into force. Past kamma does not determine that I will be disturbed by disorders of the bile at time X at place Y. But that disorders of the bile disturbed me is the condition for vipaka to come into force. As such, since past kamma does not determine 'what happens at the present' (only the results of kamma are manifested where there are appropriate conditions for their manifestation), concepts such as 'pre-destiny' are invalid. Personally, I do not think that the Buddha knew everything about the future of a particular case he concentrated on. The Buddha himself admitted that the 'end of samsara for all beings' is not in sight. This means that the Buddha could not possibly know everything about the future of whatever he concentrated on, because he would have to spend an 'eternity' concentrating on it. We know this 'eternity' to be impossible. Reasoning demands that the concept of pre-destiny is not valid and is mere wild imagination of the mind. This concept arises because one links prior knowledge of the future with the results of kamma without realizing that conditions necessary for the arising of vipaka is not caused by past kamma. There is no relationship between prior knowledge of the future and the results of kamma. Neither influences each other. There is also no relationship between prior knowledge of the future and the conditions necessary for the arising of vipaka. Again, neither influences each other. As another example, if I am reading a message posted by robmoult, the event is not caused by kamma. But rather 'reading the message posted by robmoult' is the condition that allows vipaka to come into force. Past kamma does not determine that I will be reading a message posted by robmoult at time X at place Y. But that the reading of the message posted by robmoult is the condition for vipaka to come into force. This message accounts for my understanding of Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.21 and the concept of pre-destiny. Incidentally, Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.21 implies that 'pre-destiny' is invalid... If disorders of the bile is not caused by past action, then the event of 'bile disorder' was not 'pre-destined' to happen. The event of 'bile disorder' is caused by external physical factors such as infection by viruses and bacteria. I don't suppose we can experience viruses and bacteria through the five senses and therefore the external event of infection by viruses and bacteria is not vipaka. NEO Swee Boon 17444 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 7:09am Subject: [dsg] Re: Is this a contradiction? Please help... Hi Sarah, What do you think: if you were being shot by a poison arrow, would you claim that there is no poison arrow, no shooting, no one being shot? Would such claim be true or just a plain lie, a denial of what had actually happened to you? What is the Buddha's teaching? It is the teaching on dukkha, the origin/cause of dukkha, the cessation of dukkha, the way leading to the cessation of dukkha. I think you need to be more clear on what you mean by conventional truth, and I think you are confusing what the Buddha taught with something else. And that confusion is reflected in your words. Metta, Victor --- Sarah wrote: > Hello Victor, > > I'm always glad to know you're reading the posts carefully;-) > > --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hello Sarah, > > > > Let me ask you a question: If you were being shot by a poison arrow, > > would you claim that there is no poison arrow, no shooting, no one > > being shot? Would such claim be true or just a plain lie, a denial > > of what had actually happened to you? > ..... > Let me ask you a question in return: Do we need to hear and consider the > Buddha's Teachings and wisdom to understand conventional truths? > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======= 17445 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 7:13am Subject: Hello Hello List, I am responding to Jonothan and Sarah's welcome to DSG note. Thought I would take the time to introduce myself. Most of you already know me from D-list as David Koenes. I am a recently ordained Bhikkhu (two weeks ago...a babe). I will be able to read this list for a little less then a month. Then I will be off to Cambodia to dedicate a Wat that the people of our Wat (Wat Greensboro N.C. U.S.A.) built through their loving kindness and genorisity. All together Wat Greensboro (a Khmer Wat) is responsible for building 39 Wats in Cambodia and over 200 wells dug in villages, plus tons of rice at monthly intervals. The change in weather patterns in conection with the Chinese damning the river have been a disaster for the Khmer people. Especially for the eastern portion of the country bordering Laos and Vietnam. Fortuantly, it looks like if all goes well the current planting is looking ok. The temple we are going to dedicate, also bringing rice to the lay families, is near the Vietnamese border. From there we will travel by boat to visit Angkor Wat. Then by bus to Bangkok Thailand where I will train for several years at various Wats. So, this is a short window for me to be a part of this list. I will keep my membership active and perhaps I can drop a line once in a while. Piyadhammo Bhikkhu 17446 From: James Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 8:36am Subject: Re: Fear of Rupas --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and James) - > > Some thoughts. Yes, open your eyes and there's a lamp on a table on > top of a carpet and next to a chair in the room. What is all that? It's as > follows: > Experience (by means of volition) the sequence of events we call > "opening our eyes", and there is activated the operation of discernment > [sankhara -> vi~n~nana]. Because the required discernment is operative, there > can arise a visual object (an image) [vi~n~nana -> namarupa]. Because the > required image is available the sight sense door can be activated [namarupa -> > salayatana]; actually, the coming together of discernment (vi~n~nana), sense > object (namarupa), and sense door *is* the contact. Contact is followed by > feeling. Then things seem to become personal - what one feels one recognizes > (and our concepts come into play, making us see "external objects" such as > lamps etc). This is my understanding. > > With metta, > Howard > Howard, I agree with this sequence of events until you get to this part, "Because the required image is available the sight sense door can be activated [namarupa -> salayatana]." This is a HUGE assumption that what one sees is what actually exists. We `see' a permanent world, a samsara world but the world isn't permanent; our perception lies to us because our minds are ignorant of reality. When one begins the dharma path, and the closer that one looks at something—through meditation, pondering, and scientific investigation—the more that it is seen not to be what it first appeared to be. That for all practical purposes and to our ignorant mind that needs permanence, nothing really exists. Through the mind of ignorance, it is seen that everything exists and yet doesn't exist at the same time. When enlightened, this dichotomy is eliminated. Then one sees (and knows) that all is anatta, a category that is neither existence nor non-existence. Metta, James 17447 From: James Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 8:53am Subject: Re: Emptiness? --- "chase8383 " wrote: > Hi James > > I'm new here, was reading through the messages, and found yours on emptiness. It is, as you say, a very profound and important subject to the Buddhist. And, very hard to grasp. > > If you try to get it as concept you will have trouble I think but, if you use a practice it may come easier. > > One such practice goes like this. Take an object, like your car. Than pick a place on your car and point to it. Say the drivers side door. Is that your car? Is that the "self" of you car? Or is it just a sheet of iron? If you go through your whole car, pointing to different places and things, will you ever find a spot that is the "self" of your car? Or will you just find a series of interconnected things that togather make up what we call a car? > > That is emptiness. There really is no car there. Just an object made up of interconnections. > > You may know all this. > > Dave Hi Dave, Welcome to the group! I find your explanation very clear and understandable, thank you. I do know of this explanation for anatta but reminders are always helpful. As Emerson wrote, "Nature is an endless combination and repetition of a very few laws. She hums the old well-known air through innumerable variations." It all comes back to the basics, repeated over and over again. However, at this point, I am looking past this view of anatta. I am looking at anatta in the ultimate sense, not the conventional sense. The reality that all is anatta. That the car door, the metal, everything, has no essence...is anatta. That one isn't so easy to explain rationally is it? :-) Take care and I look forward to more of your penetrating posts. Metta, James 17448 From: James Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 9:23am Subject: Re: Yuganaddha Sutta con'd: intellectual understanding and psychic experiences --- "chase8383 " wrote: > James > > "Seeing Mara isn't a result of ego. > The Buddha saw him frequently and he was void of ego." > > Mara is your ego. > > Remember, Buddha is mind. Mara is mind. Nirvana and samsara are mind. None exist anywhere but in your mind. And they are all of the same mind. There is only one mind. David, I hope you realize you have stumbled into a very traditionalist Theravada group; such talk of `everything mind' and `one mind' is heresy here! But I believe you have found a kindred spirit it me. I describe myself as a Zen Buddhist trapped in the body of a Theravada Buddhist—which means I adhere to the highest philosophies of Mahayana Buddhism, but don't agree with their `created suttas' advocating such things as `Pure Land' attainment, universal enlightenment, or Bodhisattva vows. I look toward the original words and focus of the Lord Buddha for the true path and its true focus—Nibbana as ultimate goal and individual enlightenment as only feasible path. Okay, with that said, I don't agree with your use of `ego' in this post. `Ego', as used in Buddhism, is not mind; `Ego' is a `false sense of self'. There is confusion because of Western theories of personality and consciousness formation that summarize the mind as `Ego'. The major Western theorists in this area have evolved such theories: Freud proposed: Id, Ego, Superego; Jung proposed: Consciousness, Collective Unconsciousness; and Modern Psychologists: Consciousness, Unconsciousness = Ego. There is a dichotomy between Western theories of Ego and Buddhist theories of Ego because the first presumes existence and the second presumes anatta existence. This dichotomy has ramifications to the application of such theories to the functioning of the mind that have yet to be ironed out. Perhaps in the future, the word `Ego' will have a more universal meaning and holistic approach that will incorporate its conventional meaning and ultimate anattaness. Metta, James 17449 From: James Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 9:53am Subject: Re: Yuganaddha Sutta con'd: intellectual understanding and psychic experiences --- "Mom Bongkojpriya \(Betty\) Yugala" wrote: > Dear James, > Please forgive the delay in replying to your very revealing letter. This > past week was H.M. the King's birthday here in Thailand, and for me it means > a lot of ceremonies to attend. > > As you rightly surmised I have had many of the same experiences that you > have had, especially the psychic ones, such as seeing black shapes that > incited fear. But I now find, after having studied with Achaan Sujin these > last 2 1/2 years, that such experiences were "just thinking" and that they > hindered rather than helped understanding to arise. They hinder the arising > of understanding because such experiences encourage the laying on of more > layers of "I-ness" to form over the already overloaded ego each of us > already thinks we have. > > When I studied with my first teacher years ago, such experiences were subtly > (and not so subtly) encouraged and his students liked to talk about them > quite a bit. It became a real ego thing because the more experiences one > had, the more one was "respected" by the group as being "advanced," etc. And > even if you never tell anyone about them, they are still manifestations of > the ego because it is always "I am experiencing such and such" and we tend > to get carried away by the experiences themselves, losing track of the real > reason for studying Dhamma. In such ways, the ego expands. If the ego, > atta, expands, can understanding of its true nature arise? Can understanding > of anatta arise? But think about it: was any understanding of the true > nature of "us," "the mind" and "the world," reality, ever revealed through > such experiences? Think about those last statements, check them out, that > is, contemplate about them, see if they are true or not, for yourself. > Contemplation on such questions is part of pariyati learning (see below). > Betty, Sorry I haven't written in a while but I wanted to ponder the questions I wanted to ask and where I wanted to go with this discussion. I was going to pursue this discussion off-line, but I don't think that would be fair to the members here. It was started on-line, it should be continued and finished on-line. I can really only think of a few questions: When you saw this black figure, did you think to yourself, "That was Mara." And do you still see this figure or have the visitations ceased? Did the others who saw this dark figure describe it, and instinctively know, that it was Mara? Did this dark figure interact with you? Did you 'feel' that is was visiting you specifically and for a purpose, or did you just 'see' it? Did you see it with your 'eyes' or with your 'mind'? I ask these questions just to know if our experiences are similiar. I don't want to encourage this vision further but I do want to be informed so that if it occurs again, I can take appropriate steps. Knowledge is the key. I am not sure if your current teacher gave you the best advice. I don't see or feel this figure as being 'just thoughts'. That approach presupposes an unreality, and I am positive that it was real and will not be convinced otherwise. I don't think you should convince yourself otherwise of your experiences either and what you feel for yourself to be true. It sounds like your two teachers took extreme positions and didn't follow a middle path. One encouraged the visitations and one denied the visitations, I am sure that there is an appropriate approach in the middle of those two extremes. The Lord Buddha didn't take either of those positions, according to the suttas. Metta, James 17450 From: chase8383 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 11:52am Subject: Re: Yuganaddha Sutta con'd: intellectual understanding and psychic experiences James "Ego', as used in Buddhism, is not mind; `Ego' is a `false sense of self'. There is confusion because of Western theories of personality and consciousness formation that summarize the mind as `Ego'. The major Western theorists in this area have evolved such theories: Freud proposed: Id, Ego, Superego; Jung proposed: Consciousness, Collective Unconsciousness; and Modern Psychologists: Consciousness, Unconsciousness = Ego. There is a dichotomy between Western theories of Ego and Buddhist theories of Ego because the first presumes existence and the second presumes anatta existence. This dichotomy has ramifications to the application of such theories to the functioning of the mind that have yet to be ironed out. Perhaps in the future, the word `Ego' will have a more universal meaning and holistic approach that will incorporate its conventional meaning and ultimate anattaness." No no. My use of the word mind doesn't mean that it is mind, it means it is of mind. I know all about Buddhist ego vs. Freuds ego. Forget about western ego, I never talk about that in connection wih Buddhism. Mara doesn't walk around talking to people. Therefore Mara is mind. The Buddha did one thing, he pointed to your mind. The teachings are all pointing to your mind and no where else. Whithout Mara there is no Buddha. Without samsara there is no nirvana. It is all one mind. 17451 From: chase8383 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 0:09pm Subject: Re: Emptiness? Jaes: "However, at this point, I am looking past this view of anatta. I am looking at anatta in the ultimate sense, not the conventional sense. The reality that all is anatta. That the car door, the metal, everything, has no essence...is anatta. That one isn't so easy to explain rationally is it?" Emptiness is the ultimate. How could it be any other way? How could the steel on the car door be anything but empty? How could you or I be anything but empty. How could the universe be anything but empty. Form is emptiness and emptiness is form. How could eye consciousness be anything but empty? How could ear consciousness be anything but empty? 17452 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 7:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas Hi, James - In a message dated 12/7/02 11:37:59 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi, Jon (and James) - > > > > Some thoughts. Yes, open your eyes and there's a lamp on a > table on > >top of a carpet and next to a chair in the room. What is all that? > It's as > >follows: > > Experience (by means of volition) the sequence of events we > call > >"opening our eyes", and there is activated the operation of > discernment > >[sankhara -> vi~n~nana]. Because the required discernment is > operative, there > >can arise a visual object (an image) [vi~n~nana -> namarupa]. > Because the > >required image is available the sight sense door can be activated > [namarupa -> > > salayatana]; actually, the coming together of discernment > (vi~n~nana), sense > >object (namarupa), and sense door *is* the contact. Contact is > followed by > >feeling. Then things seem to become personal - what one feels one > recognizes > >(and our concepts come into play, making us see "external objects" > such as > >lamps etc). This is my understanding. > > > >With metta, > >Howard > > > > Howard, > > I agree with this sequence of events until you get to this > part, "Because the required image is available the sight sense door > can be activated [namarupa -> salayatana]." This is a HUGE > assumption that what one sees is what actually exists. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm basically following the paticcasamuppada of the Buddha, James. Also, I am making NO assumption that an image is anything more than just an image. The activation of a sense door requires a sense object. (Seeing requires a seen.) They basically arise together. I am NOT assuming some externally existing "thing" here - just an image in interaction with the visual sense and discerned by visual consciousness. Incidentally, in one formulation of patticcasamuppada, the Buddha makes vi~n~nana and namarupa mutually dependent [vi~n~nana <-> namarupa]. This whole business simply indicates that certain conditions are among those required for other conditions. Ignorance (avijja) is required for (self-oriented) volition, intention, and other formative operations (sankhara) to be operative, these are required for subject-object discernment (vi~n~nana) to operate, that discernment is required for an object of discernment whether mental or material (namarupa) to be discerned, an object of discernment is required for a sensory gateway (salayatana) to operate, and the coming together of an act of discernment, an object being discerned, and a sense door activation is what the Buddha defined contact (phassa) to be. The namarupa is not some thing "out there", but is merely the objective pole of the subject-object contact event. --------------------------------------------------------- We `see' a > > permanent world, a samsara world but the world isn't permanent; our > perception lies to us because our minds are ignorant of reality. > ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: This seeing of identified (recognized), apparently lasting and self-existing "things out there" first arises in the mind only after feeling (vedana) arises. It is, of course, engendered by ignorance. ----------------------------------------------------------- > > When one begins the dharma path, and the closer that one looks at > something—through meditation, pondering, and scientific > investigation—the more that it is seen not to be what it first > appeared to be. That for all practical purposes and to our ignorant > mind that needs permanence, nothing really exists. Through the mind > of ignorance, it is seen that everything exists and yet doesn't > exist at the same time. When enlightened, this dichotomy is > eliminated. Then one sees (and knows) that all is anatta, a > category that is neither existence nor non-existence. > > Metta, James > > ============================ With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17453 From: chase8383 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 0:40pm Subject: Re: Yuganaddha Sutta con'd: intellectual understanding and psychic experiences One more than I think I'll shut up awhile. After all, who is this new guy chase8383? James "It sounds like your two teachers took extreme positions and didn't follow a middle path. One encouraged the visitations and one denied the visitations, I am sure that there is an appropriate approach in the middle of those two extremes." The secound teacher, I don't think, denied the experiences. The middle way is just to understand that they are experiences and nothing more. Don't attach to them. Let them go. They are empty after all. They should not be judged as real or not real. As good or bad. As profitable or not profitable. As important or unimportant. An experience is just an experience. 17454 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 1:03pm Subject: Re: Emptiness? Dear Dave, --- "chase8383 " Emptiness is the ultimate. How could it be any other way? How could the steel on the car door be anything but empty? How could you or I be anything but empty. How could the universe be anything but empty. Form is emptiness and emptiness is form. How could eye consciousness be anything but empty? How could ear consciousness be anything but empty? KKT: Yes, like you, I see emptiness as the ultimate. But emptiness is not nothingness. The difference is very subtle. Nothingness denotes annihilation. BTW, I am moved by your story about how you came to Buddhism. Thanks for sharing. Peace, KKT 17455 From: chase8383 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 1:12pm Subject: Re: Emptiness? Dear KTT You said "KKT: Yes, like you, I see emptiness as the ultimate. But emptiness is not nothingness. The difference is very subtle. Nothingness denotes annihilation." Absolutely, it is not nothingness. No birth, no death. No existence, no non-existence. "BTW, I am moved by your story about how you came to Buddhism. Thanks for sharing. Peace, KKT" Thank you KTT Peace, David 17456 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 1:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hello Dave and KKT, As it happens I was thinking about this topic this morning and I disagree. The goal in buddhism is not the realization of anatta but the realization of egolessness. To my mind, what the Buddha meant by 'atta' is soul. Not believing in a soul is not the end of dukkha. By 'ego' I mean the kamma causing root cetasikas lust, hatred, bewilderment, _and_ their opposites. All beliefs and opinions (ditthi) arise with and because of desire so a belief in a soul is based on desire, but beliefs don't perpetuate suffering, desire does. The natures of wholeness and subjectivity are philosophical issues which can be exploited in such a way as to undermine desire but as philosophical issues they could also lead to endless conceptual proliferation (papanca). Larry 17457 From: James Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 1:57pm Subject: Re: Emptiness? --- "chase8383 " wrote: Emptiness is the ultimate. How could it be any other way? How could the steel on the car door be anything but empty? How could you or I be anything but empty. How could the universe be anything but empty. Form is emptiness and emptiness is form. How could eye consciousness be anything but empty? How could ear consciousness be anything but empty? Dave, Let me reply with a quote about the consequences of attaching to semantics (word usage) in determining meaning: If we call the world of "things" (of physical objects)—the first world, and the world of subjective experiences (such as thought processes) the second world, we may call the world of statements in themselves the third world. --Karl Popper Metta, James 17458 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 9:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi, Larry, Dave, and KKT - In a message dated 12/7/02 4:54:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hello Dave and KKT, > > As it happens I was thinking about this topic this morning and I > disagree. The goal in buddhism is not the realization of anatta but the > realization of egolessness. To my mind, what the Buddha meant by 'atta' > is soul. Not believing in a soul is not the end of dukkha. By 'ego' I > mean the kamma causing root cetasikas lust, hatred, bewilderment, _and_ > their opposites. All beliefs and opinions (ditthi) arise with and > because of desire so a belief in a soul is based on desire, but beliefs > don't perpetuate suffering, desire does. > > The natures of wholeness and subjectivity are philosophical issues which > can be exploited in such a way as to undermine desire but as > philosophical issues they could also lead to endless conceptual > proliferation (papanca). > > Larry > > ========================= The goal, the ultimate goal (paramattha) is nibbana, the absence of the three poisons, the end of unsatisfactoriness. The realization of the tilakkhana, including impersonality/insubstantiality (anatta) is door way to that. This is my understanding. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17459 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 2:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi Howard, You wrote: "The realization of the tilakkhana, including impersonality/insubstantiality (anatta) is door way to that." I disagree that the realization of anatta is impersonality if by 'personal' you mean emotional reactions. Emotions are as real as reality gets so the absence of emotions couldn't be a mark of all realities. Larry 17460 From: chase8383 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 3:05pm Subject: Re: Emptiness? James And that has what to do with emptiness? Dave 17461 From: peterdac4298 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 3:48pm Subject: Re: Mara Hi James First, I am curious as to the 'alternative' definition of Anatta that you refer to. 'No-essence' seems to me to be essentially 'no- self' rather than an alternative expression, however, lets avoid falling into hair splitting if that seems to be the case from your pov. Skip this if it is trivial. I'd like to start by saying I think I have a similar problem of 'external' interference in my psychic (as opposed to physical or physiological) aspect. It affects me at any time in the twenty four hour, to the point where my very employment is at risk, in that it is quite debilitating. At one point I took a week of work, and consequently had to see a specialist, who promptly found nothing wrong with me. Between us we decided that the symptoms were 'stress related' and my employer was satisfied with that. I get both male and female entities, both benign and malevolent. Of the four types male, female, good or bad, it is the malevolent female that is the most awful - for this male yogi. The good ones are very good, very supportive and are thoroughly nice to know too. The bad guys just need a good hiding, they either respect you for it and become friends or they just disappear knowing that they can't bother you. The bad females on the other hand just get more defiant and self righteous the more you abuse them. They are the real teachers. The Tibetan concept of Dakini comes to mind, but I have never gone into this so am just guessing. However, in this epoch we have the blessings of the Triple Gem, still with us, not yet fallen or fragmented. I find that the practice of insight mediation works in controlling these entities, but I have much to learn. The Dhamma must be used with compassion and I am still inclined to use it as a weapon to get rid of these things so as to continue indulging my egotistical priorities. Like good teachers, they won't have any of this, but unlike good teachers, their motives are not rooted in compassion. I understand that true compassion is ruthless, but it does stop short of passionately motivated and deliberate harm. These beings are not especially intelligent or wise, and at times can be quite dumb. But the Dhamma being what it is, this is a perfect training predicament if ever there was one. In monastic life we have the expression, "You may not always get the training that you want, but you always get the training that you need." And these beings, being of the opposite gender, have a perfect talent for finding my weakest vulnerabilities. It is the most effective motivation I have yet encountered for putting consistent effort into my practice! There is a story in the Suttas, which I find particularly inspiring in this context. The Buddha is pointing out to a disciple, that a swirl of dust in the valley below them was non other than Mara, searching for a recently deceased Arahant, and is unable to find any trace of that fully realised parinibbana. I find that by seeing No- Self (or No-Essence) in any intrusive situation enables a disengagement from it and thus a removing of any passion from the encounter, resulting in either its cessation, or, highly significant attenuation. In both cases, either gradual or sudden. In the latter case some Samadhi practice will usually suppress any lingering interference. This can include submersing the mind totally into the task at hand, helped by seeing that there is no self (or essence) in any of this: i.e., nothing but changing and interdependent accumulating conditions. Unfortunately, sufficient clarity is not always at hand so this is not always possible. On such occasions faith alone sometimes gets me through. When all else fails, I assume they have found yet another blind spot and resign myself to looking for something else/new that needs to be learned. The people at work are very good about all this and can see why I am quite content with just being a porter. They encourage any worthwhile effort with various positive gestures, and compassionately come down heavy when they perceive any indolence and/or unawareness of any new turn of events. Unfortunately, it does put them off trying meditation for themselves! It is easy to see why Tibetans are into Guru devotion, but the Good Lord did tell us (in the Dhammapada?) that no person or being can do us as much harm as we can do to ourselves, and no person or being can do us as much good as we can do for ourselves. Hope this helps. It sure helps me getting it off my chest for the first time in the last dozen or so years that this has been going on. I never thought I'd ever find people who would take this seriously. Mind you my local GP was good. When I told her I thought I was going mad, she insisted that I carry on with my practice, she had more faith in that than anything she had seen on offer in the British Medical profession. The only problem with this is that I am quite convinced that I have never at any time told her I practiced meditation! Cheers Peter --- "James" wrote: > Hey Everyone: > > First, before I begin what most of you may be skeptical about, I > want to stress that everything in this post is the truth. It is > what I have experienced directly with no flourishes or > exaggeration. To post on such a subject, in even the most simple of > deceitful ways, would bring me unimaginably bad kamma. I would not > disrespect the Triple Gem in such a manner. > > Since no one is telling about any incidents with Mara, I am going to > tell mine. But a few things first, as I wrote in an earlier post to > this group, I have always been skeptical about Devas, Maras, etc. I > won't accept something on someone else's word alone. And I also > don't speak of things that I don't know for sure. Frankly, I didn't > believe that Mara existed. I thought, and have often read, that he > was just a metaphor for craving (and many other negative things). > Now I know that I am wrong for thinking that previously. Mara is a > real being—I have seen him, sensed him when unseen, and I have heard > his voice. And the experiences were quite real each time. > > Mara first visited me after I had begun to read the book "Reason's > Traces." I got through the forward and came across the alternative > definition for anatta, "no-essence". A light bulb came on because > this definition made so much more sense to me than `non-self'. > After reading, I laid back in a recliner, and I was thinking about > what this new definition meant in terms of the universe and myself. > My eyes were closed, kinda dozing but not asleep, just pondering, > when my thoughts were completely abducted. In an instant I saw in > my mind me lying on the recliner and a very short (4'7" or so), pale > skinned, humanoid appearing man (but with grotesque puffy eyes and > shedding hair), dressed in a black cloak, a black hat (Fedora > style), who walked past the right side of the recliner. I jumped up > immediately out of my rest and recoiled from that side of the > chair. I could sense that he was gone but I was extremely, > extremely, extremely scared! And I didn't think to myself, "What > was that?" I immediately, instinctively thought to myself, "Oh no, > that was Mara!" > > Since then, I have had a few more visits…at least once if not twice > per day. They occur when I am pondering anatta and its consequences > in a deep fashion. When they occur, I can feel him walk past me, I > don't see him during everyday awakefulness, and it makes me feel > fear every time (though less so now). > > This morning, I heard his voice in my head as I lay half-asleep and > half-awake. I was thinking about Anatta (yes I even think deeply > while half-asleep). And I was thinking, "Okay, everything is > impermanent. Everything is impermanent," when I head a second voice > say, "Permanent." My mind immediately disagreed, and it did a quick > search, and I realized that the thought wasn't mine. It had been > put there. After a bit of confusion, my mind drifted to a vision of > a classroom of kids, and I thought to myself, "They all have no > essence." And a second voice said, "Souls…souls." Again, it wasn't > my thought. The voice, which I could actually `hear', was a man's > voice and much deeper and more rich than my `thinking voice'. Then > I got out of bed. > > It seems that Mara works best during lucid dreaming, or perhaps > meditation. It is then that he can get inside the mind of the > person. Maybe everyday mind is not so easy for him and he can only > give impressions. > > I wanted to share this for those who need the information. Does > this entire happening to me mean I am enlightened? HA! I know that > I am far from that. But I must be heading in the right direction, > using the right method for me, or Mara wouldn't visit me. Does this > visitation make me happy? No. I just wanted reaching Nibbana to be > nice and easy; having an otherworldly stalker was not my goal or > hope…and something I didn't even imagine happening. > > Metta, James 17462 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 4:26pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Dear Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: Hello Dave and KKT, As it happens I was thinking about this topic this morning and I disagree. The goal in buddhism is not the realization of anatta but the realization of egolessness. To my mind, what the Buddha meant by 'atta' is soul. Not believing in a soul is not the end of dukkha. By 'ego' I mean the kamma causing root cetasikas lust, hatred, bewilderment, _and_their opposites. All beliefs and opinions (ditthi) arise with and because of desire so a belief in a soul is based on desire, but beliefs don't perpetuate suffering, desire does. The natures of wholeness and subjectivity are philosophical issues which can be exploited in such a way as to undermine desire but as philosophical issues they could also lead to endless conceptual proliferation (papanca). Larry KKT: The experience of emptiness (another way of expression for anatta/no-self/egolessness) is a real and lively experience and not merely a philosophical issue based on belief or pure speculation. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Peace, KKT 17463 From: chase8383 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 5:07pm Subject: The "Perky effect" Hi All Perhaps those having trouble with images may find this interesting. The following is from "Zen and the Brain", by Dr. James H. Austin, Page 388, 389 "Many campuses have an apocryphal tale about some absent-minded professor. If it is a math professor, he will have become totally absorbed in visually imagining an equation. As a result, he will have walked far past the door to his own mathematics building, and will finally have come to, say, in front of the gym. The easy assumption: the don was simply "distracted". He hadn't paid enough attention to all those visual clues that were obviously out in plain sight, if not right under his very nose. Back in 1910, Perky asked his human subjects to generate the image of a banana. While they were describing it, he than placed a facsimile of a banana directly in front of their gaze. The dangling artificial banana was clearly in plain sight. Surprisingly, while Perky's subjects were imaging, they didn't register this facsimile, nor did they identify it. How could anyone overlook a banana? The " Perky effect" is more than a curious bit of trivia. The effect has since been confirmed and extended far beyond bananas. Indeed, subjects still neglect the external object in front of their line of sight. It doesn't have to be the same one as the one which they are actively imagining. Clearly, we share, with the professor, an ability to blot out other visual functions while in the act of pulling up images into the mental foreground. This is an active process of suppression, not one that merely overlooks an object that has received a slightly lower priority. Imagining in, blots out. " Peace, Daivd 17464 From: chase8383 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 5:33pm Subject: The "Perky effect" Hi All Perhaps those having trouble with images may find this interesting. The following is from "Zen and the Brain", by Dr. James H. Austin, Page 388, 389 "Many campuses have an apocryphal tale about some absent-minded professor. If it is a math professor, he will have become totally absorbed in visually imagining an equation. As a result, he will have walked far past the door to his own mathematics building, and will finally have come to, say, in front of the gym. The easy assumption: the don was simply "distracted". He hadn't paid enough attention to all those visual clues that were obviously out in plain sight, if not right under his very nose. Back in 1910, Perky asked his human subjects to generate the image of a banana. While they were describing it, he than placed a facsimile of a banana directly in front of their gaze. The dangling artificial banana was clearly in plain sight. Surprisingly, while Perky's subjects were imaging, they didn't register this facsimile, nor did they identify it. How could anyone overlook a banana? The " Perky effect" is more than a curious bit of trivia. The effect has since been confirmed and extended far beyond bananas. Indeed, subjects still neglect the external object in front of their line of sight. It doesn't have to be the same one as the one which they are actively imagining. Clearly, we share, with the professor, an ability to blot out other visual functions while in the act of pulling up images into the mental foreground. This is an active process of suppression, not one that merely overlooks an object that has received a slightly lower priority. Imagining in, blots out. " Peace, Daivd ADVERTISEMENT 17465 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 0:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? In a message dated 12/7/2002 2:50:57 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > You wrote: "The realization of the tilakkhana, including > impersonality/insubstantiality (anatta) is door way to that." > > I disagree that the realization of anatta is impersonality if by > 'personal' you mean emotional reactions. Emotions are as real as reality > gets so the absence of emotions couldn't be a mark of all realities. > > Larry > Hi Larry Suffering is real also (as real as reality gets) and the ending of suffering is the goal of the Buddha's teaching. Probably what what Howard means by "impersonality" is that:-- experiences encountered are just conditions. They arise, persist while changing, and cease due to a cause, and they are not I, me, or mine. As for emotions, they are based on ignorance and will disappear in the presence of -- mindfulness of conditionality...much like darkness disappears in the presence of light. TG 17466 From: James Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 6:41pm Subject: Re: Emptiness? --- "chase8383 " wrote: > James > > And that has what to do with emptiness? > > Dave Hi Dave, That quote is about semantics and how some words, when used improperly, can create worlds not based on physical or mental accepted reality. They can create worlds unto themselves; semantic worlds composed of word houses, occupied by word people, walking word dogs...:-). I believe the word `emptiness' is meaningless and misleading when related to anatta. A cup is empty, a plate is empty, your belly is empty, but anatta is not `empty'. I believe that viewing anatta as `emptiness' is fruitless. Emptiness presupposes a thing/an object. The very nature of the word requires the existence of an object that is then `empty'. Anatta, or no-essence, doesn't presuppose an object. To say `this is empty' and `that is empty' sounds profound, but I believe it is false view. I was trying to be subtle with the quote so that you could conclude this for yourself. I don't like to tell people how they should think. Metta, James 17467 From: chase8383 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 7:16pm Subject: Re: Emptiness? Hi James You hang up up with the word empty is your hang up. It means it is empty of a self. It doesn't mean one minute is has a self, than you take it away from it. It never had a self in the first place. Use what ever WORD you want. What builds your house doesn't build mine. Your Mara is not mine. "We don't share so much as a fart" Zen Master Peace, David 17468 From: James Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 7:30pm Subject: Re: Mara --- "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi James > > I'd like to start by saying I think I have a similar problem > of 'external' interference in my psychic (as opposed to physical or > physiological) aspect. > I get both male and female entities, both benign and malevolent. Of > the four types male, female, good or bad, it is the malevolent > female that is the most awful - for this male yogi. The good ones > are very good, very supportive and are thoroughly nice to know too. > The bad guys just need a good hiding, they either respect you for it > and become friends or they just disappear knowing that they can't > bother you. Peter, First, concerning the trivial matter for you, the significant matter for me, I have always gotten hung up on the phrase `no self' because of my extensive education in psychology. I have seen the word `self' as something that could only belong to living entities, predominately humans, and could not be used in reference to inanimate objects. "No essence" breaks my mind free of that conditioning and I am able to see and understand much more. Words can be the key—to either let you out or lock you in. Thank you for sharing that information about yourself. And let me assure you, you are not crazy. However, you do have a significant problem, which I don't know if anyone has put it to you this way or not, but you have excess/heavy karma. Before I go into the explanation let me make a few things clear: this knowledge that I have about certain people is not based on sutta information, I have never read of it in a sutta but I still know it is real; I do have psychic ability in the areas of reading thoughts (especially hidden ones), knowing future events, knowing other people's psychic abilities, and knowing the age and weight of a people's karma stream. I have written previously about this on the Internet and I don't care what people think about it (which is usually skepticism, denial, irritation, and fear). I don't have to be near the person to do this; I can do it from a distance. But, unlike you, I have never had such personal encounters, or even visions, of otherworldly beings as I have had recently. With this said, I believe that you, Peter, have an extremely old karma stream. You are probably attracted to a great number of world religions, from the ancient Druids and Egyptians to Catholicism, but you know that Buddhism holds the most promise for you. Additionally, you have held positions of `seer' and `priests' in practically all of the earth's religions, religions of species from other planets, and in deva realms for an immeasurably long time. You now realize that your present life is one of profound significance for you. Your current manifestation is one where you can finally begin the process of ending this samsara existence, which weighs heavy on you. Unfortunately, you have dragged along the experiences and feelings from your previous lifetimes. Like thoughts that we say to ourselves, "Oh, I have to remember this…I may need it one day." You have dragged along experience after experience and associated feelings after feelings from one life to another. And the thought of letting all of that go terrifies you; you see it as your treasure chest of wisdom. Now that you feel this existence as so important, you have been rummaging through that chest and re-examining old karma. I bet that you even experience many vivid dreams about living in ancient times and seeing the passage of time through lives. I also bet that you don't think predominately in terms of days, months and years—you think predominately in terms of millennium, centuries, and eons. But this dragging up of your old karma looking for answers and wisdom is pulling entities out of your past, especially deva and higher realms, and most of them are none to pleased about it. They want you to break the ties you have with them. You also attach more strongly to people/entities than material objects or experiences. You are correct, Vipassana meditation is the way for you to eliminate this heavy karma. If you are doing it right, you should feel your body get very hot as the excess karma is burned away. You will also feel sadness and regret, which will translate into tears and physical pain where none should be. However, I sense that your meditation is predominately visualizations, against your will and with your will sometimes, and that type will only strengthen those ties, not eliminate them. You are in good company in this group because most everyone also has an old karma stream, but the oldest ones have lightened the weight of it through Vipassana meditation. I, however, have a relatively young karma stream for someone as spiritually focused as myself. Many in this group, with old karma streams, can sense this about me and it is puzzling and frustrating to them. I should not know the things I do, but I do. And my karma stream is very light. I am an upstart, a show-off, who hasn't paid my dues. My fortitude has been my ability to find and really listen to the best teachers. I don't try to learn something for myself all the time, I ask question, after question, after question. People with old karma streams have a hard time doing that. They feel that they must be teachers, not students. I have always been a student, really. I hope this helps you some. Don't worry if other people think you are crazy. What you know for yourself to be true is true. I won't tell you to trust me on this. If what I am telling you sounds like nonsense, ignore it. If it doesn't, listen to it and decide a course of action for you. I am just a young pup, but I can show an old dog a new trick or two. ;-) Metta, James 17469 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 7:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi James, You are right that there is no emptiness in and of itself. In the suttas 'emptiness' always qualifies a container, like an empty cup. What is empty (of a self) is usually the khandhas; sometimes 'empty' qualifies a narrower object. If you have a "Wisdom" Majjhima Nikaya it is interesting to look up all the instances of 'empty' with the index. I don't think nibbana is called empty (could be wrong). Maybe because it isn't a container?? Larry 17470 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 2:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/7/02 5:50:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > You wrote: "The realization of the tilakkhana, including > impersonality/insubstantiality (anatta) is door way to that." > > I disagree that the realization of anatta is impersonality if by > 'personal' you mean emotional reactions. Emotions are as real as reality > gets so the absence of emotions couldn't be a mark of all realities. > > Larry > ========================= By the impersonality of things I mean their being not-self: not an "I", nor belonging to or related to an "I". In particular, neither volition nor discernment is self or belongs to or is related to self. They are simply impersonal, conditioned phenomena. That's all. Emotions are also impersonal phenomena. All conditioned dhammas are impersonal and insubstantial. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17471 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 2:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] question Hello Jon, Now if I were to rant and call you all sorts of abusive names and such I might well receive a moderator cautioning, or somesuch. On the other hand if I were to effusively praise and laud you I should anticipate no such cautioning. Yet, in terms of the 8 worldly conditions the two cases are symmetrical; in fact, the latter is perhaps likely to cause you harm (e.g., build your ego a bit) than the former, which I rather doubt would have much effect. Consequently, do you consider my hypothesized moderator behavior inconsistent, even adhammic? ;-) metta, stephen 17472 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 7:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi Howard, Thanks for that clarification. I agree, but what's an 'I'? Larry 17473 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 2:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Thanks, TG. You have it just right. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/7/02 8:38:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > > In a message dated 12/7/2002 2:50:57 PM Pacific Standard Time, > LBIDD@w... writes: > > > >Hi Howard, > > > >You wrote: "The realization of the tilakkhana, including > >impersonality/insubstantiality (anatta) is door way to that." > > > >I disagree that the realization of anatta is impersonality if by > >'personal' you mean emotional reactions. Emotions are as real as reality > >gets so the absence of emotions couldn't be a mark of all realities. > > > >Larry > > > > Hi Larry > > Suffering is real also (as real as reality gets) and the ending of > suffering > is the goal of the Buddha's teaching. Probably what what Howard means by > "impersonality" is that:-- experiences encountered are just conditions. > They > arise, persist while changing, and cease due to a cause, and they are not > I, > me, or mine. > > As for emotions, they are based on ignorance and will disappear in the > presence of -- mindfulness of conditionality...much like darkness > disappears > in the presence of light. > > TG > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17474 From: chase8383 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 7:44pm Subject: Re: Mara Ok James I've had enough. This is NOT the Dharma. "With this said, I believe that you, Peter, have an extremely old karma stream. You are probably attracted to a great number of world religions, from the ancient Druids and Egyptians to Catholicism, but you know that Buddhism holds the most promise for you. Additionally, you have held positions of `seer´ and `priests´ in practically all of the earth's religions, religions of species from other planets, and in deva realms for an immeasurably long time. You now realize that your present life is one of profound significance for you. Your current manifestation is one where you can finally begin the process of ending this samsara existence, which weighs heavy on you. Unfortunately, you have dragged along the experiences and feelings from your previous lifetimes. Like thoughts that we say to ourselves, "Oh, I have to remember this…I may need it one day." You have dragged along experience after experience and associated feelings after feelings from one life to another. And the thought of letting all of that go terrifies you; you see it as your treasure chest of wisdom. Now that you feel this existence as so important, you have been rummaging through that chest and re-examining old karma. I bet that you even experience many vivid dreams about living in ancient times and seeing the passage of time through lives. I also bet that you don't think predominately in terms of days, months and years—you think predominately in terms of millennium, centuries, and eons. But this dragging up of your old karma looking for answers and wisdom is pulling entities out of your past, especially deva and higher realms, and most of them are none to pleased about it. They want you to break the ties you have with them. You also attach more strongly to people/entities than material objects or experiences." The rest of the members of this club can do as they wish, but I feel I owe = it to Buddhism to point that what James is pushing here has nothing to Buddh= is, or the Buddha, or the Dharma. Peace, David 17475 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 2:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Yuganaddha Sutta con'd: intellectual understanding and psychic experiences Hello "this new guy chase8383" >The second teacher, I don't think, denied the experiences. The middle >way is just to understand that they are experiences and nothing more. Don't >attach to them. Let them go. They are empty after all. They should not >be judged as real or not real. As good or bad. As profitable or not profitable. >As important or unimportant. An experience is just an experience. While I think that this is good advice in the situation at hand, and while this general position in hardly unique to yourself, I really have never gotten it. Let's take an instance of child abuse: Not bad? Not important? Not profitable or unprofitable? How do you reconcile "emptiness" with morality (sila)? (*If* you're going to say one's ultimate and one's conventional do relate the two, especially to something resembling reality, as in my example.) metta, stephen 17476 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 2:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/7/02 10:42:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > Thanks for that clarification. I agree, but what's an 'I'? > > Larry > ======================= Well, at least in part one could say that it is an alleged agent underlying and exercising control over phenomena. Generally it is considered an autonomous, isolated entity that is the center of "one's world". With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17477 From: chase8383 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 7:58pm Subject: Re: Yuganaddha Sutta con'd: intellectual understanding and psychic experiences Hi Stephen You said "While I think that this is good advice in the situation at hand, and while this general position in hardly unique to yourself, I really have never gotten it. Let's take an instance of child abuse: Not bad? Not important? Not profitable or unprofitable? How do you reconcile "emptiness" with morality (sila)? (*If* you're going to say one's ultimate and one's conventional do relate the two, especially to something resembling reality, as in my example.)" Stephen, I was talking about experiences of the mind. Meditative experiences. Visualizations etc. Not experiences such as child abuse. I think we all no the difference between an experience that takes place in the cinema of our mind and an expereince such as an adult abusing a child. Don't we? 17478 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 8:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi Howard, Your definition of 'I' fits into my subjectivity theories category but in examining my experience I would say 'I' is purely a special kind of focused desire without much conceptual content. In other words, an emotion. However, it is very curious that I can't see this clearly. One would think one would know what one means by 'I', but apparently not. Larry 17479 From: James Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 8:02pm Subject: Re: Mara --- "chase8383 " wrote: > Ok James > > I've had enough. This is NOT the Dharma. > The rest of the members of this club can do as they wish, but I feel I owe = > it to Buddhism to point that what James is pushing here has nothing to Buddh= > is, or the Buddha, or the Dharma. > > Peace, David Dear David, LOL! Hmmmm...how could so much 'emptiness' push your buttons? :-) Dharma, translated, simply means 'the way' or 'truth'. The Vedics used the word long before the Buddha used it. See the big picture? Dharma is not simply the teaching of the Buddha, dharma is the truth. Einstein, Shakespeare, Hawking, Darwin...they all taught dharma. Very simple, very plain, not even a religion really. The Buddha said as much in sutta after sutta. You don't 'owe it to Buddhism' anything. Such a statement is absurd. You need to do what you keep preaching and 'let go'. Additionally, you do not know me, my history of posts to this group, or my backgroud. You should learn a bit more before you condemn a person for Buddhist Heresy...an oxymoron is there ever was one. Metta, James 17480 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 3:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hello James, >I believe the word `emptiness' is meaningless and misleading when >related to anatta. A cup is empty, a plate is empty, your belly is >empty, but anatta is not `empty'. I believe that viewing anatta >as `emptiness' is fruitless. Emptiness presupposes a thing/an >object. Suppose there is no self: anatta. So in that case one is empty of self, void. In the seeing there is just the seen, etc. — the advice to Bahiya. Just the seen (heard, sensed) requires an object or thing (or thought). One just is the perception. In that sense of emptiness we are the union of emptiness (anatta) and object. [I just reread this and it already seems somewhat obscure; a lot of what' s written on this score is nonsense and illogical, but the above isn't, just poorly written ;-) On your claim of meaninglessness you might enjoy: Buddhist Illogic] >The very nature of the word requires the existence of an >object that is then `empty'. This is a Mahayana extension of anatta, I think. You are, I'm sure, correctly giving the meaning of the term as being empty of essence, or, it's equivalent, interrelatedness. Of all things, not just the person/self. I'm curious to what extent this is, in fact, a valid extrapolation; or even criticism of apparent abhidhammic realism concerning dhammas. Perhaps this is another issue. metta, stephen 17481 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 8:13pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Howard, > > Your definition of 'I' fits into my subjectivity theories category but > in examining my experience I would say 'I' is purely a special kind of > focused desire without much conceptual content. In other words, an > emotion. > > However, it is very curious that I can't see this clearly. One would > think one would know what one means by 'I', but apparently not. > > Larry Dear Larry, It's hard to know to what "I" refers, since in general when we use it, it refers to a concept of entity which we presume to exist within. I think the discovery that "I" does not refer to something definite is an inroad towards wisdom. Robert Ep. 17482 From: chase8383 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 8:25pm Subject: Re: Mara James I don't know who you think your fooling my friend, but your not fooling me. You can set up a tent and pull out your crystal ball at the local fair if you want, but your not a Buddhist. You hallucinations are just that. Your claims of seeing the future are just that, claims. Your claims of seeing into the past are just that, claims. But hay, you go right ahead. David 17483 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 3:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Yuganaddha Sutta con'd: intellectual understanding and psychic experiences Hello chase8383, I misunderstood your point. No, we do not all know the difference (between "cinema of mind" and reality). And there are many who advocate seeing everything as a dream, an illusion; just an experience. However, James has been, I believe, clear, that he doesn't believe he's talking about a mental manifestation or hallucination but an actual physical presence. I thought you were speaking from that premise; or from some variant of the mind-only position. metta, stephen 17484 From: chase8383 Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 8:39pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Yuganaddha Sutta con'd: intellectual understanding and psychic experiences Hi again Stephen You said "> I misunderstood your point. > No, we do not all know the difference (between "cinema of mind" and reality). > And there are many who advocate seeing everything as a dream, an illusion; > just an experience. > However, James has been, I believe, clear, that he doesn't believe he's > talking about a mental manifestation or hallucination but an actual physical > presence. I thought you were speaking from that premise; or from some variant > of the mind-only position." No, I don't belong to the mind only school. That may be important to state in here at the moment. I think your mind plays a key role in what you see, but I don't believe that if you turn your back on a tree it isn't there. Peace, David 17485 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 9:33pm Subject: Re: How I came to Buddism Dear David, Great introduction. Nice to meet you. I can only drop in from time to time, but nice to hear your story. Best, Robert Ep. ======= --- "chase8383 " < dcwcc@w...> wrote: > In June of 1968 I was at a Military Hospital, just outside of Boston Ma. USA. I was there to recover from wounds I had received in Vietnam. They were quite serious. I had been wounded on May 19th and by early June I had gone from 185lbs to under 100lbs. It would take one year and multiple surgical procedures for me to recover. > > As I lay on my bed, in early June, I thought of praying as a way of drawing enough strength to face my future. As I began to pray, I suddenly realized that no matter how much I prayed, it would still be me that had to face the operating table. It would still be me that would have to face the recovery. It would have to be me that was strong. It couldn't come from outside of me, from another being other than myself. No, it had to come from inside. And further more, it would have to come from my mind. After all, my body was damaged. > > Without knowing it, I was entering the Buddha's path. That turning of the mind on itself. That understanding of my impermanence. That taking of life, moment by moment. I had no place else to go. > > Fifteen years later I picked up a book on Buddhism in the library. As I read it I thought, I'll be damned. Here it is. Suffering, sickness, all of it and, the path out. The same path I had started all those years go, on my own. > > David 17486 From: Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 9:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi Robert, Nice to see you again. I agree when you say, "I think the discovery that "I" does not refer to something definite is an inroad towards wisdom." This would definitely cut down on the desire. I've sort of lost track of my point. I think it was something like _if_ 'I' is mostly an emotion then anatta doesn't mean 'I'-lessness because emotions are real and therefore 'I' is anatta. To put it another way, the understanding or even experience, as KKT suggested, of anatta could lead to 'I'-lessness (desirelessness). Both desire and desirelessness are anatta. The goal is desirelessness. Desirelessness could be considered the result of correct understanding of anatta or impermanence or dukkha or foulness. See Satipatthana Sutta Commentary for more info: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html Larry :) 17487 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 10:21pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta --- "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > Hi James, (Ray, Rob M, Rob K & All), > > > > I have several of your anatta' posts in front of me and I'd like > to pick > > up on a few issues - many of which have probably been clarified > for you > > already by Ray, Rob M, Rob K and your own reflections. If you > don't mind, > > I'll use point form this time (more or less in the order you > raised them): > > > Sarah, > > Wow! These ambush posts of yours will be the death of me! :-) just > kidding. The question of anatta is not so cut and dry as you seem > to state here. From a purely historical perspective, there have > been four major schools of thought within Thera Buddhism concerning > anatta since the Buddha's death. Of the two largest schools, one > proposed a `synthetic self', a temporary self that receives the > result of karma and rebirth, etc.; the other proposed no self at > all, temporary or otherwise. I am undecided at this point. Dear James, I would like to suggest that the difference between the above schools may be a matter of semantics, dependent upon whether someone uses the word 'self' to refer to the kandhas, or to refer to the concept one has of being an entity. We can talk about a 'temporary self' formed by the kandhas, or a 'non- existent self' represented by a concept that is taken for real. In fact, either way, the 'self' only occurs within the kandhas. If we think of the whole system of the kandhas as the 'self', it is a shifting collection of temporary tendencies, actions, perceptions within which we develop the concept of an entity or being, which is actually non-existent. The important point about anatta is what it denies; it is after all a negative term, not a positive one; it points to the absence of a reality, not a 'thing' that is a 'non-self'. Anatta denies that anywhere within the kandhas - the mind, the personality, the body - is a permanent defineable entity that is one's true being. Whether one defines this as a psychological center, a soul or a person, this proposed 'thing' does not exist. So we can say there is a mechanical, temporary self that is not really a being or an entity. We can say that the concept of self arises in the mind giving the illusion of a being or entity. But the result is the same. There is no such being, there is no such concept. There are only various shifting psychophysical states and the consciousness that experiences them. When this consciousness is also viewed as an arising condition rather than a separate perceiver, then I would say the understanding of anatta would be complete. Best, Robert Ep. =========== 17488 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 10:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Thanks Sarah, for your reply and for your further reminders about anatta. It might be interesting to discuss the 20 kinds of self-view. If you have a little link for me, I'll take a look.... Best, Robert Ep. ========================= --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Rob Ep, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > It takes me too long to get back to posts and I apologize for the > > disruption. I am going on the theory that if I can post from time to > > time it is better than not posting at all. I at least am very glad to > > be able to drop in when I can. It feels at this point like visiting > > good friends -- not that there's any attachment there.... > ..... > No disruption and `from time to time' is definitely better than `not at > all'. > .....and for us it's like having `good friends' drop in, even if there is > attachment;-) don't be put off by the occasional bark - we all get them at > times, esp. if we're long-winded as I often am;-). There aren't any bites > and we're all very grateful to Larry for his tireless efforts with the > extracts and considerations they lead to. He's having a well-earned break > now from the Way commentary til Nina returns. > ..... > > The theme in several of your comments, that the idea of self and desire > > > for a result can easily creep in to one's concept of the path and the > > attempt to discern realities as well, is very well taken. It is easy > > to want to jump to the conclusion and feel the 'security' of a method > > that seems to guarantee enlightenment. All of this must be a denial of > > the current work of relaxing the clinging mind and submitting to the > > reality now, whether it seems like it's leading somewhere or not > ..... > Yes, I had a chat with Christine at the weekend about how there really are > no `sweeteners' in the path of detachment. Even when we talk about > `relaxing the clinging mind and submitting to reality now', attachment and > clinging to self or results can creep in. She may add more. > ..... > > A friend recently had the insight that all the things that occur in > > samsara really don't lead anywhere, all the causes and effects lead to > > just more causes and effects. i thought it was interesting. It > > removed the whole idea that one can 'get somewhere' by interacting with > > samsara in this or that way. > ..... > No `one' to get anywhere or interact in anyway. > ..... > >Only discernment and progress in relation > > to wisdom does anything, and this only comes by cultivating the right > > conditions. > ..... > Yes and no self to cultivate conditions either. > ..... > > Anyway, I'm rambling, but I'm happy to hear your reminders about the > > subtle idea of self. > ..... > I think it's useful for us all. There are 20 kinds of sakkaya-ditthi (self > view), i.e 4 types for each of the khandhas. K.Sujin was reminding us that > it's useful to know about these and to understand how they can arise at > any time, even whilst `practising' or discussing dhamma. > ..... > > And thanks for letting me take part in this interesting discussion. > .... > This is an open forum as you said. For my part, I always enjoy chatting to > you and miss your contributions when you disappear. I've always > appreciated your kind support for DSG too. > > Look f/w to anymore anatta discussion. As James says, it's the 'heart' of > the Teachings. > > Sarah > > p.s Did you see the following quote from TG? I thought it was very good: > > "The Suttas were delivered to all sorts of individuals or groups with all > sorts of different levels of understanding. I believe the best way to try > to > understand individual suttas is to read all of the suttas over and over. > If > that is done and they are seriously contemplated, the "puzzle" starts > fitting > together. > > As far as this particular sutta is concerned...emptiness does exactly mean > -- > "empty of self." Empty of self simply means that conditioned phenomena > (all > phenomena except for Nibbana) arise due to conditions, alter due to > conditions, and cease due to conditions. There is nothing that is "self > made" or "self generated." " > ======================================== 17489 From: James Date: Sat Dec 7, 2002 11:02pm Subject: Matter/AntiMatter Hey All, I have some ideas about the nature of anatta to share. I wrote to Sarah that I wouldn't post anymore since my ideas get everyone a little unsettled, but I think that was an overreaction. I am sure that most members can appreciate looking at questions of dharma from different angles rather than adhering to the customary banality. Further, Rob M has started a ball rolling on the question of anatta that is hard to stop...at least for me. I am not sure it should be stopped at this time. This hypothesis that I am proposing is simply a theory, improvable at the current time, but may point in the right direction for further thought and investigation. This post centers on a `scientific hypothesis' for the `anatta', no-essence, of our universe. I don't know if this hypothesis has been advanced previously, but I haven't run across it in my studies. According to one approach to the Big Bang theory, a particle of antimatter, called a Quark, and smaller than a sub-atomic particle, `slipped' through a hole in the space-time fabric separating alternate dimensions, and entered our present dimension. This Quark from an alternate dimension (different from `Buddhist Worlds; which exist in our dimension) evidently got trapped because the hole that it had slipped through closed back up again. Consequently, being in a dimension foreign to its own, it exploded and created all of the matter of our present universe. Thus, you have the phrase `Big Bang' to explain this theory. Okay, taking this theory as a given, which has the circumstantial evidence of a plainly expanding universe from a single point, that would mean that the energy of a Quark of `antimatter', a substance completely opposite the given nature of our dimension, created all of the `matter' that we currently know and see. However, I posit that maybe it didn't happen just that way. If anything, it would make more sense that the resulting matter from the Big Bang would have the substances or characteristics making it `fit' this dimension, but also the `antimatter' quality of an alternate dimension. Such a substance, the basic building block of our universe, would be forever off balance. It would phase in and out as the two characteristics of the matter jockeyed for dominance, one after the other. This would result in a very unstable universe, one that was forever existing and non-existing, and yet neither. Like a penny with one side black and the other glowing phosphorus, being flipped rapidly in a dark room, the penny would be visible then disappear, be visible again and then disappear again, forever. Something, in an ultimate and conventional sense, that would be neither existing nor not existing. Which could fit the understanding of the sages of `anatta'. The Buddha said that the beginning of our samsara existence was `untracable, unknowable, etc.', but I don't know if he SPECIFICALLY said that he didn't know it. Additionally, he also admitted that there were many things he knew that he didn't teach. Trying to explain `universe', `alternate dimensions', and the `Big Bang' to the people of ancient India, who even used a rudimentary lunar calendar, would have been very difficult. It wouldn't have been impossible, but his essential teachings would have been lost in the attempt. (I sincerely hope that this post doesn't have the same result). This hypothesis is shaky at best I know. The Big Bang isn't proven (and never could be with modern means) and alternate dimensions aren't a proven reality; it's all just theory at this point. But I feel, deep down, that if a person want to truly know anatta, he/she should look to themselves first and the stars second. Perhaps the everyday world is so mundane and habit-centered that it's very difficult to break free of the inherent illusion of permanence through that route. Metta, James 17490 From: James Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 0:36am Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta --- "Robert Epstein " wrote: The important point about anatta is what it > denies; it is after all a negative term, not a positive one; it points > to the absence of a reality, not a 'thing' that is a 'non-self'. Rob Epstein, Wow! This phrase is mind-blowing to me. You are quite correct, anatta is a position of negation and not a position of affirmation. The ramifications of this 'philosophical/analytical posturing' of the Buddha are numerous and extremely revealing. The ramifications in a historical and modern perspective are a negation of the historical atmosphere of Siddhartha's time period and a negation of the predominate view of existence which still exists. I am very thankful that you opened my eyes to this reality/insight! Thank you. Metta, James ps. I want to 'pull out my crystal ball' for a moment :-). I have looked at your pictures and the pictures of your children in the files section of this group and all I want to say in this public forum is: "Lord of the Rings". You should know what I mean. I look forward to future contact/assistance. 17491 From: Sarah Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 3:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello Dear Phra Piyadhamma, Thank you for taking the time to introduce yourself and to share all the interesting information. A couple of years ago exactly we were in Cambodia and really appreciated the keen interest in dhamma amongst both the bhikkhus and the lay people we met. I'm sure I speak on behalf of everyone here when I send our very best wishes for your life as a monk. I also hope you find the discussions on DSG helpful. We appreciate that you will only be able to participate from time to time. With respect, Sarah ====== --- "phrapiyadhammo " wrote: > Hello List, > > I am responding to Jonothan and Sarah's welcome to DSG note. Thought > I would take the time to introduce myself. 17492 From: Sarah Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 3:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] How I came to Buddism Dear David, Thank you also for kindly letting us know the unusual circumstances in which you 'came to Buddhism'. Who knows - maybe without the wounds and surgery we wouldn't be discussing dhamma with you now. Conditions are so very intricate. I'm glad to read all your reflections and sincerely hope you're able to continue to share and benefit from discussions here. Are you still in the Boston area, I wonder? Best wishes, Sarah ====== --- "chase8383 " wrote: > In June of 1968 I was at a Military Hospital, just outside of Boston Ma. > USA. 17493 From: chase8383 Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 3:28am Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Rob You said "it is after all a negative term, not a positive one; it points to the absence of a reality, not a 'thing' that is a 'non-self'." A simple example would be a sweater. If you look at a sweater it looks like it has a self. But it doesn't. It is made up of wool, and that wool was processed by humans who than made the sweater. But when we look at the sweater we can't see the sheep or the workers who produced the sweater. So Buddhist negate the selfness of a sweater in order to reduce the tendency to see the world as an us vs. them existence. To negate the false perception of duality. Peace, David 17494 From: chase8383 Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 3:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] How I came to Buddism Hi Sarah I am still in the Boston area. David 17495 From: chase8383 Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 4:12am Subject: No-self No-self is about peace of mind. It is about seeing the suchness of thing. It is about non-fear. And it is about compassion. I first came across no-self as a soldier. When you are fighting an enemy the concept of duality is in a heightened condition. War is after all the ultimate them vs. us state of mind. But as I looked down on the first dead enemy soldier I saw, I had the opposite reaction. I realized that he was just like me. Young, there not because he wanted to be but, because he was caught up in the karma of the times. As I looked through his personal belongings I found a picture of a family, his family, I'm sure. I was overwhelmed by compassion. I had killed their son, their brother. They became my family, the sadness they would feel when they learned of his death became the sadness of my family. The interconnectedness of this world suddenly came crashing down on me. I work very hard to make sure I never forget it. Peace, David 17496 From: peterdac4298 Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 4:35am Subject: Re: The "Perky effect" Hi David I really don't think the scientific approach helps much in managing the human predicament. It's a bit like boiling an egg, just to prove you don't have to take a five year apprenticeship to become a master chef. The Buddha taught that we have six senses, five physical and one mental. He also taught mindfulness of the body as part of the four foundations of mindfulness in his path to liberation. He taught very abstract approaches to understanding the Human predicament, also some very colourful cosmological approaches too. All this without having a clue as to the functions or purpose of the brain or indeed much of the rest of the body to which we direct mindfulness. From this it is clear to me that the only science needed, to see things as they really are, is little more than the Buddha's slant on the Vedic interpretation of the four elements and a Terrestrial centric view of the Cosmos. But let us not rubbish the experimental approach too much, it certainly has its place, and a centrally heated room in an English winter is definitely one of them. We have an advantage over previous generations due to the experiments on the Split Brain population, resulting in a fairly clear idea of the functions of the two halves of the brain. Of particular interest is the right hemisphere controlling the left hand side of the body. Having worked through all the exercises in that art book "Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain" by Betty Edwards, and achieving the advertised results, I have a lot of respect for Neural science theory, indeed find it quite fascinating. But science is still science. It needs reproducible and repeatable results so as to be independently verifiable. Even then we only _accept_ a consensus view rather than repeating the experiments for ourselves. Even if we could repeat such experiments, others would either have to believe us or repeat them themselves, and so on ad infinitum. It is much the same with the Dhamma, but in this case the Buddha tells us _not_ to believe anything but to find out everything for ourselves. Hence we all know the various phenomena that occur during practice. But in a Helio Centric society, cannot prove it to any non practitioners. Who all seem to have a paranoid obsession for cast iron proof, even though such standards are not needed for the acceptance of scientific phenomena. I don't really know where this is getting me, but sure felt a need to say something like it for quite some time. Cheers Peter --- "chase8383 " wrote: > Hi All > > Perhaps those having trouble with images may find this interesting. > > The following is from "Zen and the Brain", by Dr. James H. Austin, Page 388, 389 > > "Many campuses have an apocryphal tale about some absent-minded professor. If it is a math professor, he will have become totally absorbed in visually imagining an equation. As a result, he will have walked far past the door to his own mathematics building, and will finally have come to, say, in front of the gym. The easy assumption: the don was simply "distracted". He hadn't paid enough attention to all those visual clues that were obviously out in plain sight, if not right under his very nose. > > Back in 1910, Perky asked his human subjects to generate the image of a banana. While they were describing it, he than placed a facsimile of a banana directly in front of their gaze. The dangling artificial banana was clearly in plain sight. Surprisingly, while Perky's subjects were imaging, they didn't register this facsimile, nor did they identify it. How could anyone overlook a banana? > > The " Perky effect" is more than a curious bit of trivia. The effect has since been confirmed and extended far beyond bananas. Indeed, subjects still neglect the external object in front of their line of sight. It doesn't have to be the same one as the one which they are actively imagining. Clearly, we share, with the professor, an ability to blot out other visual functions while in the act of pulling up images into the mental foreground. This is an active process of suppression, not one that merely overlooks an object that has received a slightly lower priority. Imagining in, blots out. " > > Peace, Daivd 17497 From: nidive Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 7:09am Subject: Re: Matter/AntiMatter Hi James, I have this thought: If understanding the universe or the beginning of the universe is essential to gain insight into anatta, I am sure the Buddha would have taught it. If scientific reasonings are enough to gain insight into anatta, I am sure the Buddha would have taught science. But the Buddha took another path to gain insight into anatta. In essence, reasonings about anatta is not the same as insight into anatta. Reasonings about anatta does not equal to about the nature of anatta. It is like monkeys discussing about how the banana tastes like without having tasted it. I think it is futile to pursue the knowledge of the nature of anatta through scientific reasonings. Without the input of insight into anatta into the mind, the mind remains forever 'boxed up' in its own shell. The mind may think about, speculate about and reason about the nature of anatta, but it will never what the nature of anatta is. NEO Swee Boon Q: Am I the mind or is the mind me? What exactly is the mind? Does it exist in the ultimate sense? A: I am not the mind nor the mind me. There is only a citta and numerous cetasikas RIGHT NOW, but as for the mind - (I) know not of its existence. 17498 From: chase8383 Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 8:29am Subject: Re: The "Perky effect" Hi peter I posted that as an alternative explanation for visual hallucinations during meditation or contemplation. Not as a tool to live by. Peace, David "> Hi David > > I really don't think the scientific approach helps much in managing > the human predicament. It's a bit like boiling an egg, just to > prove you don't have to take a five year apprenticeship to become a > master chef. > > The Buddha taught that we have six senses, five physical and one > mental. He also taught mindfulness of the body as part of the four > foundations of mindfulness in his path to liberation. > > He taught very abstract approaches to understanding the Human > predicament, also some very colourful cosmological approaches too. > All this without having a clue as to the functions or purpose of the > brain or indeed much of the rest of the body to which we direct > mindfulness. > > From this it is clear to me that the only science needed, to see > things as they really are, is little more than the Buddha's slant on > the Vedic interpretation of the four elements and a Terrestrial > centric view of the Cosmos." 17499 From: Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 4:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? In a message dated 12/7/2002 7:32:48 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi James, > > You are right that there is no emptiness in and of itself. In the suttas > 'emptiness' always qualifies a container, like an empty cup. What is > empty (of a self) is usually the khandhas; sometimes 'empty' qualifies a > narrower object. If you have a "Wisdom" Majjhima Nikaya it is > interesting to look up all the instances of 'empty' with the index. I > don't think nibbana is called empty (could be wrong). Maybe because it > isn't a container?? > > Larry > Hi Larry. The famous passage in the suttas that goes ... "all conditioned things are impermanent, all conditioned things are suffering, ALL THINGS ARE NOT SELF. Sense the last of these three statements excludes the word "conditioned," it is usually considered that the Buddha meant for it to include Nibbana. If this is a correct interpretation, impermanence and suffering are not applicable to Nibbana but no-self is. TG 17500 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 10:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello Dear Sarah, Thank you for the warm welcome. Yes, Dhamma is the heart of the Khmer people from the convential beliefs all the way up to ultimate truth of the nature of the way things really are....liberating Dhamma. Good in the begining, good in the middle, and good in the end. There are now over twenty thousand Bhikkhu's in Cambodia. Up from zero twenty three years ago! There is still much work to do to insure the survival of Buddhasasana in Cambodia. The old monks with the knowledge, and Pali scholars are few and far between. The only ones who survived had to disrobe or die, or escape to America. So, many of the new Monks are lacking in knowledge, which fortuantly members of the Thai sangha are working to re-establish properly (like one of my Acariya's Phra Maha Somsak. There is no end to the amount of good one can do, and so little time to make a difference so that the path of liberation...cessation of suffering remains in the world for future generations. On another note. I do very much appreciate your welcome on this list. Many thanks for the best wishes for this new life as a monk. I hope to learn much here, and perhaps contribute over the years. My home Wat has the entire Tipitaka in English including all the important books of the Abhidhamma pitaka. I know a lot of the members from D- list. One thing I did at the ordination was asking the sangha to recoginize past good deeds and forgiveness for my past missdeeds. I also had to ask my mother for forgiveness for any way in which I treated her ill and with disrespect before asking her permission to ordain. There are many people on this list who are good caring and compassionate individuals like Robert K., Christine, Robert E., Stephen, and many more who I have been disrespectfull to by action, thought and deed because of silly trivial dissagreements on points of Dhamma. When in fact they are all good caring and kind people who are not deserving of the way that I treated them as a lay person on D- list. To them and all that I have offended in the past I am sorry for any way in which I have treated you ill by thought, deed or action. I ask you all for forgiveness. P.S. For James: Read carefully what Robert Edison and Howard wrote to you about Anatta they are spot on. Much Metta and Karuna, Phra Piyadhammo > Dear Phra Piyadhamma, > > Thank you for taking the time to introduce yourself and to share all the > interesting information. A couple of years ago exactly we were in Cambodia > and really appreciated the keen interest in dhamma amongst both the > bhikkhus and the lay people we met. > > I'm sure I speak on behalf of everyone here when I send our very best > wishes for your life as a monk. I also hope you find the discussions on > DSG helpful. We appreciate that you will only be able to participate from > time to time. > > With respect, > > Sarah 17501 From: James Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 10:38am Subject: Laters :-) (was: Re: Matter/AntiMatter) --- "nidive " wrote: > Hi James, > > I have this thought: If understanding the universe or the beginning > of the universe is essential to gain insight into anatta, I am sure > the Buddha would have taught it. If scientific reasonings are enough > to gain insight into anatta, I am sure the Buddha would have taught > science. > > But the Buddha took another path to gain insight into anatta. > > In essence, reasonings about anatta is not the same as insight into > anatta. Reasonings about anatta does not equal to about > the nature of anatta. It is like monkeys discussing about how the > banana tastes like without having tasted it. > > I think it is futile to pursue the knowledge of the nature of anatta > through scientific reasonings. Without the input of insight into > anatta into the mind, the mind remains forever 'boxed up' in its own > shell. The mind may think about, speculate about and reason about > the nature of anatta, but it will never what the nature of > anatta is. > > NEO Swee Boon > Q: Am I the mind or is the mind me? What exactly is the mind? Does > it exist in the ultimate sense? > A: I am not the mind nor the mind me. There is only a citta and > numerous cetasikas RIGHT NOW, but as for the mind - (I) know not of > its existence. Neo and All, I was not proposing that this theory was going to make anyone enlightened or that even pondering it was going to make anyone enlightened. We are all having a hard time determining the basis for reality when the concept of anatta is inserted into the picture. Much of this is due to our conditioning and knowledge of scientific laws of the universe. The person who says he can escape the influence of such laws on perception as he thinks about the nature of the universe or everyday reality is self-deluded. I was proposing that reality is quite real and that anatta is quite real. I was proposing that the two could be explained metaphysically and scientifically. That would not be the end of insight or the end of the big picture. In other words, there doesn't need to exist a dichotomy between Eastern and Western philosophy or religious and scientific views and one should not be limited to discuss either. The Buddha stressed the most strongly, before he died, that his monks were to be a `light unto themselves". Have you ever wondered why the Lord Buddha didn't teach uniformly; have his monks memorize his teachings; or why he personally didn't record his teachings? Before, I didn't understand why. Now I think I do. He didn't want his teachings to become trapped in the worlds of semantics and the rigidity of time. But it is too late now. They have been trapped and pieces lost, and he are all hovering over the incomplete puzzle… but not allowing ourselves to find the missing pieces in the here and now. If anyone believes that over a period of three thousand years that the Tipitaka has preserved, verbatim, the original teachings of the Buddha is again self-delusional. We all instinctively know this. We all know that we are missing something. But rather than searching for it in ourselves and in our culture, by our own volition, and with our own cognition…like the Buddha said we should, we keep going back to the Tipitaka in the vain hope that we have missed something. Nope, we haven't missed anything. It isn't there. The Tipitaka + yourself = wisdom; The Tipitaka + The Tipitaka = The Tipitaka. The moderators of this group informed me that my group posts need to focus on the Tipitaka and the Tipitaka only, as per the group description. That is understandable; I can respect that; but that is not what I need for me. I came here to get answers about the Abhidhamma, I feel satisfied that I have gotten my answers, and it is time for me to leave now. I have greatly enjoyed my time in this group and find the members very intelligent. I am on a journey and this has been a pleasant and rewarding stop. Good Luck to you all. Metta, James 17502 From: Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 0:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi TG, I agree nibbana is not self. What I meant was I don't think 'sunnata' qualifies 'nibbana' in the majjhima nikaya. But I haven't checked yet, so I could be wrong. 'Sunnata' isn't used very often, to my recollection. Maybe it wouldn't make sense to say nibbana is coreless or hollow. Is there a pali expert in the house? Larry 17503 From: Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 0:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi again TG, Here's one way of reasoning it. Sunnata seems to be a result of compounding so the uncompounded element couldn't be sunnata. I'm not sure if this is valid as nibbana is such a special case. What do you think? Larry 17504 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 1:09pm Subject: Out of Cooran - Metta is first "developed" towards oneself :) Dear All, Returned from the great weekend at Cooran (6 humans out-numbered by 'The Cats' - incl. the superb 'Smokey', size rules! just ignore the treadmill remarks.) reinvigorated and looking forward again to studying, sharing, living the Dhamma. Much to everyone's delight, Steve (Bodhi2500) was able to make the 'sleepover', though perhaps we should have asked for I.D. such was the difference in his appearance from last time after his trip to Thailand, the 'radical' haircut, and the beard and moustache :-) Wonderful to have his input on the Dhamma including the new knowledge of the Vinaya. Andrew and KenH - great companions as usual, non-stop stimulating discussions, rustling of pages to verify points, differing views 'heated' only to a comfortable level. And gratitude for KenH's invariable, insightful, (incessant?) reminders of non- self, nama and rupa. :-) Very glad to have Andrew's valuable contributions and companionship again after a hard slog at Uni. this semester. On ya! Just a further question Regarding Metta Towards Self. (Surely you didn't think the debate had gone away - no, no - it is just lying dormant under the ashes, but the coals are still glowing . I wonder what the Visuddhimagga means when this is written. (p.322 - 'The Divine Abidings' vs. 8 ff.) "8. First of all it should be developed only towards oneself, doing it repeatedly thus: 'May I be happy and free from suffering' or 'May I keep myself free from enmity, affliction and anxiety and live happily'. "9. If that is so, does it not conflict with what is said in the texts? For there is no mention of any development of it towards oneself in what is said in the Vibhanga, 'And how does a bhikkhu dwell pervading one direction with his heart 'filled with lovingkindness? Just as he would feel loving-kindness on seeing a dearly loved person, so he pervades all 'beings with lovingkindness' (Vibh. 272) and in what is said in the Patisambhida, 'In what five ways is the mind-deliverance of lovingkindness [practised] with unspecified pervasion? May all beings be free from enmity, affliction and anxiety and live happily. May all breathing things [297] ... all who are born ... all persons ... all those who have a personality be free from enmity, affliction and anxiety and live happily' (Ps. ii, 130), and in what is said in the Metta-sutta, 'In joy and safety may all beings buy joyful at heart' (Sn. 145). [Does it not conflict with those texts?] "10. It does not conflict. Why not? Because that refers to absorption. But this [initial development towards oneself] refers to [making oneself] an example. For even if he developed lovingkindness for a hundred or a thousand years in this way, 'I am happy' and so on, absorption would never arise. But if he develops it in this way 'I am happy. Just as I want to be happy and dread pain, as I want to live and not to die, so do other beings, too', making himself the example, then desire for other beings' welfare and happiness arises in him. And this method is indicated by the Blessed One's saying, 'I visited all quarters with my mind 'Nor found I any dearer than myself; 'Self is likewise to every other dear; 'Who loves himself will never harm another' (S. i, 75; Ud. 47) '11 So he should first, as example, pervade himself with lovingkindness.' Now, does That settle That? Metta is first "developed" towards oneself? ;) metta, Christine 17505 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 1:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello Phra Piyadhammo Sir, Please, it would be a kindness if you would think no more of the past - we are reborn each moment and are not the same selves as those who were so full of 'sound and fury' elsewhere. I am happy for you in your new life, wish you well and will follow your journey with interest. I, too, ask for forgiveness if my words or manner were the condition for the arising of dosa at any time. with respect and mudita, Christine --- "phrapiyadhammo " wrote: 17506 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 2:49pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Forgiveness Dear Chris and Jon, I very much appreciate Jon's reminder why it is beneficial to apologize for /acknowledge one's error. In doing so, we resolve not to repeat such mistakes. And in following thru (instead of just thinking about it), one may also reduce one's own conceit (mana) when one apologizes (don't we have the feeling sometimes that we should apologize, but our conceit prevents that?). This resolution is, in fact, done by both monks and laypeople. People report that they become less angry if they understand that they are hearing such unpleasant sound because they themselves must have done bad deeds in the past: one must reap what one sows. On the other hand, if one think that the person (doing the scolding / bad deeds) too, must reap what he/she sows, we must examine whether this thought is just a muted anger (wishing other people unpleasant result) under the guise of wisdom. I think there are benefits in forgiving others. By forgiving others, we give the person (and others) the gift of harmlessness (abhaya), we abstain from wrong words and wrong deeds, and we develop the beautiful states in our daily life (be it metta or loving-compassion [karuna]). Best of all, if one sees the anger as just a conditioned dhamma, not me, not my anger, then one is benefiting from the unparalleled wisdom of the Buddha, and starting to see a way out of this endless samsara. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: Jonothan Abbott [mailto:jonoabb@y...] > As regards any wrong done by oneself, one is encouraged to > acknowledge the error and resolve not to repeat > it. In the order of > monks, this takes the form of a confession procedure. > 17507 From: bodhi2500 Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 4:26pm Subject: Re: Out of Cooran - Metta is first "developed" towards oneself :) Hi I've been "nudged" to come out of lurking, so here I am. I guess I'm to blame for the reemergence of the "do/do not direct Metta to wards oneself" thread as I heard another Dhamma talk on Metta where the speaker was saying that first "direct metta to oneself", which promted me to reread the Visuddhimagga on the Brahmavihara's and found the quote Christine quoted below, I then brought it up at the SEQDSG gathering. To my understanding the Sutta's on the subject aren't clear(and to all as to himself). What I would like to know is, are there any commentary quotes that specifically say "Do not direct Metta towards oneself". As to my "radical" new appearance, Christine you forgot to mention my lack of eye brows as well... Take care Steve --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear All, > > Returned from the great weekend at Cooran (6 humans out-numbered > by 'The Cats' - incl. the superb 'Smokey', size rules! just ignore > the treadmill remarks.) reinvigorated and looking forward again to > studying, sharing, living the Dhamma. > Much to everyone's delight, Steve (Bodhi2500) was able to make > the 'sleepover', though perhaps we should have asked for I.D. such > was the difference in his appearance from last time after his trip to > Thailand, the 'radical' haircut, and the beard and moustache :-) > Wonderful to have his input on the Dhamma including the new > knowledge of the Vinaya. Andrew and KenH - great companions as usual, > non-stop stimulating discussions, rustling of pages to verify points, > differing views 'heated' only to a comfortable level. And gratitude > for KenH's invariable, insightful, (incessant?) reminders of non- > self, nama and rupa. :-) Very glad to have Andrew's valuable > contributions and companionship again after a hard slog at Uni. this > semester. On ya! > > Just a further question Regarding Metta Towards Self. (Surely you > didn't think the debate had gone away - no, no - it is just lying > dormant under the ashes, but the coals are still glowing . > I wonder what the Visuddhimagga means when this is written. (p.322 - > 'The Divine Abidings' vs. 8 ff.) "8. First of all it should be > developed only towards oneself, doing it repeatedly thus: 'May I be > happy and free from suffering' or 'May I keep myself free from > enmity, affliction and anxiety and live happily'. > "9. If that is so, does it not conflict with what is said in the > texts? For there is no mention of any development of it towards > oneself in what is said in the Vibhanga, 'And how does a bhikkhu > dwell pervading one direction with his heart 'filled with > lovingkindness? Just as he would feel loving-kindness on seeing a > dearly loved person, so he pervades all 'beings with lovingkindness' > (Vibh. 272) and in what is said in the Patisambhida, 'In what five > ways is the mind-deliverance of lovingkindness [practised] with > unspecified pervasion? May all beings be free from enmity, > affliction and anxiety and live happily. May all breathing things > [297] ... all who are born ... all persons ... all those who have a > personality be free from enmity, affliction and anxiety and live > happily' (Ps. ii, 130), and in what is said in the Metta-sutta, 'In > joy and safety may all beings buy joyful at heart' (Sn. 145). [Does > it not conflict with those texts?] > "10. It does not conflict. Why not? Because that refers to > absorption. But this [initial development towards oneself] refers to > [making oneself] an example. For even if he developed lovingkindness > for a hundred or a thousand years in this way, 'I am happy' and so > on, absorption would never arise. But if he develops it in this > way 'I am happy. Just as I want to be happy and dread pain, as I > want to live and not to die, so do other beings, too', making himself > the example, then desire for other beings' welfare and happiness > arises in him. And this method is indicated by the Blessed One's > saying, > 'I visited all quarters with my mind > 'Nor found I any dearer than myself; > 'Self is likewise to every other dear; > 'Who loves himself will never harm another' (S. i, 75; Ud. 47) > '11 So he should first, as example, pervade himself with > lovingkindness.' > > Now, does That settle That? Metta is first "developed" towards > oneself? ;) > > metta, > Christine 17508 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 5:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello Dearest Christine, Many thanks for this post, and many Blessings to you. I have been reflecting on what to say in response to your kind post during Meditation after this evenings chant. Then when we ended with the Metta chant I smiled and all was well. I knew to convey this was the proper response to your post. I also would like to share from the Navakovada (instructions for newly ordained Bhikkhus and Samanera's compiled by Somdet Phra Maha Samana Chao Krom Phraya Vajirananavarorasa) page 59 Sattaka-Groups Of Seven #2 Seven Ariyan Treasures: These "Treasures" are the wealth of virtue that is found in the characters of those who are "excellent," and are called "Ariyan Treasures." 1. Saddha: They have faith in those things in which one should have faith. 2. Sila: They look after their bodily action and speech, so that they shall be right and proper. 3. Hiri: They are ashamed at the doing of evil and dishonest things. 4. Ottapa: They are shocked and afraid to do evil. 5. Bahusacca: They are people who have listened and heard much. In other words, they remember much Dhamma and have knowledge of many things. 6. Caga: They renounce, give away to and share with those whom it is right to do so. 7. Panna: They know all about what things have value and what things have no value. These Seven Ariyan Treasures are superior to external treasures like silver and gold. One should search for them so as to have them on one's own charachter. May we all strive diligently to drop the unwholesome, cultivate the wholesome, and purify the mind. I will try to keep in touch, at least if, and when at all possible. I will be staying in Thailand for a year or so (or longer). For awhile at Wat Suan Mokkh then perhaps a Wat where my Achaan stayed, before he spent many years at Wat Pho, which is in Surin Thailand near Cambodia, so that I might learn to speak Khmer. I will be able to get photos of our trip to Cambodia posted in the Photo section. So, thank you for the interest I will do my best to keep updates. Christine May you be well and happy Much Karuna and Mudita, in Dhamma Phra Piyadhammo > Phra Piyadhammo > Sir, > > Please, it would be a kindness if you would think no more of the > past - we are reborn each moment and are not the same selves as those > who were so full of 'sound and fury' elsewhere. I am happy for you in > your new life, wish you well and will follow your journey with > interest. I, too, ask for forgiveness if my words or manner were the > condition for the arising of dosa at any time. > > with respect and mudita, > Christine > 17509 From: bodhi2500 Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 6:20pm Subject: Maranasati Hi Another subject that came up at the SEQDSG was Maranasati. My first thought was that it may be Sati that arises taking the "death" or "dissolution" of momentary formations (citta/rupa?) as object. But reading the Vis. it says "this is not what is intended" It seems to be saying in Vis. and Sutta's that what is Maranasati is that the object of Maranasati is the concept(though as I understand it a concept can not be a object of sati?) "all beings are subject to death" and different reflections on death of beings. The Vis. also mentions "In the ultimate sense the life-moment of living beings is extreamly short, being only as much as the occurrence of a single citta", but this seems to be only one of 8 aspects of Maranasati, The other 7 being concepts as object? Thank-you Steve 17510 From: Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 7:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Maranasati Hi Steve, I'm just guessing on this but I think the idea is to look at a dead body and develop a sense of revulsion toward it and, by extension, one's own body. There does seem to be a mix of thinking and direct experience but there really isn't any theorizing or speculation. Revulsion goes along with the general theme of foulness of the body that characterizes kayanupassana. I don't know how foulness is applied to mindfulness of breathing or some of the other body practices but I'm sure it will come up for discussion when we get to it in the study group. Robert K. and Kom might have some thoughts on this as well. Larry 17511 From: peterdac4298 Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 8:26pm Subject: Re: Mara Hi James First of all, I'd like to apologize to all members of the dsg for introducing a thread that pulls the focus away from the study of the triple gem. My intention was to bring up an example from daily life that was at most a little extreme, but still recognisably typical. I should have made it more explicit in my previous post that the phenomena I am describing are nothing more than cases of common telepathy. Telepathy is one of the psychic powers common to meditators as described in various passages in the Suttas when a certain degree of Samadhi is developed. The danger of any of these powers is that they are very seductive to the ego as conceited attachments and thus become serious obstacles to progress. My current predicament is indeed heavy, but seems to be quite recent in origin. I would say that it is all due primarily to my own lack of wisdom. I should have done the same as everyone else with such things and just let these things go - as and when they arise. But somehow or other, greed, hatred and delusion got into the act, and I have been trying to extract myself ever since. A misguided sense of compassion if ever there was one, but such is the nature of confusion and conceit. Teachers have always stressed that meditation should be practiced with wise reflection and clear comprehension, and unwittingly this is exactly what has not been happening with my own practice. The way out is to cultivate insight, with progressively increasing clarity, that the right view of no-self is at the very heart of things as they are. I used to avoid or dilute this by saying that it is equivalent to the view that all arising things are interdependently and progressively conditioned. But this view does not quite cut out the tendency to identify with the detached observer, so much beloved in our modern scientific age. No-self hits the nail right on the head and is the only thing that has any worthwhile impact on my current self made predicament: thankfully with reasonably encouraging results, but conceit is insidious and the battle is far from over. My reason for 'coming out' was to share with others whom I thought had a similar problem, but it seems to have compounded the problem instead. Well you don't know if you don't try, but this must not be an excuse for recklessness and disruption. Hence this attempt to bring it all to a close. Part of the reason for my last disrobing was to go through this self made quagmire of confusion as a layman so as not to bring the robe into disrepute. I returned for a while to my previous teacher, Alan James, who thought the whole thing was hilariously funny, but had the kindness and compassion to advise me to "bring it all back down to basics". This is something that I took to heart and have been endeavouring to do ever since. It has dragged out for so long principally due to a lack of commitment and discipline in applying the practice, which in turn is due to weak wisdom. Slow learner, so who's perfect? Cheers Peter --- "James " wrote: > > Peter, > > First, concerning the trivial matter for you, the significant matter > for me, I have always gotten hung up on the phrase `no self' because > of my extensive education in psychology. I have seen the > word `self' as something that could only belong to living entities, > predominately humans, and could not be used in reference to > inanimate objects. "No essence" breaks my mind free of that > conditioning and I am able to see and understand much more. Words > can be the key—to either let you out or lock you in. > > Thank you for sharing that information about yourself. And let me > assure you, you are not crazy. However, you do have a significant > problem, which I don't know if anyone has put it to you this way or > not, but you have excess/heavy karma. Before I go into the > explanation let me make a few things clear: this knowledge that I > have about certain people is not based on sutta information, I have > never read of it in a sutta but I still know it is real; I do have > psychic ability in the areas of reading thoughts (especially hidden > ones), knowing future events, knowing other people's psychic > abilities, and knowing the age and weight of a people's karma > stream. I have written previously about this on the Internet and I > don't care what people think about it (which is usually skepticism, > denial, irritation, and fear). I don't have to be near the person > to do this; I can do it from a distance. But, unlike you, I have > never had such personal encounters, or even visions, of otherworldly > beings as I have had recently. > > With this said, I believe that you, Peter, have an extremely old > karma stream. You are probably attracted to a great number of world > religions, from the ancient Druids and Egyptians to Catholicism, but > you know that Buddhism holds the most promise for you. > Additionally, you have held positions of `seer' and `priests' in > practically all of the earth's religions, religions of species from > other planets, and in deva realms for an immeasurably long time. > You now realize that your present life is one of profound > significance for you. Your current manifestation is one where you > can finally begin the process of ending this samsara existence, > which weighs heavy on you. Unfortunately, you have dragged along > the experiences and feelings from your previous lifetimes. Like > thoughts that we say to ourselves, "Oh, I have to remember this…I > may need it one day." You have dragged along experience after > experience and associated feelings after feelings from one life to > another. And the thought of letting all of that go terrifies you; > you see it as your treasure chest of wisdom. Now that you feel this > existence as so important, you have been rummaging through that > chest and re-examining old karma. I bet that you even experience > many vivid dreams about living in ancient times and seeing the > passage of time through lives. I also bet that you don't think > predominately in terms of days, months and years—you think > predominately in terms of millennium, centuries, and eons. But this > dragging up of your old karma looking for answers and wisdom is > pulling entities out of your past, especially deva and higher > realms, and most of them are none to pleased about it. They want > you to break the ties you have with them. You also attach more > strongly to people/entities than material objects or experiences. > > You are correct, Vipassana meditation is the way for you to > eliminate this heavy karma. If you are doing it right, you should > feel your body get very hot as the excess karma is burned away. You > will also feel sadness and regret, which will translate into tears > and physical pain where none should be. However, I sense that your > meditation is predominately visualizations, against your will and > with your will sometimes, and that type will only strengthen those > ties, not eliminate them. > > You are in good company in this group because most everyone also has > an old karma stream, but the oldest ones have lightened the weight > of it through Vipassana meditation. I, however, have a relatively > young karma stream for someone as spiritually focused as myself. > Many in this group, with old karma streams, can sense this about me > and it is puzzling and frustrating to them. I should not know the > things I do, but I do. And my karma stream is very light. I am an > upstart, a show-off, who hasn't paid my dues. My fortitude has been > my ability to find and really listen to the best teachers. I don't > try to learn something for myself all the time, I ask question, > after question, after question. People with old karma streams have > a hard time doing that. They feel that they must be teachers, not > students. I have always been a student, really. > > I hope this helps you some. Don't worry if other people think you > are crazy. What you know for yourself to be true is true. I won't > tell you to trust me on this. If what I am telling you sounds like > nonsense, ignore it. If it doesn't, listen to it and decide a > course of action for you. I am just a young pup, but I can show an > old dog a new trick or two. ;-) > > Metta, James > --- "peterdac4298 > " wrote: > > Hi James > > > > I'd like to start by saying I think I have a similar problem > > of 'external' interference in my psychic (as opposed to physical > or > > physiological) aspect. > > I get both male and female entities, both benign and malevolent. > Of > > the four types male, female, good or bad, it is the malevolent > > female that is the most awful - for this male yogi. The good ones > > are very good, very supportive and are thoroughly nice to know > too. > > The bad guys just need a good hiding, they either respect you for > it > > and become friends or they just disappear knowing that they can't > > bother you. 17512 From: Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 4:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? In a message dated 12/8/2002 12:43:44 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi again TG, > > Here's one way of reasoning it. Sunnata seems to be a result of > compounding so the uncompounded element couldn't be sunnata. I'm not > sure if this is valid as nibbana is such a special case. What do you > think? > > Larry > Hi Larry I don't think its valid. Sunnata is not the result of compounding. It is not a "thing" that arises as a result. It is a lack of something. It is a lack of self. "Void is the world...because it is void of a self and anything belonging to a self." S.XXXV, 85. Nibbana is as selfless as samsara. The unconditioned and conditioned are both empty of self. TG 17513 From: Sarah Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 10:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Expressions of gratitude. Hi Peter, I’m finding all your posts very interesting and appreciate greatly that you’re able to share your experiences and difficulties. There’s no need to apologise at all and any responses have been very well intended too. When I read your background details, they were a condition for lots of stories and lobha on my part. Like you, I left from England for India in the early 70s (as one did in those days!!).Like you did at another time, I spent several months living in a Forest Monastery outside of Colombo. Like you (different dates), I lived in Hampstead and was there when A.Sumedho first came to be resident. I just visited occasionally and one time provided a dana when A.Cha was visiting as well. Cooking has always been an ordeal to be avoided if possible for me. That day, I prepared a curry, various condiments and an apple crumble w/custard to follow, with nervous anticipation. Well, A.Cha just just mixed the curry, rice, condiments, crumble and custard up together in his bowl and we all smiled and laughed. I was introduced by A.Sumedho as being a student of A.Sujin’s and there was a light and pleasant acceptance of different understandings of dhamma. No one tried to persuade or convince anyone of anything and there was no apparent conceit at stake. It was rather like our recent pleasant discussions and the friendly atmosphere with B.Bodhi, B.Anthony and the Chinese Master. I vistied Chithurst a few times, once with K.Sujin (when she stayed with me in Sussex) if I remember rightly - it could have been another time or with Nina. I always had demanding jobs in London - working with delinquent adolescents or in psychiatric centres - so visits to temples were occasional only. Pls give my rgds - Sarah Procter’s (the K.Sujin student;-)) from the 70s- to A.Sumedho if you visit him. Pls mention that I’ve been living overseas for the last 20 years. I’m especially glad to hear about the visit of Badanta Amamdametreya and the introduction of Abhidhamma at Amaravati. Prhaps others will continue their interest or study here as well. Peter, I sympathise and appreciate your sharing of your ‘interference’ experiences and understand how debilitating these can be. I think you make many good points and indeed I think that the key to all difficulties in life is the development of panna (rt understanding). It helps a lot, as you suggest, if we don’t attach especial importance or respond with conceit to any special experience. Anything can happen and to know it has to be the path of detachment is very important. Even those who had attained the highest jhanas and special powers in the time of the Buddha had to give up all attachment and see phenomena for what they were - merely namas and rupas. I was interested in your GP’s comments to ‘carry on with practice’. To you, practice means/meant ‘meditation’ in a particular manner. Perhaps to the GP or others of us, the word may be used in a more general manner to refer to the development of wholesome qualities and growth of wisdom at the present momentand in daily life. Once again I’d like to reiterate your comment relating to samadhi (which of course can be right or wrong samadhi): “The danger of any of these powers is that they are very seductive to the ego as conceited attachments and thus become serious obstacles to progress”. I think this is just the point that Betty and others were making in earlier posts. With the growth of wise reflection, panna and detachment from any idea of self, there will be fewer conditions to cling to and have fear of special experiences and thus fewer obstacles on the path. We’re all slow learners, Peter, no need to be discouraged or to apologize for your helpful and well-considered reflections. Please let us know if further wise reflection and understanding help with the disturbing experiences. Sarah p.s If you’d like to meet a friend to several of us here, Alan Weller, in London (who runs the Zolag website often mentioned), I’m sure he’d be glad to meet you and I find you might find the contact helpful. He’s a very close dhamma friend and we go back to school days in the 60s;-)Let me know off-list if so. I'm not sure if he's reading posts at present or not. ======================================================== 17514 From: Sarah Date: Sun Dec 8, 2002 11:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Out of Cooran - Metta is first "developed" towards oneself :) Hi Steve (& Christine). Thanks for the prompt updates from what was obviously a stimulating and enjoyable weekend. Steve, it may have taken some serious nudging so let me give it some quick reinfocement;-) As Chris will have indicated (and hopefully given you her set of links, but if not see under ‘metta’ in U.P. for a start), this seems to be an area where there are different understandings and as you suggest we can all read the passage from the Vis (ch 1X) she quoted according to these understandings which seem so very clear to us;-) Additional references you may like to check: 1. Commentary to the CariyaPitaka as translated by B.Bodhi at the back of his text on the Brahmajala Sutta and commentaries. 2. Commentary to the metta discourse as translated by B.Nanamoli in the Minor Readings (Khuddakapatha). References are all given to ‘their’ rather than ‘our’ welfare or welfare of others. Let me add a few brief quotes as many members won’t have the texts and they’re not on line. May the quotes be a condition for reflection on the qualities of metta and perhaps other qualities being discussed, such as forgiveness too, rather than the proving or otherwise of any views: From com. to Cariyapitaka, transl by B.Bodhi: “Loving-kindness has the characteristic of promoting the welfare(of living beings); its function is to provide for their welfare, or its function is to remove resentment; its manifestation is kindliness; seeing the agreeable side of beings is its proximate cause.” ***** From the com. to the Metta discourse, transl by B.Nanamoli: “And while maintaining this (thought )in this way, he would maintain it in being by ensuring the absence of any check, malice, or foe, so that it may be unchecked, no malice with or foe (asambaadha.m avera.m asapatta.m). Or else he would maintain, augment, for all the world, in the three divisions of above, below and all around, his thought of love (lovingkindness) unboundedly when it has reached excellence in maintenance-in-being and is unchecked since it finds opportunities everywhere, has no malice since his own annoyance with others has been removed, and has no foe since others’ annoyance with himself has been removed.” ..... “ ‘Let them not wish each other ill: naa~n~nama~n~nassa dukkham icceyya = a~n~nama~n~nassa dukkha.m na iccheyya’. What is meant? Lovingkindness should be maintained in being not only by attention given thus ‘joyful and safe’ etc, but it should also be maintained in being as follows: ‘Oh that no person at all might undo any other person at all in any place on the ground for conceit (maanavatthu)consisting in birth, (property) etc (see Miii 37), and that each might not wish another ill with provocation or resistive thought. “ ***** As I understand the quality of metta (and all the brahma viharas for that matter) as discussed in these references and those that Christine cited from the Vism, the lack of kindness and lack of wishing for pleasant and joyful experiences is not related to ourselves (for whom there is no such lack), but for others. As it explains in the Vism, by reflecting on what we like, i.e to be happy and free from suffering, we can know this is what all others would like too and such a reflection may be a condition for metta when we are with others or think about them. In this way, there is no conflict with the passages in the Vibhanga (from the Abhidhamma, Patisambhidamagga and metta discourse(both from the Suttapitaka)which relate to highly developed metta as explained, for all beings. As is indicated in the Udana sutta, there is indeed no one dearer than the self. The last line quoted from the text, suggesting metta to oneself, should therefore be read in the light of what precedes it, ie ‘making oneself an example’ and ‘nor found I any dearer than myself’. I think when one reads and considers the other brahma viharas in the Visuddhimagga it also becomes more apparent. ***** The abundance of self love may be very apparent when someone seems to show an excess of self-importance. I think it’s just as prevalent, however, when there seems to be an abundance of self loathing or despair. Clinging to self, attachment, which is the near enemy of metta and lack of consideration for others are still at the root of the problem. I think James wrote beautifully about this in a post to one of the Star kids: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m13076.html It’s the one about Patty and Dominique who are both obsessed with their self-importance in different ways. I found it really moving and so did some of the kids it was addressed to. I think that in the end, like the discussions about the authenticity of the Abhidhamma and so on, no amount of quote and requote will help; it depends on panna to understand the present reality and in the case of metta, to understand the difference between wholesome and unwholesome mind-states when they arise. This is the only way that qualities can be known. How does this sound to you, Steve and Chris? Sarah p.s Whilst I understand that by definition the brahma viharas must have other beings as object, this doesn’t preclude there being any other wholesome mental states whilst thinking of ‘oneself’ or ‘one’s’ good or bad deeds performed even though the attachment can jump in very quickly. .....oh and do we get an updated group photo without the eyebrows as well?? =================================== --- "bodhi2500 " wrote: > Hi > I've been "nudged" to come out of lurking, so here I am. I guess > I'm to blame for the reemergence of the "do/do not direct Metta to > wards oneself" thread 17515 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 0:35am Subject: RE: [dsg] Maranasati Hi Steve & Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > > Hi Steve, > > I'm just guessing on this but I think the idea is > to look at a dead body > and develop a sense of revulsion toward it and, > by extension, one's own > body. There does seem to be a mix of thinking and > direct experience but > there really isn't any theorizing or speculation. > Revulsion goes along > with the general theme of foulness of the body > that characterizes > kayanupassana. I don't know how foulness is > applied to mindfulness of > breathing or some of the other body practices but > I'm sure it will come > up for discussion when we get to it in the study > group. Robert K. and > Kom might have some thoughts on this as well. > I don't know much about the contents from Vism, but the objects of the rupa jhana cittas (and most samatha development) are always conceptual. A samatha object is good for a person if by contemplating on the object, the person achieves (and increases) tranquility of the mind, which is free from attachment, anger, and ignorance. I am not at all surprised that the majority of the aspects of Marananusati are conceptual. In reality, there is only one: all conditioned realities fall away --- this is the real death of anything, and this is the most important aspect of death that one should learn for oneself. Without seeing this aspect of reality, liberation is impossible. The conceptual death can only (directly) bring one temporary tranquility of mind. The common theme that I see in the different (samatha) contemplations taught in the tipitaka is the application to oneself. When we see the different deaths, we can see that we too, will (maybe soon) reach this state. We can also see that no matter how hard we try, we cannot escape this state. This reminds us to be diligent to do things we should do, and to be mindful. If you are like me, you will like some parts of your bodies (and maybe others' ;-) ). If you contemplate wisely, you will see that these body parts don't have anything that should be attached to. If you are attached to your hair, you can contemplate about all the things (like blood, puss, oil, etc.) that are the nourishment of a hair. If you are attached to your own skin, you can compare your own skin to the skin of a dead body: they are not that much different visibly. For anapanasati, you can compare your breath to the wind outside the body. You can see that even a big storm eventually comes to a stop: your little fragile breath also comes to a stop, and without this little breath, you will be dead. You can do this with the element of fire (inside fire, outside fire), and the element of earth. Sati is a cetasika that co-arises with all wholesome cittas, even if the citta (and cetacikas) has a concept as its object. When we abstain from bad words and bad deeds, there is sati being mindful (or remebering) to abstain. When we give, there is sati mindful of giving. When we think of the samatha object that brings tranquility, there is sati mindful of the conceptual object. When we directly learn the characteristic of nama and rupa, there is sati mindful of nama and rupa. kom 17516 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 1:43am Subject: Re: Maranasati Hi Steve, Would the contemplation of an actual dead body over time (rupas as visible object, smell, sound) as in the Cemetery Contemplations, be different to the contemplation of the idea of death (one's own or another) or even briefly attending a cremation, in that there is the awareness of realities appearing through the eyes, ears, nose and mind-door when experiencing the continuing processes that a 'close by' dead body undergoes as time passes? Maranasati Mindfulness of Death: {from the Visuddhimagga p.247-259} refers to two kinds of death - timely death (that comes about with the exhaustion of merit or exhaustion of life span or with both) and untimely death(that comes about through kamma that interrupts [other, life-producing] kamma). p.249 vs. 8 " recollecting of death in eight ways, that is to say: 1. as having the appearance of a murderer 2. as the ruin of success 3. by comparison 4. as to sharing the body with many 5. as to frailty of life 6. as signless 7. as to the limitedness of the extent 8. as to the shortness of the moment. The eight ways are given more clarification at: http://www.baynet.net/~arcc/dhamma/death.html Vis. p257 "So while he does his recollecting by means of one or other of these eight ways, his consciousness acquires [the support of] repetition owing to the reiterated attention, mindfulness settles down with death as its object, the hindrances are suppressed, and the jhana factors make their appearance. But since the object is states with individual essences, and since it awakes a sense of urgency, the jhana does not reach absorption and is only access." <<>> And that access is known as 'mindfulness of death' too since it arises through its means. A bhikkhu devoted to mindfulness of death is constantly diligent. He acquires perception of disenchantment with all kinds of becoming (existence). He conquers attachment ot life. He condemns evil. He avoids much storing. He has no stain of avarice about requisites. Perception of impermanence grows in him, following upon which there appear the perceptions of pain and not-self. <<>> And if he does not attain the deathless here and now, he is at least headed for a happy destiny on the break-up of the body. metta, Christine --- "bodhi2500 " wrote: > Hi > Another subject that came up at the SEQDSG was Maranasati. My first > thought was that it may be Sati that arises taking the "death" > or "dissolution" of momentary formations (citta/rupa?) as object. But > reading the Vis. it says "this is not what is intended" It seems to > be saying in Vis. and Sutta's that what is Maranasati is that the > object of Maranasati is the concept(though as I understand it a > concept can not be a object of sati?) "all beings are subject to > death" and different reflections on death of beings. > The Vis. also mentions "In the ultimate sense the life-moment of > living beings is extreamly short, being only as much as the > occurrence of a single citta", but this seems to be only one of 8 > aspects of Maranasati, The other 7 being concepts as object? > > Thank-you > Steve 17517 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 2:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Freewill is out?!;-)?!:-) Hi Rob M, Glad you’re recovering....it’s been Jon’s turn to be down with flu this weekend;-( --- "robmoult " wrote: > I was still under the impression that yoniso manisakara / ayoniso > manasikara arose during the determining stage and thereby > conditioned either kusala or akusala at the javana stage. > > Did we discuss this before? .... Would you mind looking back at the following message from last August: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m11257.html In it, I explained, as I understand, how votthapanna (determining) consciousness is an ahetuka kiriya citta (rootless inoperative consciousness. The cetasikas (mental factors) accompanying it, including manasikara (attention) are therefore also rootless and inoperative and perform their functions accordingly. For example, the ekaggata (concentration) arising with this citta or with a moment of seeing or hearing will neither be right or wrong concentration, it will be ‘rootless’. The same applies to the sanna (perception) or cetana (intention). They perform their functions of ‘directing’, ‘perceiving’(sorry, Suan;-)) or ‘coordinating/willing’ the consciousness and other mental factors to the object. However they don’t direct or will kusala or akusala, for example, so their tasks are not quite the same when they arise with these different kinds of citta. Back to the determining consciousness. It is accompanied by equanimity only and the manaskikara can surely not be wise or unwise which I understand would only arise in the javana process with kusala and akusala cittas (or kiriya cittas for the arahat). Vis XIV (183) discusses cetasikas arising with functional indetrminate consciousness with and without root cause. Earlier in the same chapter (152) it discusses the controlling function of manasikara. It also mentions ‘controller of the cognitive series’ and ‘controller of impulsions’ as terms for the 2 kinds of adverting cosciousness, but makes it clear that they are ‘not included’ under the given sobhana manasikara. Rob, the only reason I’m pursuing this discussion is because I think you are giving this particular consciousness and the role of the accompanying manasikara undue importance in determining the nature of the following javana cittas (of course there couldn’t be the succeeding cittas without this crucial one). I would see the importance of wise and unwise attention as being when they accompany moments of consciousness with lobha or panna or dosa as they arise now and they can be experienced and known as such. What do you think? Sarah ======= 17518 From: bodhi2500 Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 2:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Maranasati Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Sati is a cetasika that co-arises with all wholesome cittas, > even if the citta (and cetacikas) has a concept as its > object. When we abstain from bad words and bad deeds, there > is sati being mindful (or remebering) to abstain. When we > give, there is sati mindful of giving. When we think of the > samatha object that brings tranquility, there is sati > mindful of the conceptual object. When we directly learn > the characteristic of nama and rupa, there is sati mindful > of nama and rupa. Kom Thank-you. I was under the impression that sati could only take paramattha dhamma's as object, hense the sati/concept confusion. So it is a moment of Satipatthana that can only take parammattha dhamma's, not concepts as object? And does Samma Sati only arise in moments of Satipatthana and magga citta's? And Phala citta's?? Steve 17519 From: dragonwriter2 Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 2:55am Subject: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Howard, > > Thanks for that clarification. I agree, but what's an 'I'? "I" or "i" am not really sure :) However here's a poem by Michael Sariban that may or may not be of benefit. Ego Trip So capital I profiles as girder, lines up as railway track; likes to think of itself as steeland able to take great pressure but small i really fancies itself, makes the ultimate understatement, when it's only a performing seal balancing ego on its nose 17520 From: chase8383 Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 3:38am Subject: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi TG You said "Sunnata is not the result of compounding. It is not a "thing" that arises as a result. It is a lack of something. It is a lack of self." I agree. It is the negation of the false perception that compounded things are made up of a self. How could I be here if I wasn't compounded? I didn't manufacture myself. But we think we are a self, therefore the Buddha pointed to Sunnata. Sunnata is the great ego bomb. 17521 From: Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 2:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi, Larry - I seem to recall nibbana being referred to as the "ultimate emptiness", though I don't have a ready citation for that. With metta. Howard In a message dated 12/8/02 3:16:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi TG, > > I agree nibbana is not self. What I meant was I don't think 'sunnata' > qualifies 'nibbana' in the majjhima nikaya. But I haven't checked yet, > so I could be wrong. 'Sunnata' isn't used very often, to my > recollection. Maybe it wouldn't make sense to say nibbana is coreless or > hollow. Is there a pali expert in the house? > > Larry > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17522 From: nidive Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 8:49am Subject: A 'Funny' Question Hi ALL, Here's a 'funny' question. If let's say you attained the first stage of awakening of a sotapanna, would you confide your attainment with any close Dhamma friends? Or would you rather keep it to yourself? NEO Swee Boon 17523 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 8:58am Subject: RE: [dsg] Maranasati Dear Steve, > -----Original Message----- > From: bodhi2500 > So it is a moment of Satipatthana that can only > take parammattha > dhamma's, not concepts as object? I think of it this way. If we look thru the list of vipassana-nana (wisdom clearly comprehending the true chracteristics of nature), you see that we start with: 1) Nama-rupa distinction 2) Conditionality of nama-rupa 3) Rapid rising & falling away of nama-rupa 4) Falling away of nama-rupa ... If concept doesn't truly exist (doesn't have a characteristic), how do you see it rising and falling away? I think the answer is you don't. To clearly see the impermanence of dhamma, the dhamma needs to exist in nature, and hence, only realities can be objects of vipassana-nana. Also, if we look thru the suttas. We can also see whenever the buddha talked about seeing impermanence, what should we see the impermanence of? Always kandhas, (some) ayatanas, (some) dhathus, etc., always real, and never conceptual. > > And does Samma Sati only arise in moments of > Satipatthana and magga > citta's? And Phala citta's?? > No, all sati, rising with sobhana states, is samma, although not all sati is part of the 8-fold path. When we talk about the paths (5-fold, 6-fold, and 8-fold [and 7-fold in some case]), it is always about satipatthana. 5-fold and 6-fold path is the lokiya (mundane) satipatthana, and 8-fold and 7-fold is the lokkutara (supra-mundane) satipathanna. There is also micha-sati, but micha-sati never arises with the sobhana states, but arises with attachment. If there is an attachment, for example, when "we" are trying to see the characteristics of nama or rupa (wanting to see, wanting results --- be it tranquility of mind, vipassana nana, wisdom, wanting to accomplish, etc), that is clearly micha-sati. When we have micha-sati (and all the other 7 micha factors), we can see how we can progress toward micha-liberation (vimutti). kom 17524 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 0:41pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi Simon, Nice to see you here, and read the poem. How true that overt humility often hides a bigger conceit. :-) Are you still in Sulawesi? May you stay safe and free from harm, Christine --- "dragonwriter2 " wrote: > but small i > really fancies itself, > makes the ultimate > understatement, when it's only > a performing seal > balancing ego > on its nose ADVERTISEMENT 17525 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 1:16pm Subject: Re: Forgiveness Dear Paul, Howard, James, Frank, Jon, Kom, and All, Paul, This is a good reminder that "mostly" the results of kamma, the vipaka, are certain. I wonder if they can be weakened or diluted or even if the seeds can be prevented from arising at all ... maybe I'm on the wrong track here, looking for a loop-hole. I still have trouble with the idea that ignorance attracts a more severe vipaka than knowingly doing something wrong. But I'll keep my eye out for the sutta you mention. --------------------------- Howard, Thanks for the link. However, I think the Kakacupana Sutta uses the Simile of the Saw as a training reminder to urge Monks to endure unpleasant aspects of speech. Not as the Buddha's expectation of how one should be able to behave under horrific physical violence. At ATI, it can be found at: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn021.html and it ends with: --->Monks, if you attend constantly to this admonition on the simile of the saw, do you see any aspects of speech, slight or gross, that you could not endure?"<--- I liked this other quote and will try to keep it in my mind, "This person is a fellow-being of mine. Intentionally or unintentionally I myself must have been the source of provocation, or it may be due to a past evil kamma of mine. As it is the outcome of my own action, why should I harbour ill-will towards him?" --------------------------- James, Thanks for this poem. In Bodhi's translation the word 'compassion' is used, instead of the word 'sympathy' - and the arrow that pierces the chest is 'craving'. -------------------------- Frank, What you say here is clear to me, 'The problem with most conventional religious teachings on "forgiveness" is it reinforces clinging to notions of "self", clinging to notions of "others", clinging to even the actions that require forgiveness. Trying to work through and relieve sufferings of complex emotions (with conventional teachings) creates much more sufferring and delusion in the process! The whole basis for the notion of forgiveness (as understood conventionally) is counter to anatta.' Thanks. --------------------------- Jon, Thanks for this reminder "As regards wrong done by others to oneself, the Buddha explained on many occasions the need to understand that people act the way they do because of their accumulated nature, that one is reaping the results of one's own previous deeds...'. Also please see my remarks above to Howard regarding the Kakacupana Sutta. I hope I'm not wrong. Having the expectation from the Buddha that his followers not feel aversion when under horrific physical torture would be 'setting the hurdle too high' for me and for most beings, I think. ----------------------------------- Kom, I agree that if one has done wrong, one should apologise and resolve not to repeat the error in speech or behaviour. I'm glad you pointed out that thinking of the fact that the person who has done wrong to me will reap what he/she sows needs to be examined to discern my own disguised anger. I hadn't considered this before. Seeing anger as a conditioned dhamma - not me, not my anger - anatta and no control again. :) ------------------------------------ metta, Christine --- "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello all, > > I was wondering what the Theravada teachings say > about 'forgiveness'. Christianity has a lot to say about this .. > about asking for one's own forgiveness from others and from the Lord, > about forgiving others, about forgiving oneself. Maybe I'm > still 'trailing clouds of glory' from that faith, but forgiveness > would seem to me to be quite an important thing to ask for and give, > and I wonder why I can't find any teachings. There seems to be some > teachings in Mahayana writings - e.g. Bodhicitta. I looked but I > couldn't find much in Theravada ... accesstoinsight doesn't even > have 'forgiveness' under the subject headings in the sutta > listings. Perhaps it's called something else? > If someone did a wrong to me, would my forgiving them affect the > kammic fruit of their act? Would my not forgiving them affect my > kammic fruit? Somehow I feel the answer is 'no' to the first > and 'yes' to the second. > The mechanism of forgiveness would seem to involve 'acceptance of > self and other', 'metta to both other and self (oops)', 'compassion > for both', 'equanimity', 'putting oneself in the position of the > other', and 'anatta'. Maybe that's why there is a 'forgiveness- > shaped' blank in Theravada - no simple one word topic? > > metta, > Christine 17526 From: James Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 2:27pm Subject: Takin' a Break Hey All, A very sweet member sent me this e-mail I am going to quote at the end of this letter. And Sarah also wrote a very kind e-mail. Thanks to both. Tellingly, they both say the same thing: YOU'RE NUTS!!! :-) Just Kidding. I still believe that the visitations are real, though they have stopped for the time being, but I think the way I am viewing the world now is not so real. To put it in New Age terms: I have lost my center. First I bit off Howard's head, then Nina's head, and then everyone's head. I am obviously not myself. I am going to take a break for a week or two and find my center again. I will be reading but not responding. As the Phoenix who rises from the ashes of his own, self-generated cremation, I hope to rise renewed from this experience. Metta, James "Hi James, It was a pleasure reading your posts, your theories, and thoughts. Any time you are confused and would like to have someone to talk to, feel free to drop by dsg. I'm new to dsg myself, but have found this list quite supportive. Although you may think that I'm a skeptics, but I did notice a change of tone and manner in your posts following the one where you mention about your encounter with Mara. So I'm quite concerned about you like many members who have publicly wrote to you. Anyway, take care of yourself, study dhamma, keep your focus on what you were seeking for, and feel free to drop by dsg again!" 17527 From: Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 3:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi TG, Howard, & David, After thinking about it again I agree with you guys. My only concern was with the grammar, not the dhamma, and I've decided calling nibbana empty is similar to calling space empty. There doesn't have to be a container. There is also an experience of emptiness but I don't know if that is relevant. One thing that occurred to me is when we say there is no self found in nibbana it could be because there is no more looking. Does anyone know what happens in the citta process when nibbana is experienced? Does the nibbana element arise and cease or is the bhavanga stream interrupted without an object arising? Is the nibbana element underlying? Larry 17528 From: Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 3:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi Simon and Howard, As to what is an 'I', I was wondering what are the characteristics of a self (atta) as discussed by the Buddha. I can think of 4: wholeness, appropriation, subjectivity, and permanence. Permanence isn't necessarily for all of eternity; it could be as limited as continuing from one moment to the next. Subjectivity is a do-er and would incorporate control issues. Appropriation is the illusion of attachment, being connected to something, and I think would include identifying with a feeling etc. Wholeness is the appearance of a separate, individual, independent phenomenon. Can you think of any other characteristics of an 'atta'? Larry 17529 From: peterdac4298 Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 5:38pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Expressions of gratitude. Hi Sarah Your highly skillful support is most appreciated. I could go into the details of your post in even more detail but have to sit on such projects for now. It was 04:00am last night when I finally got to bed after working on that last post. I can't keep this up, my shirts will never get ironed, etc! It's not as though my job is demanding, but the great British public soon start to notice if one's sleep deficit starts building up: so does one's employer! I will definitely follow up on your suggestion to make some sort of contact with the Zolag webmaster Alan Weller and let you know, off list, how it goes. As you so rightly say: "...With the growth of wise reflection, panna and detachment from any idea of self, there will be fewer conditions to cling to and have fear of special experiences and thus fewer obstacles on the path..." This very reduction in 'things to cling to' could be a problem in itself, in that those ever fewer remaining things take on ever greater significance simply because there is nothing else to occupy the energy of the defilements. Hah! there must be many times in the life of yer actual typical yogi, when s/he must wish s/he had never started on this path! I often think that that well known expression should be rendered as "...interesting in the beginning, interesting in the middle, and interesting in the end..." We always get the training we need! Cheers Peter 17531 From: Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 2:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi, Larry (and Simon) - In a message dated 12/9/02 6:42:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Simon and Howard, > > As to what is an 'I', I was wondering what are the characteristics of a > self (atta) as discussed by the Buddha. I can think of 4: wholeness, > appropriation, subjectivity, and permanence. Permanence isn't > necessarily for all of eternity; it could be as limited as continuing > from one moment to the next. Subjectivity is a do-er and would > incorporate control issues. Appropriation is the illusion of attachment, > being connected to something, and I think would include identifying with > a feeling etc. Wholeness is the appearance of a separate, individual, > independent phenomenon. > > Can you think of any other characteristics of an 'atta'? > > Larry > > ===================== Hmm, not sure. But this is a good list. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17532 From: Andrew Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 9:02pm Subject: Right livelihood - Samma-ajiva Hello everyone This is my first question for a long time. It pertains to samma-ajiva. In Thanissaro Bhikkhu's translation of the Maha-cattarisaka Sutta, a distinction is drawn between "right livelihood with fermentations, siding with merit, resulting in the acquisitions [of becoming]" and "noble right livelihood, without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path". I do not understand this distinction. I consulted a work by Bhikkhu Bodhi but he does not seem to deal with the distinction. Can anyone assist on this question? Many thanks Andrew 17533 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 10:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ignored.... Hi James the Ignored and Misunderstood;-), --- "James " wrote: > --- In > Oh my goodness! I thought I had answered every letter from Philip > and I don't remember one from little Sandy. Give me the numbers for > these posts and I will respond immediately. > > Since not replying is okay, I won't reply to the rest of this post > ;-) (So There! :-P) Me childish!? HA! :-) > > Metta, James the Ignored :-( ..... ;-) Nothing like a little bit of Kids' Play to bring us to our senses;-) I've just done a little research on the kids posts on list and the their reactions. Finding: Those who compain about being ignored (AKA Philip) are the least ignored and those who don't say a word in protest (AKA little Sandy and Janet) would have good cause;-) Familiar?? (Actually, Philip's protest was only after his first letter which didn't receive an immediate, that day, response;-)) I'll give you numbers for the little girls, partly because I enjoy your letters to the children so much too. There is absolutely NO HURRY ever. Janet: 17128, 17150 (note: her brother Philip was told NOT to reply to her) Sandy: 17149, 17223 I took a few pix. Sometime I'll try to get them to the album to make it easier for anyone replying, though the novelty for the kids may soon wear off anyway, now they're all experts in Buddhism;-). Enjoy your holiday meanwhile, Sarah the Busybody =================== 17534 From: James Date: Mon Dec 9, 2002 11:48pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Ignored.... --- Sarah wrote: > Hi James the Ignored and Misunderstood;-), Finding: Those who compain about being ignored (AKA Philip) are > the least ignored and those who don't say a word in protest (AKA little > Sandy and Janet) would have good cause;-) Familiar?? (Actually, Philip's > protest was only after his first letter which didn't receive an immediate, > that day, response;-)) (I have no clue what you mean here! ;-) Oh well, as they say, "The squeaky wheel gets the grease.") > I'll give you numbers for the little girls, partly because I enjoy your > letters to the children so much too. There is absolutely NO HURRY ever. > Janet: 17128, 17150 (note: her brother Philip was told NOT to reply to > her) > Sandy: 17149, 17223 (Thank you. I am glad you enjoy the letters. I was thinking of including them in a book if I ever publish one. I will leisurely respond to these letters and post the responses. I didn't usually respond to a letter from the kids unless it was addressed to me. I had no idea they were all looking for a response from me.) > > I took a few pix. Sometime I'll try to get them to the album to make it > easier for anyone replying, though the novelty for the kids may soon wear > off anyway, now they're all experts in Buddhism;-). (LOL! Kids are so cute! I was thinking of adopting an Asian child one day. I was showing the movie "White Fang", about sled dogs and wolves in Alaska during the Gold Rush, and I heard a couple of funny comments from the kids. One exclaimed, during a death scene with a mother wolf and her cub, "Gosh, these dogs are really good actors! They should get an award." And during a scene where a miner goes running after his sled dog being attacked by a pack of wolves and ends up being attacked himself, a different student explaims, "Man, people do some really stupid things for their pets!" > > Enjoy your holiday meanwhile, > > Sarah the Busybody > =================== > Thanks, I will try. Metta, James the Transient ps. I declair that this e-mail is 'Buddhism Certified': This e-mail presents, in a non-direct way, the Buddhist theme of conceit: From: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-207.html Yavakalapi Sutta The Sheaf of Barley "'I am' is an act of conceit. 'I am this' is an act of conceit. 'I shall be' is an act of conceit. 'I shall not be'... 'I shall be possessed of form'... 'I shall not be possessed of form'... 'I shall be percipient'... 'I shall not be percipient'... 'I shall be neither percipient nor non-percipient' is an act of conceit. An act of conceit is a disease, an act of conceit is a cancer, an act of conceit is an arrow. Therefore, monks, you should train yourselves: 'We will dwell with an awareness free of acts of conceit.'" Note: The Lord Buddha clarifies, "...you should train yourselves.." not "...you should naturally and automatically be..." 17535 From: chase8383 Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 3:39am Subject: Re: Emptiness? Hi Larry You said "One thing that occurred to me is when we say there is no self found in nibbana it could be because there is no more looking. Does anyone know what happens in the citta process when nibbana is experienced? Does the nibbana element arise and cease or is the bhavanga stream interrupted without an object arising? Is the nibbana element underlying?" It is hard for me to understand some of the words being used here. I am from the Dzogchen path. But I would say that Nibbana itself is empty. So of course there would be no self found there. Nibbana can't be attained because there is no attainment. Nibbana can't arise because there is no arising. Nibana is without self, without arising, and without attainment. That's how the Dzogchen path sees it. 17536 From: azita gill Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 3:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Right livelihood - Samma-ajiva --- "Andrew " wrote: > Hello everyone > This is my first question for a long time. It > pertains to > samma-ajiva. In Thanissaro Bhikkhu's translation of > the > Maha-cattarisaka Sutta, a distinction is drawn > between "right > livelihood with fermentations, siding with merit, > resulting in the > acquisitions [of becoming]" and "noble right > livelihood, without > fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path". > I do not > understand this distinction. I consulted a work by > Bhikkhu Bodhi but > he does not seem to deal with the distinction. Can > anyone assist on > this question? Many thanks > Andrew > > Hello Andrew, Nice to hear from you - I understand your w/e at Cooran went well. My guess, about your question, is that the first one is a path factor of one who is not yet arahant and the second one is arahant. I'm unable to elaborate on this, maybe one of the more eloquent writers can. I don't seem to have the accumulations for 'wordiness', but no doubt someone will. Maybe when I return to Oz. I'll be able to attend an occasional SEQ.dsg. Cheers, Azita 17538 From: chase8383 Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 3:54am Subject: Re: Emptiness? Sorry Larry, I forgot to sign off. BTW, as to the signing off. In Dzogchen we use "good in the begining, good in the middle, good in the end" as a way to make our meditation pratice more beneficial. So in here, saying Hi would be "good in the begining", your post would be "good in the middle" (hopefully), and the signing off would be "good in the end". Also if my being from the Dzogchen path bothers anyone, I wil stop posting. Peace, David 17539 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 5:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Right livelihood - Samma-ajiva Andrew Nice to see you back. I do not find this an easy sutta to understand, but it is a very important one. The sutta deals with the factors that are the supports and requisites of supramundane right concentration (i.e., the right concentration that accompanies a moment of experiencing nibbana). Elsewhere in the sutta, the same two-fold distinction is drawn as regards other factors of the Noble Eightfold Path, including right view. I have set out below the passage from the sutta dealing with right view (the translation and notes are from the Bhikkhu Bodhi/BPS/Wisdom publication) The distinction relates to the difference between the mundane and the supramundane versions of the path factor. In brief, both the mundane and the supramundane path factors mentioned are a support for supramundane right concentration, but in different ways. The mundane path factors are a support in that they lead eventually to the supramundane; the supramundane ones are a support in that they accompany each other at supramundane moments. But in each case, right view is the leader ('comes first'). I hope this helps clarify a little. Please feel free to follow-up. I find it helpful to discuss. Jon Mahacattarisaka Sutta 'The Great Forty' (M. 117) 2. "Bhikkhus, I shall teach you noble right concentration with its supports and its requisites. ... 3 "What, Bhikkhus, is noble right concentration with its supports and its requisites, that is, right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, and right mindfulness? Unification of mind equipped with these seven factors is called noble right concentration with its supports and its requisites. 4. "Therein, bhikkhus, right view comes first. ... 6. "And what, bhikkhus, is right view? Right view, I say, is twofold: there is right view that is affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening on the side of attachment; and there is right view that is noble, taintless, supramundane, a factor of the path. 9. ... "Mindfully one abandons wrong view, mindfully one enters upon and abides in right view: this is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three states run and circle around right view, that is, right view, right effort, and right mindfulness. ------------------------------- According to the footnotes, the commentary explains as follows: In par. 3, "noble" in "noble right concentration" means supramundane, that is, the concentration pertaining to the supramundane path. Its "supports and requisites" are the other seven path factors. In par. 4, there are two kinds of right view that are forerunners: the right view of insight, which investigates formations as impermanent, suffering, and non-self; and the right view of the path, which arises as a consequence of insight and effects the radical destruction of defilements. In par. 9, the three states mentioned accompany right view in the sense of being either co-existents or precursors. Right effort and right mindfulness are co-existent with supramundane right view; while the right view of insight is the precursor of supramundane right view. --- "Andrew " wrote: > Hello everyone > This is my first question for a long time. It pertains to > samma-ajiva. In Thanissaro Bhikkhu's translation of the > Maha-cattarisaka Sutta, a distinction is drawn between "right > livelihood with fermentations, siding with merit, resulting in the > acquisitions [of becoming]" and "noble right livelihood, without > fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path". I do not > understand this distinction. I consulted a work by Bhikkhu Bodhi > but > he does not seem to deal with the distinction. Can anyone assist > on > this question? Many thanks > Andrew 17540 From: Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 7:42am Subject: Patisambhidamagga # 6: Gotarabhu-, and magga~nana Ptsm6 Dear Nina, and all. I’d like to say that the discussion at Kang Krajan is very inspiring. I always feel that it’s much better to see someone in person than to talk over the net and e-mail. I think it’s my kusala (both kamma and vipaka) that made me meet a very nice group of very enthusiastic students. Esp. Nina, who is very energetic and seemed to be tireless in studying dhamma. A.Sujin also always reminds us that dhamma is here and now. I always get lost a story, concept, or books. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PTSM # 6 gotarabhu~nana, and magga~nana. Matika: 10) Panna that leads out and away from outer sankara-nimitta is gotarabhunana 11) Panna that leads out and away from kilesa, khandha, and the two outer sankaras is magganana. Atthakatha gotarabhunana: Bahiddha vut.th.anavivat.t.ane panna gotarabhunanam: Panna that leads out and away from outer sankara-nimitta is gotarabhunana “Bahiddha” refers to sankaranimitta (conditional appearance)<>. Also called “bahiddha” because it depends on akusala-khandha along in citta <>. Gotarabhunana leads out, which means leading out from an outer sankaranimitta (sankatadhamma and/or samudaya). Gotarabhu then called vut.th.ana (leading out). Gotarabhu also called vivat.t.ana(turning one’s back against) because it turns one away from a sankatadhamma to nibbaba or from a worldly stage to a non-worldly stage). The books refers to Visuddhimagga: Gotarabhunana is still not out from the circle of khandha (pavattikhandha) because it cannot eradicate the causes (samudaya), but it can step out from an appearance (nimitta, sankaranimitta). Because it has nibbana as its object. So, gotarabhu is called ekatovutthana because it steps out only from a sankara-nimitta. (Ekato means one) It called “gotarabhu” because it can overcome a worldly stage (puthujana), and it is stepping into a non-worldly stage (ariya). Because gotarabhu has nibbana, animitta, as its object. << in my own word, gotarabhu is still a lokiya-citta (mahakusala nanasampayutta), but it has lokuttara-dhamma(nibbana) as its object.>> Gotarabhu conditions maggacitta by 6 conditions: anantara (proximity)-, samanantara (contiguity)-, asevana (repetition)-, upanissaya (decisive support)-, natthi (absence)-, and vigata (disappearance, used to be there but gone)- paccaya. Gotarabhu is the peak of vipassana, lokiyapanna. Once enter the magga citta stage, one can no longer turns back to the worldly stage. Atthakatha magganana: Dubhato vutthaavivattane panna magge nanam: Panna that leads out and away from kilesa, khandha, and the two outer sankaras is magganana. Dubhato means both or two. First, maggananas lead away from nimitta because they have nibbana (animitta, signless, no appearance) as theirs object. Second, maggananas lead away from circles of khandha because they can eradicate samudaya. So they are called dubhatovutthana. Magganana dries the vast ocean of dukkha, closes all doors of hell (apaya), presents 7 ariya assets, leads one out of a wrong way (miccamagga), subdues all dangers, and leads one to become the son of the Buddha. “ If one wants to cross a river and stand on the other side of the river. He grasps a rope, which tied to a tree, then he jumps and takes off fast. He then stands on the other side of the river. He is no longer frightened. One, who wants to overcome defilement, sees the dangers of sakayaditthi on this side of the river. He crosses the river and stands on the other side of the river, nibbana, which has no danger. He first grasps rupakhandha or namakhandha with udayabbayanupassana. Then he jumps with avajjana-citta, and takes off with anuloma-nana. He is then close to the other side of the river, he sees nibbaba, and lets go of the rope with gotarabhunana. He then lands on ground, which is nibbana, with magganana.” “One wants to see the moon in a cloudy night. When the wind blows the thick cloud away little by little, one then can see the moon. Anulomanana is the wind that blows avijja away, but the wind does not see the moon. A man, gotarabhunana, sees the moon, but he himself cannot eradicate the darkness from the cloud. Magganana, which gets a signal from gotarabhu, absorbs into nibbaba, so it can eradicate lobha. Like an archer gets a signal from others, he then lets go of his arrow. His arrow is able to pierce through 100 layers of targets. Magganana dries up the vast ocean of sankaradukkha, closes all doors of bad direction, fulfills one with 7 ariya assets, lets go of miccamagga, subdues all dangers, and 100 times more of other benefit” Next time: palanana, vimuttinana, and paccavekkhananana. With appreciation, Num ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through MU-Webmail: webmail.mahidol 17541 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 7:49am Subject: Re: Out of Cooran - Metta is first "developed" towards oneself :) --- "bodhi2500 " wrote: > Hi > > To my understanding the Sutta's on the subject aren't clear(and to > all as to himself). What I would like to know is, are there any > commentary quotes that specifically say "Do not direct Metta towards > oneself". > > ________________ Dear Steve, Good to hear of the meeting in Cooran. I just tried to get a stopover in Brisbane later in the month to see if I could meet with the crew; but the plane only stops for an hour with no overnight allowed on my ticket. I think this dilemma can only be solved by really knowing the characteristic of metta (as Sarah and others suggested). Personally whenever I take myself as a concept object- which is very often - there is attachment, not metta. In the Cariya-pitaka- athakatha (see bodhi net of views p323) it says "The destruction of self-love and the development of love for others are the means for the accomplishing of the paramis". Robert 17542 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 8:02am Subject: [determing stage" --- Dear Rob and Sarah, A. Sujin explained a little about the votthapanna citta last Sunday . It is simply a citta that invariably arises before the javana cittas. As Sarah said it is ahetuka, rootless. What conditions it is upanissaya paccaya and anatara paccaya. It is accumulations that 'decide' whether the javana process will be kuala or akusala. One of the similes given in the commentaries is to call the votthapana citta a fool (because it is simply ahetuka); it doesn't know right from wrong. It is like a fool who will insult even a King. There is no panna arising at the moment of votthapana. It is possible(perhaps) to suggest the votthapana that preceeds kusala javana process as 'yoniso' or the one preceeding akusala as 'ayoniso' but I think not really helpful to do so as this might cause someone to overestimate the importance of this citta. Rrobert Sarah > > --- "robmoult " wrote: > > I was still under the impression that yoniso manisakara / ayoniso > > manasikara arose during the determining stage and thereby > > conditioned either kusala or akusala at the javana stage. > > > > Did we discuss this before? > .... > Would you mind looking back at the following message from last August: > http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m11257.html > > In it, I explained, as I understand, how votthapanna (determining) > consciousness is an ahetuka kiriya citta (rootless inoperative > consciousness. The cetasikas (mental factors) accompanying it, including > manasikara (attention) are therefore also rootless and inoperative and > perform their functions accordingly. For example, the ekaggata > (concentration) arising with this citta or with a moment of seeing or > hearing will neither be right or wrong concentration, it will be > `rootless'. The same applies to the sanna (perception) or cetana > (intention). They perform their functions of `directing', > `perceiving'(sorry, Suan;-)) or `coordinating/willing' the consciousness > and other mental factors to the object. However they don't direct or will > kusala or akusala, for example, so their tasks are not quite the same when > they arise with these different kinds of citta. > > Back to the determining consciousness. It is accompanied by equanimity > only and the manaskikara can surely not be wise or unwise which I > understand would only arise in the javana process with kusala and akusala > cittas (or kiriya cittas for the arahat). Vis XIV (183) discusses > cetasikas arising with functional indetrminate consciousness with and > without root cause. Earlier in the same chapter (152) it discusses the > controlling function of manasikara. It also mentions `controller of the > cognitive series' and `controller of impulsions' as terms for the 2 kinds > of adverting cosciousness, but makes it clear that they are `not included' > under the given sobhana manasikara. > > Rob, the only reason I'm pursuing this discussion is because I think you > are giving this particular consciousness and the role of the accompanying > manasikara undue importance in determining the nature of the following > javana cittas (of course there couldn't be the succeeding cittas without > this crucial one). > > I would see the importance of wise and unwise attention as being when they > accompany moments of consciousness with lobha or panna or dosa as they > arise now and they can be experienced and known as such. > > What do you think? > > Sarah > ======= 17543 From: robmoult Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 8:23am Subject: Re: [determing stage" Hi Rob K and Sarah, I sincerely appreciate you putting me straight on this issue. I need to review my materials and "tone down" my handling of this citta. I would be very grateful if you could both download my "Class Notes" and review them for other misinterpretations. In 2002, my Class Notes were distributed one section per class. In a couple of weeks, I plan to print the compliled version and distribute it as a draft to the entire class (I will make 100 copies). Now is the criticial time that I need to have misinterpretations identified before I print out the book and it takes a life of its own, potentially leading to wrong views among my students. Metta, Rob M :-) 17544 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 0:12pm Subject: Re: Emptiness? Hi David, Oh, no! the Dzogchen path! :) I'm enjoying your posts whichever tradition you come from. List membership is international, multi-cultural, with members from all traditions. (Theravada, Mahayana, Vajrayana) The list rules only state that content of posts should be "relating to the Buddha's teachings as found in the texts of the Theravada tradition (including the Suttanta, Abhidhamma, Vinaya and the ancient commentaries)." No stipulation about where the post-ers need to be based. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/DSG_Guide_Lines If you start to develop Pali-allergy, just skip over those bits. Familiarity sneaks up on you, and before you know it you'll be throwing maggamagga-nanadassana-visuddhi's around with the best of them. :) metta, (and peace) Christine --- "chase8383 " wrote: > Sorry Larry, I forgot to sign off. > > BTW, as to the signing off. In Dzogchen we use "good in the begining, good in > the middle, good in the end" as a way to make our meditation pratice more > beneficial. So in here, saying Hi would be "good in the begining", your post > would be "good in the middle" (hopefully), and the signing off would be "good in the end". > > Also if my being from the Dzogchen path bothers anyone, I wil stop posting. > Peace, David 17545 From: James Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 0:42pm Subject: A Letter to Nina Dear Nina, I want to address a line of questioning to you. I know that you are currently traveling so it may take you some time to respond. Additionally you may not have the inclination to respond depending on the conditions of cittas, consciousness states, and feeling perceptions in play at the `kshanikavada' moments (atomic times) such arises due to contacts with this 'rupa' letter . I want to question your approach to the collection of works known as the Abhidhamma `special dhamma' Pitaka and the approach of many modern, and some ancient, experts of this collection. I will be using your book `Abhidhamma in Daily Life' as a reference point and as a symbol/reference point for the current methodology of approach. In `ADL', each chapter gives the vocabulary, analysis, and exposition in regards to the Abhidhamma ontology and the ancient commentaries on such and then concludes with how Abhidhamma ontology relates to the teachings of the Buddha with the comparison to various sutta quotes and subsequent analysis. I reached the conclusion that this final part of each chapter was demonstration of how the Abhidhamma thus applies to daily life, as stated in the title. I don't see this connection as proof that the Abhidhamma applies to daily life or even should be applied to daily life in such a literal manner; I only see it as proof that the suttas apply to daily life. To say that the Abhidhamma applies to the Sutta Pitaka, and the Sutta Pitaka applies to daily life, therefore the Abhidhamma applies to daily life is an error in deductive logic, i.e. if Jack knows Mary and Mary knows Bill, that doesn't mean that Jack knows Bill; or because a plant needs water and a human needs water, that doesn't mean a human is a plant; or because in the summertime people eat more ice cream, that doesn't mean increased ice cream sales increase the daily temperature, etc. The point I want to make, and the question I have for you, is that perhaps the Abhidhamma is being approached with a methodology contrary to its intended purpose. Perhaps the Abhidhamma is not supposed to be taken literally, but symbolically. I see it as a special vocablulary and symbolism for discussing and determining the dhamma, but it is not the dhamma itself. After all, as you explain throughout your book, the concepts of the Abhidhamma cannot be truly known in the present moment. In other words, there is no way we can know if the classifications are real or not. The categories were created through deductive thought (since the Buddha didn't teach it) with the purpose of knowing the nature of anatta; therefore they should not be seen as reality but as a tool to know reality. If approached in this way, I see great value in the Abhidhamma and would become one of its biggest supporters. Of course it needs to be re-approached with the goal of using it as a tool to discover reality, not as a true description of reality itself. Along these lines, I am thinking of Herman Hesse's book `The Glass Bead Game'. I don't know if you have read this book, but I have, so allow me to give a brief summary. `The Glass Bead Game', created in the book by the same title, is a game where the players use symbols derived from the worlds great schools of endeavor: art, music, history, math, science, metaphysics, philosophy, etc., and these symbols are put forth in a game in the pursuit of establishing an ontology for the universe. How this game is actually played in the book is not important and details aren't given. The point Hesse wanted to make is that symbolism, be that the symbolism of thought or words or music or art, is the means by which humans can know ultimate reality. That actually, symbols are the only means we have to know ultimate reality. The ramifications of this type of approach to the Abhidhamma are vast and could open its use in all matters of human fields of endeavor. But, the way it is being approached now, as classifications of ultimate reality, I see it as lying motionless and limited. Do you have any thoughts on this matter? Do you know of sources that approach the Abhidhamma Pitaka as symbolism rather than a description of ultimate reality? Thank you for considering my questions. Metta, James 17546 From: chase8383 Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 1:06pm Subject: Re: Emptiness? Hello Christine "Oh, no! the Dzogchen path! :) " LOL. Yes, the dreaded Dzogchen path, sweeping out of the high Tibetan plains, bringing forth Ground, Path and Fruition, its winds stirring the pure awareness of RIGPA. I'm trying to get over it. :) Thanks Christine Peace, David 17547 From: chase8383 Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 1:31pm Subject: Re: A Letter to Nina Hi James When walking a path through the woods, you might need to go over a fallen log. The method you use to scale that log is good for only scaling logs. When you've continued on the path, and come across a swamp, can you use the log scaling method? Or do you need a different method? All methods are just methods. Means are means. But the more methods/means you know, the easier the path will become. And that's good, because the path is the goal. Peace, David 17548 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 2:07pm Subject: Wrong speech in Jest Dear Group, Is it necessarily akusala (unwholesome) to have wrong speech in jest? With five Aussie blokes present last weekend this was of great interest, i.e. I sensed that no-one wanted to see it as akusala - because it was seen as a valued part of male bonding/communication in the Australian culture. Gentle irony and satire are also predominant ways that this SEQdsg group relates to one another. An inconsistency was that they could all tell stories of all-male schools and the emotional damage inflicted on some fellow students. With joking remarks or stories, if it is felt that all people present know that what is being said is not truth, and the speaker knows that everyone knows it is not truth, is it the untruthfulness or the jest that makes it akusala? metta, Christine 17549 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 2:05pm Subject: Dana with things that are precious to us Dear Group, There was discussion on the weekend about giving and generosity, but differing opinions about giving away things that are precious to us. If the gift is still being seen as precious (with lobha, attachment) how can the giving of it be kusala (wholesome) if we know there will be moments of regret (dosa) later. Should we give away something to which we are attached? But others of us thought that giving something like old clothes to a charity is merely disposing of things no longer needed. I wonder if is it true giving if we aren't attached to it? ... if you didn't want it anyway. And even if giving results in regret, wouldn't that still create stronger conditions for future giving? metta, Christine 17550 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 2:13pm Subject: The Power of Kusula Dear Robert K and Group, Is it the case that one kusala moment overcomes countles akusala moments? According to Ken H, 'long ago and far away' in a dsg post, Robert K told him that kusala was derived from the same word as kusa grass - the significance being that kusala 'cuts two ways'. Ken H said last weekend that he had been meaning to ask Robert K what this meant but just 'hadn't got around to it'. (howls of derision from assembled puthujjana's). metta, Christine 17551 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 2:35pm Subject: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and vipaka? Dear Group, A fair amount of time last weekend was spent in trying to move from deep misunderstanding towards slightly shallower misunderstanding of what kamma is, what vipaka is, what part conditionality and anatta had in the mix, what, if any, choice we had. From this came the question of just how fair was vipaka if we are just choiceless robots and automata (the word puppet wasn't mentioned...:-)). Some in the group were still at a stage where they found the very idea of nama and rupa rather novel. The main difficulty seemed to centre on conditionality, choice and, particularly, the creation of new kamma. If there is no choice, no control - if "everything is by conditions", how is it that "the everchanging process conveniently called Reg or Christine" with no control of kamma creating action, then inherits certain miserable kammic fruits, and another everchanging process (conveniently called "Andrew, KenH or Steve") also with no choice, no control of kamma creating action then inherits delightful results? how can one "improve" (setting aside that there is 'no-self' to improve) or, alternatively, can we really 'choose' to alter behaviour? And back in a circle to the perceived lack of fairness in inheriting vipaka at all when there is no real choice in action ...'; this led to "won't we all get to Nibanna (or not, as the case may be) eventually, so why bother with 'seeking' deliverance?", and 'can one, anyway'? As Ken H reminded me, the answer to the usual agonising over predeterminism and randomness would have to be found in our knowledge of the realities of the present moment. We tried to clarify with regard to cetana (volition, will)? i.e. 'who' has cetana, 'who' flicks the yes/no switch? I think Steve suggested Present Conditions (hope I'm not misrepresenting you Steve) - which led us to decide that Right Understanding of realities was the Middle Way's alternative to a Self. Any comments? I thought of RobM and wondered if he may be willing to loan his "Ah- Ha!" moment, (I'm not entirely sure that it wasn't really MY "Ah- ha!" moment that jumped the paddock fence and strayed up his way ... I wonder if there is a name for a moment when you suddenly realise that something that once seemed so clear is now becoming covered by clouds of ignorance? The "Uh-Oh! moment? Should we write The New Adze Handle Sutta?). metta, Christine 17552 From: peterdac4298 Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 2:57pm Subject: Re: Dana with things that are precious to us Hi Christine Good question. Here's my take on it. Giving old cloths etc, is ok. The Vinaya makes it an offence for a Bhikkhu to receive a robe of cloth that is perfectly new. They would have to work into a new robe some old stuff in order to make it allowable. However, they can make a robe themselves, from new cloth that is given, as in the annual Katina ceremony: but even then the robe cannot be of one piece of cloth, there having to be at least one join. Giving away something precious to oneself sets up a situation in which the practice of abandonment is possible, i.e. the overcoming of attachment, which is what this path is all about. I am sure I have seen somewhere in the Suttas a story about the Buddha preferring to take a meal from a more humble man than from a richer one. There may even be a verse or two in the Dhammapada on this. The receiver only has to receive skillfully: i.e. with mindfulness and reflective appreciation and gratitude, and use the gift responsibly. He can also take joy in the donors opportunity for practicing the overcoming of greed, hatred and delusion in this act of generosity. However, the Vinaya requires Bhikkhus to ensure that a donor is not jeopardising their ability to meet their family and social responsibilities, i.e. the gift is something that they can afford, irrespective of personal attachment. Cheers Peter --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, > > There was discussion on the weekend about giving and generosity, but > differing opinions about giving away things that are precious to us. > If the gift is still being seen as precious (with lobha, attachment) > how can the giving of it be kusala (wholesome) if we know there will > be moments of regret (dosa) later. Should we give away something to > which we are attached? > But others of us thought that giving something like old clothes to a > charity is merely disposing of things no longer needed. I wonder if > is it true giving if we aren't attached to it? ... if you didn't want > it anyway. > And even if giving results in regret, wouldn't that still create > stronger conditions for future giving? > > metta, > Christine 17553 From: peterdac4298 Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 3:13pm Subject: Re: Wrong speech in Jest Hi Christine Maybe humour can be quite skillful as a way to make the recipient see some point that they might otherwise be reluctant to see, especially if they end up laughing at themselves and their own shortcomings. Maybe humour goes wrong when it leads to heedlessness. Wrong speech includes harsh language, divisory language as well as porkies. All could be used to either good or bad effect. I guess it's the intention that counts. Anything can backfire and blow up in one's face, but if one's conscience is clear then there is no regret beyond the need to assure the offended person that no offence was intended. Peter --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, > > Is it necessarily akusala (unwholesome) to have wrong speech in > jest? With five Aussie blokes present last weekend this was of great > interest, i.e. I sensed that no-one wanted to see it as akusala - > because it was seen as a valued part of male bonding/communication in > the Australian culture. Gentle irony and satire are also > predominant ways that this SEQdsg group relates to one another. An > inconsistency was that they could all tell stories of all-male > schools and the emotional damage inflicted on some fellow students. > > With joking remarks or stories, if it is felt that all people present > know that what is being said is not truth, and the speaker knows that > everyone knows it is not truth, is it the untruthfulness or the jest > that makes it akusala? > > metta, > Christine 17555 From: chase8383 Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 3:25pm Subject: Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and vipaka? Hi again Christine Boy your giving me a lot of "Uh-Oh!" moments here. I know when I get them I= = try and remember "If you open your mouth, you are wrong. If you give rise t= = o a single thought, you are in error.", and than sit with it, quietly, for = a= while. Most of the teachings are common sense. The confusion comes from wit= = hin our own minds. It comes from our trying to grasp onto these thoughts, i= n= stead of just letting them find their own place. Poem by Nyoshul Khenpo: >>Rest in natural great peace This exhausted mind Beaten helpless by karma and neurotic thought, Like the relentless fury of the pounding waves In the infinite ocean of samsara << I know this didn't answer any of your questions, but I'm not a big fan of a= nswers. Peace, David 17556 From: peterdac4298 Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 3:28pm Subject: Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and vipaka? --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, > > > I think Steve suggested Present > Conditions (hope I'm not misrepresenting you Steve) - which led us > to decide that Right Understanding of realities was the Middle > Way's alternative to a Self. Any comments? > > > metta, > Christine Hi Christine Every time I have put this kind of question to a teacher at some time or other I have invariably had the same response. Namely to be urged to see for oneself. Cheers Peter 17557 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 3:48pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Dear Christine, It is said that each (javana) consciousness not related to dana, sila, and bhavana is akusala. The interesting part to me is if the jest is an akusala kamma-patha (of which I have no answer). I was watching this video, "Guaranteed for Laugh," this morning for lack of sleep. They were showing practical jokes done on people (like people running half-nude across the golf courses while the golfers are teeing, or people who walked into the restaurant's bathroom and after they came out, found everybody to be half naked). I was laughing my heart out (almost choked on my food), but at the same time, I saw that some of these people experienced quite unpleasant feelings having to endure thru it (even if they also laughed at the end). Although I was enjoying myself, I personally wouldn't think of doing such pranks myself (but who knows?). I think jest, even when it is not intentional to harm other people, sometimes does, even if temporarily. And because we think it is a joke, we sometimes fail to recognize that this can do harm to some people. We may even think such persons harbor no sense of humor, or just don't get it. How could anybody not laugh at "our" light-hearted, (and even well-told), joke? I am sometimes inspired by the Buddha's teaching of good speeches. He said, he wouldn't himself speak unless 5 factors are met: 1) Truthful 2) Useful, inclining toward the dhamma 3) Appropriate for the time (Inappropriate speech renders the speech non-useful) 4) With well-spoken words 5) With kindness Do we speak with kindness all the time, even among friends in Dhamma? Sometimes we joke because it entertains us, sometimes because it entertains others, and sometimes it gives other happiness. Even if we cannot be like the Buddha, but that doesn't really prevent us from learning the benefit of good speeches, spoken with kindness. I think there is great bonding among the Buddha and his disciples, even if they don't jest to entertain themselves or others. They greatly respect one another, because people and the teeachings such as the Buddha, the dhamma, and the Sangha are truly rare in the world. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: christine_forsyth > [mailto:cforsyth@v...] > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 2:07 PM > Subject: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest > > > Dear Group, > > Is it necessarily akusala (unwholesome) to have > wrong speech in > jest? With five Aussie blokes present last > weekend this was of great > interest, i.e. I sensed that no-one wanted to see > it as akusala - 17558 From: Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 11:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? In a message dated 12/9/2002 7:24:00 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > Hi, Larry - > > I seem to recall nibbana being referred to as the "ultimate > emptiness", though I don't have a ready citation for that. > > With metta. > Howard > The Patisambhidamagga treatise XXIX, # 8 ... lists about 37 metaphors expressing what Nibbana is. Among these are:-- The Ultimate Voidness; and, The Ultimate Meaning of Not Self. If we consider the Patisambhidamagga an authoritative text, then according to such, emptiness and no-self are probably both synonyms as well as meanings of Nibbana. TG 17559 From: Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 5:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [determing stage" Hi Robert, Rob, & Sarah, Would it be correct to say kamma is always just? Good intentions always produce good results, eventually. When a good intention seems to produce a bad result, the result is actually the result of some other bad intention? Kamma result is rootless (causes no further kamma), does that mean it is desireless? Is rootlessness a good thing? Do you like it? Is it correct that all experience is accumulated by sanna (memory)? Are accumulations memories? Are they rootless? Does kamma result (vipaka) condition the arising of accumulations and then those accumulations condition javana cittas which are the root (kamma causing) consciousnesses (cittas) lust, hatred, bewilderment and their opposites? How does intention come into the picture here? Does intention arise only with a javana citta? Does intention always produce kamma? Does lust, hatred, bewilderment etc. only arise with javana cittas? Why aren't accumulations included in citta process? thanks, Larry 17560 From: Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 1:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi TG,Larry and Howard I looked up the Patisambhidamagga quote you posted below TG and found something interesting >Patisambhidamagga XXIX8 > Seeing the 5 aggregates as empty,he chooses in conformity:seeing how the cessation of the 5 aggregates is Nibbana, which is not empty*,he enters into the certainty of rightness. Seeing the 5 aggregates as void,he chooses in conformity: seeing how the cessation of the 5 aggregates is Nibbana, which is the ultimate voidness, he enters into the certainty of rightness... Seeing the 5 aggregates as not-self, he choses in conformity:seeing how the cessation of the 5 aggregates is Nibbana, which is the ultimate meaning(aim), he enters into the certainty of rightness. PatisambhidamaggaXXIX9> As empty is contemplation of not self. As void is contemplation of not self. As not self is contemplation of not self Both voidness and empty are contemplation on not self. Nibbana is both the ultimate voidness but it is not empty? Steve TGrand458@a... writes: > > Hi, Larry - > > > > I seem to recall nibbana being referred to as the "ultimate > > emptiness", though I don't have a ready citation for that. > > > > With metta. > > Howard > > > > The Patisambhidamagga treatise XXIX, # 8 ... lists about 37 metaphors > expressing what Nibbana is. Among these are:-- The Ultimate Voidness; and, > > The Ultimate Meaning of Not Self. > > If we consider the Patisambhidamagga an authoritative text, then according > to > such, emptiness and no-self are probably both synonyms as well as meanings > of > Nibbana. > > TG > 17561 From: Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 8:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi David, Here is what I was refering to: from "A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma" IX #34 When he thus practices contemplation, owing to the ripening of insight (he feels), "now the absorption (of the path) will arise." Thereupon, arresting the life-continuum [bhavanga consciousness], there arises mind-door adverting, followed by two or three (moments of) insight consciousness having for their object any of the chacteristics such as impermanence etc. [impermanence, suffering, no self]. They are termed preparation, access, and conformity (moments). That knowledge of equanimity towards formations together with knowledge that conforms (to the truths), when perfected, is also termed "insight leading to emergence." Thereupon, the change-of-lineage consciousness, having Nibbana as its object, occurs, overcoming the lineage of the worldlings and evolving the lineage of the noble ones. Immediately after this, the path (of stream-entry), fully understanding the truth of suffering, abandoning the truth of its origin, realizing the truth of its cessation, and developing the truth of the path to its cessation, enters upon the (supramundane) [lokuttara] cognitive process of absorption. After that, two or three moments of fruition consciousness arise and cease. Then there is subsidence into the life-continuum. Then, arresting the life-continuum, reviewing knowledge occurs. The wise person reviews the path, fruit, Nibbana, and he either reviews or does not review the defilements destroyed and the remaining defilements. L: I couldn't find the answer to my question concerning how does Nibbana interact with the bhavanga (life-continuum consciousness) and citta but Nina says it definitely doesn't arise and cease. There is something called cessation attainment which is a meditative attainment only once-returners or arahants can practice in which the bhavanga is temporarily stopped without an object arising. This is apparently not nibbana. Larry 17562 From: Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 8:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi Steve, I don't understand any of your quote from Ptsm. What's the context? Aren't 'empty' and 'void' both translations of 'sunna'? Larry 17563 From: Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 8:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? H TG, I found several instances of nibbana called void in CMA, meaning void of self and void of khandhas. Larry 17564 From: Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 4:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi Larry The part of the quote I was interested in was "Nibbana which is not empty (aritta.m)". The context is insight. Seeing the 5 aggregates as empty,he chooses in conformity:seeing how the cessation of the 5 aggregates is Nibbana, which is not empty*,he enters into the certainty of rightness. "When a Bhikkhu sees all formations as impermanent it is possible that he shall make a choice in conformity(with actuality), and making a choice in confomity(with actuallity) it is possible that he shall enter upon the certainty of rightness" The Pali for empty in the quote is "rittato" and not empty is "arittata.m" The Pali for void in the quote is "su~n~nato" and ultimate voidness is "paramasu~n~na.m" The PTS dictonary has "Ritta = devoid, empty, free, rid (of) " Steve LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Steve, > > I don't understand any of your quote from Ptsm. What's the context? > Aren't 'empty' and 'void' both translations of 'sunna'? > > Larry > 17565 From: bodhi2500 Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 9:21pm Subject: Re: Out of Cooran - Metta is first "developed" towards oneself :) Dear Robert and Sarah Thank-you for your replies. I tried to find other occurances of the word "sabbattataaya"(to others as to oneself) in the Tipitaka and it seems it only occurs in referance to the Brahmavihara's. A.K. Warders intro to Pali has > Sabbattataa - non-discrimination (all-self-ness) considering all beings as like oneself, putting oneself in the place of others. Thank-you for the quotes. Steve 17566 From: Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 9:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Thanks Steve, Ritta and sunna seem like synonyms. Any ideas on in what sense nibbana is not empty? Larry 17567 From: Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 10:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi David and all, Concerning Dzogchen, many mahayana schools assert that realizing emptiness is the highest realization. So for them there is no attainment because everything is already empty. Theravada holds that nibbana is the highest realization. Nibbana is a reality that is distinguishable from other kinds of reality. So in that sense it can be attained, but not by khandhas. It can, however, be experienced by khandhas. This happens in conjunction with life-changing insights. That change due to insight is also called nibbana. Is this right? There are two nibbanas? One that is the object of consciousness during a path moment and one (really 4) that is the permanent cessation of defilements as a result of the 4 path moments: stream enterer, once returner, non-returner, arahat? Larry ps: mahayana is off topic. No one knows what you are talking about and it difuses the focus of the group. However, I know that Tibetan schools are very fastidious about including the entire tipitaka, including abhidhamma, in their teachings. So anything you learn here should be applicable. And as K. Sujin said, the dhamma is this experience. Insight into experience is the common ground. Larry 17568 From: Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 5:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi, Steve (and Larry) - In a message dated 12/11/02 12:15:16 AM Eastern Standard Time, you quote the following: > > Seeing the 5 aggregates as empty,he chooses in conformity:seeing how the > cessation of the 5 aggregates is Nibbana, which is not empty*,he enters > into > the certainty of rightness. > -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: A bit later you provide the following: > > > The PTS dictonary has "Ritta = devoid, empty, free, rid (of) " > > It seems to me that if one adopts the last definition, "rid (of)" or "ceased", the the first quote makes noncontradictory sense. It would read as follows: "Seeing the 5 aggregates as empty, he chooses in conformity: seeing how the cessation of the 5 aggregates is Nibbana, which is not ceased, he enters into the certainty of rightness." Nibbana is not ceased for it neither arises nor ceases. =============================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17569 From: Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 10:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Good one Howard. I'll buy it. Larry 17570 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 10:33pm Subject: Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and vipaka? Hi David, You say: "I'm not a big fan of answers." Well, that certainly got my attention. :) So different are you and I - I tried to imagine not seeking answers but found I would need to become a different person ... I could agree they were a hindrance if by 'answers' you meant merely the proliferation of thought. But I tend to see 'looking for answers' as 'looking for truth' (in the Dhamma). Thank you for this poem by Nyoshul Khenpo. It seems to speak to exactly how I feel at times, particularly when I'm at work. [Still on holidays for another 11 days, but who's counting?:-)] "This exhausted mind Beaten helpless by karma and neurotic thought" metta, Christine --- "chase8383 " wrote: > Hi again Christine > > Boy your giving me a lot of "Uh-Oh!" moments here. I know when I get them I= 17571 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 10:43pm Subject: Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and vipaka? Hi Peter, 'One should find out for oneself' is almost a mantra on this List also. Have you ever found out for yourself? If so, a hint would be appreciated. :) Let's advocate for the Rights of those who require (or is that desire) spoon feeding! :) metta, Christine --- "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi Christine > Every time I have put this kind of question to a teacher at some > time or other I have invariably had the same response. Namely to be > urged to see for oneself. > Cheers > Peter 17572 From: Sarah Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 11:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Out of Cooran - Metta is first "developed" towards oneself :) Dear Steve (& Rob K), --- "bodhi2500 " wrote: > Dear Robert and Sarah > Thank-you for your replies. I tried to find other > occurances of the word "sabbattataaya"(to others as to oneself) in > the Tipitaka and it seems it only occurs in referance to the > Brahmavihara's. .... Would you kindly in turn give me some refs as to where it occurs w/r to the brahmaviharas? I’d also be glad for the Pali (and yr literal translation) for key phrases in the Visud. which are so often quoted. In fact when you’ve collected all the relevant terms, perhaps you may add them with expanatory comments we can refer to as needed. ..... A.K. Warders intro to Pali has > Sabbattataa - > non-discrimination (all-self-ness) considering all beings as like > oneself, putting oneself in the place of others. ..... ..or treating others as we would like to be treated?? I just went to an earlier post I wrote to look at whether this term in used in the Udana verse (quoted in the Vism) and commentary notes and would like to give a link to this post as some of the comments may be useful to consider for other relevant threads such as conceit and discouragement and self-attachment too: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m5476.html This is the extract with the actual commentary notes: ***** After King Pasenadi and Queen Mallika concluded that indeed there was no one dearer than themselves, the Buddha spoke these lines in Udana, 5-1, ‘Dear’ (Masefield trans): ‘Having explored all quarters with the mind, one would simply not attain that dearer than the self in any place; thus is the self dear separately to others - therefore one desiring self should not harm another.’ The commentary adds: ‘.....One would simply not attain that dearer than the self in any place (n’ev’ajjhagaapiyataram attanaa kvaci): whatever man, seeking out with every endeavour someone else (more) excessively dear than the self, would neither attain nor behold (such) in any place, anywhere in the (ten) quarters.Thus is the self dear separately to others (evam piyo puthu attaa paresa.m): thus is the self alone dear separately, severally, to this and that being, by way of the non-discovery of anyone dearer than the self. Therefore one desiring self should not harm another (tasmaa na hi.mse param attakaama): since each being holds the self dear in that way, is one desiring happiness for that self, one for whom dukkha is repulsive, therefore one desiring self, in wanting well-being and happiness for that self, should not harm, should not kill, should not even antagonise with the hand....and so on, another being, upwards from and including even a mere ant or (other) samll insect. for when dukkha is caused by oneself to some other, that (dukkha) is, after an interval of time, observed in one’s (own) self, as though it were passing over therefrom. for this is the law of karma.’ ****** Steve, really appreciating your participation. As Christine said, this is a thread that never dies (or sth like that), so will appreciate anything you find or quote too. Sarah ====== 17573 From: Sarah Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 11:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness (Rob Ep & Goglerr) Hi Rob Ep (& Goglerr), --- "Robert Epstein " wrote: > Thanks Sarah, for your reply and for your further reminders about > anatta. > > It might be interesting to discuss the 20 kinds of self-view. If you > have a little link for me, I'll take a look.... .... This is most encouraging, Rob (that you follow links these days;-))I always find our discussions on anatta helpful: 1. From Nyantiloka’s dictionary (brief, so in full): sakkáya-ditthi: 'personality-belief', is the first of the 10 fetters (samyojana). It is entirely abandoned only on reaching the path of Stream-winning (sotápatti-magga; s. ariya-puggala). There are 20 kinds of personality-belief, which are obtained by applying 4 types of that belief to each of the 5 groups of existence (khandha, q.v.): (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). See prec., ditthi, upádána 4. 2. A very interesting and detailed post from Goglerr: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/12778 Here’s an extract: “How does one or many self-view/s arises? In Cullavedalla Sutta (MN 44), it is mentioned there 20 types of personality view which connected to the 5 agg. And we divide each agg in 4 types, therefore we have 20 types. For e.g in the material agg. 1) one regards material form is self, i.e. the body isthe self or the self is the body. 2) one regards the self as the possessor of the material form– here the non-material which is the mind (the other 4 agg)regarded as self. This non-material self (`I') is one thing and material form is another thing. Therefore the self (`I') is the owner of the material form. 3) one regards material form as in a self - The concept of self here is also maintained in the relation to the other four non-material agg. The holder of this view will maintained that material form is one thing, the non-material self is the other; that material form exist `in' this non-material self. [This will be more clear if you see it see it from the mind basis, for e.g. the feeling: feeling is one thing, the non-feeling self – the other 4 agg - is another.The feeling exists `in' this non-feeling self]. Illustration - imagine of a fried egg with sunny side up, the material form is the yolk and the egg white is the self. 4) one regard the self as in material form - material form is one thing, the non-material self is the other; that self exist `in' this material form. The self is the yolk and the egg white is the material form.”,end quote> ***** During our weekend trip in Thailand, a friend was talking about her particular meditative experiences and K.Sujin asked her to consider whether any of the sakkaya ditthi were present. The friend realized (intellectually anyway) as she spoke, that there was the idea of phenomena in the self and the self was just these 5 khandhas.K.sujin then reminded us to consider and know the various kinds of sakkaya ditthi when they arise at anytime. Any more thoughts? Sarah ===== 17574 From: ven.yanatharo.bikkhu Date: Tue Dec 10, 2002 11:49pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Dana with things that are precious to us Dear Peter, as many of you in the list, you people follow the books but very little you guys know about the really life of Bikkhus. This year I was invited to 9 kathina's ceremonies, from different traditions, and I received 9 different robes, I accepted because otherwise will be ofending the people. I have a room full of robes. This is not the first year, so imagine how many robes I have. I only use two, one in the wash and the other one I wear. Metta. Ven. Yanatharo -----Mensaje original----- De: peterdac4298 [mailto:peterd@w...] Enviado el: Miércoles, Diciembre 11, 2002 09:57 a.m. Asunto: [dsg] Re: Dana with things that are precious to us Hi Christine Good question. Here's my take on it. Giving old cloths etc, is ok. The Vinaya makes it an offence for a Bhikkhu to receive a robe of cloth that is perfectly new. They would have to work into a new robe some old stuff in order to make it allowable. However, they can make a robe themselves, from new cloth that is given, as in the annual Katina ceremony: but even then the robe cannot be of one piece of cloth, there having to be at least one join. Giving away something precious to oneself sets up a situation in which the practice of abandonment is possible, i.e. the overcoming of attachment, which is what this path is all about. I am sure I have seen somewhere in the Suttas a story about the Buddha preferring to take a meal from a more humble man than from a richer one. There may even be a verse or two in the Dhammapada on this. The receiver only has to receive skillfully: i.e. with mindfulness and reflective appreciation and gratitude, and use the gift responsibly. He can also take joy in the donors opportunity for practicing the overcoming of greed, hatred and delusion in this act of generosity. However, the Vinaya requires Bhikkhus to ensure that a donor is not jeopardising their ability to meet their family and social responsibilities, i.e. the gift is something that they can afford, irrespective of personal attachment. Cheers Peter --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, > > There was discussion on the weekend about giving and generosity, but > differing opinions about giving away things that are precious to us. > If the gift is still being seen as precious (with lobha, attachment) > how can the giving of it be kusala (wholesome) if we know there will > be moments of regret (dosa) later. Should we give away something to > which we are attached? > But others of us thought that giving something like old clothes to a > charity is merely disposing of things no longer needed. I wonder if > is it true giving if we aren't attached to it? ... if you didn't want > it anyway. > And even if giving results in regret, wouldn't that still create > stronger conditions for future giving? > > metta, > Christine 17575 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 0:04am Subject: Re: Hello(Venerable PiyaDhammo) --- "phrapiyadhammo Dear Venerable, Thanks for joining the list. I'm sure any contibutions you make will be much appreciated. There is actually a conversation between you (when you were a layman) and Dan ,that I forwarded from D-l, in the useful posts under "light relief". Robert " wrote: > Hello List, > > I am responding to Jonothan and Sarah's welcome to DSG note. Thought > I would take the time to introduce myself. Most of you already know > me from D-list as David Koenes. I am a recently ordained Bhikkhu (two > weeks ago...a babe). I will be able to read this list for a little > 17576 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 0:08am Subject: RE: [dsg] Patisambhidamagga # 6: Gotarabhu-, and magga~nana Dear Num, I very much appreciate the translation you have done to be posted. It just happened to coincide with Larry's discussion of the path moments. With appreciation, kom > -----Original Message----- > From: sinsk@m... > [mailto:sinsk@m...] > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 7:42 AM > To: dsg > Subject: [dsg] Patisambhidamagga # 6: Gotarabhu-, > and magga~nana > 17577 From: Sarah Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 0:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Letter to Nina Hi James & All, --- "James " wrote: > Dear Nina, > > I want to address a line of questioning to you. I know that you are > currently traveling so it may take you some time to respond. > Additionally you may not have the inclination to respond depending > on the conditions of cittas, consciousness states, and feeling > perceptions in play at the `kshanikavada' moments (atomic times) > such arises due to contacts with this 'rupa' letter . ..... I'm smiling and appreciating your nice letter;-) I'm forwarding letters related to KK discussions to Nina as requested (for her return) and will also f/w any addressed to her like yours. It might be better to address further letters to her when she returns on list as it always takes time to catch up after an overseas trip. We received a newsy hand-written fax from her yesterday (from her last couple of days in Bkk) and it reminded me of when we considered it to be so quick and efficient to be able to send faxes after all the years of snail mail. She and her husband seem to have had a wonderful trip in Cambodia and action-packed dhamma in Thai and English and Pali (as Num described) in Bkk. She asked us to send her regards to DSG members. Sarah ======= 17578 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 0:24am Subject: Re: Wrong speech in Jest Hi Peter, Thanks for your reply - mostly I agree - but when you said "Anything can backfire and blow up in one's face, but if one's conscience is clear then there is no regret beyond the need to assure the offended person that no offence was intended", I wondered if we ever really know our own intentions fully? Realities are such fleeting paramattha dhammas and are beyond control. An example of brushing away an ant was given on the w/e - that it was not clearly kusala or akusala because of mixed motives - kindness in wishing to be gentle with another tiny being, annoyance at the physical feel and surprise of little crawling feet, and conceit at 'Oh what a good Buddhist I am in not killing an ant'. It is hard enough in everyday life when guided by the Precepts to know our true motives - how much harder, at least for me, when there is the overlay of humour. metta, Christine --- "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi Christine > > Maybe humour can be quite skillful as a way to make the recipient > see some point that they might otherwise be reluctant to see, > especially if they end up laughing at themselves and their own > shortcomings. 17579 From: Sarah Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 1:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] A 'Funny' Question Hi Swee boon, --- "nidive " wrote: > > Here's a 'funny' question. > > If let's say you attained the first stage of awakening of a > sotapanna, would you confide your attainment with any close Dhamma > friends? Or would you rather keep it to yourself? ..... 'funny' answer - maybe I'd rather worry about it when I have that problem;-) less funny answer - no one, no person that has any attainment - just another process of cittas. If there is any wisdom now, is there any clinging to it as self? Is there any purpose or benefit in telling others about these particular cittas or experiences? Curious.... ***** I also read your "'contradiction' resolve" post with interest. It was beautifully written. Just a couple of comments: When you mention 'drenched by the rain' being the condition that 'allows vipaka to come into force', we all understand what you mean conventionally and this is correct. Of course, more accurately still, there is no 'drenched by the rain' as it is a concept (or many concepts)as you realize. What is experienced are the various rupas through the bodysense (results of kamma and assisted by other conditions). And so with the 'disorders of the bile'. I would suggest that past kamma along with other conditions combined together at that instant cause the various rupas to be experienced through the body sense (with mind-door proceses in between 'responding' to these phenomena) which are categorised as 'disorders'. Apart from the namas and rupas, there are no other phenomena experiencing/experienced or existing. Even when we talk about viruses and bacteria, as you suggest, they cannot be experienced as realities through the 5 senses. They are concepts again. This doesn't mean that there aren't particular combinations of rupa which are experienced by vipaka cittas through the body-sense as a result of kamma, temperature, nutrition or consciousness (the 4 conditions for rupas to arise). According to the particular conditions at any given instant, the phenomena experienced could not be any different. Thus we see that every reality arises as a result of the 24 paccaya (conditions)and there are no 'selves' or 'things'. Useful and difficult points to ponder....Thanks. Sarah ======= 17580 From: Sarah Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependent origination question (Ranjit) Dear Ranjit, You wrote some very interesting posts just as I had to break for a while. May I belatedly welcome you to DSG too and perhaps encourage you to share a little more about your background and obviously extensive research of both the dhamma and psychology. Where do you live? ..... --- rjchacko wrote: > > When I compare satipatthana and psychology I see a lot of overlap. A > student of satipatthana meditates to observe the relationship between > mentality and materiality. A student of psychology also studies the > relationship between mentality and materiality. The difference lies in > the approach. A yogi takes advantage of his sentience to note the > dynamics of his mind. A psychologist applies tests, surveys, PET > scans, etc. to his experimental subjects. One approaches the mind from > the inside, and the other approaches it from the outside. ..... May I suggest the difference also lies in the theoretical framework of study and approach. A student of satipatthana appreciates there is primarily no self, no being behind the mental and physical phenomena. Just as there are mere ‘bare phenomena rolling on’ now, so that have there always been, through countless aeons of lifetimes. Sati (mindfulness) and panna (understanding) can never be developed or known by using external tests which doesn’t mean they are not useful for many other purposes as you suggest. ..... > When a psychologist throws out a hypothesis it should be possible to > recast it in a way that we can think about it from an internal point > of view and see if that makes sense. ..... My own experience and study suggests that any explanations (eg your example of ‘what makes certain feelings pleasant or unpleasant’)will always be simplistic or limited to a conventional understanding of contributing factors. As we have discussed many times here, only a Buddha can really know all the intricacies of kamma and other conditions working at any given moment. This doesn’t mean other generalisations, such as XYZ leads to aggression and so on, are not useful and important. .... > The external approach could also help to refine teaching methods in > Buddhism. Also Buddhism doesn't seem to have anything to offer to > people who have organic defects like schizophrenia. ..... I’m not sure that I agree. While various short-term solutions may be helpful/essential (and not to be underestimated in value), in the end, the only way for any of us to understand and overcome our mental disorders is through the development of panna. I think you might find it useful to look at a discussion I was having with Num (who also shares many of your interests). There should be links at the end which help you find his posts too. http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m8683.html ..... > Well, I'm actually skeptical about different lifetimes myself, but > even if I were to grant that, it I think it would still be more > important to understand dependent arising in terms of succesive mind > moments, because this is how one would comprehend anatta. Dependent > origination is the middle way of rejecting both an inherently existing > self, and nihilism. .... You may wish to review the posts (mostly written by Rob K)on D.O. in Useful Posts: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts .... Ranjit, I agree with many of your other comments and hope you’ll contribute further to discussions. I think that the more appreciation there is of anatta (no ‘one’ to progress or eliminate hindrances, for example), the less scepticism there is about ‘different lifetimes’, but I appreciate others may not share this view. Sarah ====== 17581 From: Andrew Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:21am Subject: Right livelihood - Samma-ajiva Hi Azita, Jon & all Thanks for your replies which I did find most useful. As an ex-lawyer, I was actually considering whether the practice of law is right livelihood. Over the last year, I've lost count of the number of articles I've read on legal professional ethics. Of interest is the strong "representational" view that a lawyer must do everything to advantage the client short of misleading the court or breaking the law. This usually leads to disadvantaging the client's adversary. Bhikkhu Bodhi writes of samma-ajiva that we should earn a living "in ways which do not entail harm or suffering for others". Is the lawyer acting on instructions from a malicious client practising wrong livelihood because of the harm done to the client's adversary? Bhikkhu Bodhi also says that if your work violates Right Speech, it is wrong livelihood. How does this relate to the lawyer seeking to discredit a witness on cross-examination? I know Jon has a legal background like me and I'm not expecting anyone to answer these questions. They came to mind during my reading. Whereas initially, I thought "of course being a lawyer is right livelihood", I am now more of the view that it is one of those occupations that may or may not be right livelihood depending upon how it is practiced. Andrew 17582 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:47am Subject: Re: Wrong speech in Jest Hi Christine, The Buddha advised his son Rahula, "Of anyone for whom there is no shame at intentional lying; of him I say that there is no evil he cannot do. 'I will not speak a lie, even for fun' - this is how you must train yourself, Rahula." (i.e. there is no room for "white lies"). Here is what Bhikkhu Bodhi says about telling jokes in "Going for Refuge Taking the Precepts": http://www.buddhistinformation.com/going_for_refuge_taking_the_prec.h tm Four factors enter into the offense of false speech: (1) an untrue state of affairs; (2) the intention of deceiving another; (3) the effort to express that, either verbally or bodily; and (4) the conveying of a false impression to another. Since intention is required, if one speaks falsely without aiming at deceiving another, as when one speaks what is false believing it to be true, there is no breach of the precept. Actual deception, however, is not needed for the precept to be broken. It is enough if the false impression is communicated to another. Even though he does not believe the false statement, if one expresses what is false to him and he understands what is being said, the transgression of speaking falsehood has been committed. The motivation for false speech can be any of the three unwholesome roots. These yield three principal kinds of falsehood: (1) false speech motivated by greed, intended to increase one's gains or promote one's status or that of those dear to oneself; (2) false speech motivated by hatred, intended to destroy the welfare of others or to bring them harm and suffering; and (3) false speech of a less serious kind, motivated principally by delusion in association with less noxious degrees of greed or hatred, intended neither to bring special benefits to oneself nor to harm others. Some examples would be lying for the sake of a joke, exaggerating an account to make it more interesting, speaking flattery to gratify others, etc. In other words, it is always akusala to have wrong speech, even in jest. It is also akusala to crave for continued existence, but we all do it anyways. There can be kusala cittas of wanting to share the Dhamma followed by akusala cittas of inserting a joke into a post to make it more interesting. Huge kusala, extremely small akusala; I'll take that combination any day! Metta, Rob M :-) --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, > > Is it necessarily akusala (unwholesome) to have wrong speech in > jest? With five Aussie blokes present last weekend this was of great > interest, i.e. I sensed that no-one wanted to see it as akusala - > because it was seen as a valued part of male bonding/communication in > the Australian culture. Gentle irony and satire are also > predominant ways that this SEQdsg group relates to one another. An > inconsistency was that they could all tell stories of all-male > schools and the emotional damage inflicted on some fellow students. > > With joking remarks or stories, if it is felt that all people present > know that what is being said is not truth, and the speaker knows that > everyone knows it is not truth, is it the untruthfulness or the jest > that makes it akusala? > > metta, > Christine 17583 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 3:38am Subject: Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and vipaka? Hi Christine, Let me try and share my "Ah-ha" moment. --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, > > A fair amount of time last weekend was spent in trying to move from > deep misunderstanding towards slightly shallower misunderstanding of > what kamma is, what vipaka is, what part conditionality and anatta > had in the mix, what, if any, choice we had. From this came the > question of just how fair was vipaka if we are just choiceless robots > and automata (the word puppet wasn't mentioned...:-)). Some in the > group were still at a stage where they found the very idea of nama > and rupa rather novel. > ======= There are a gazillion vipakas waiting to happen at any moment. Each of the vipakas were "created" by a past action. Which vipaka arises at each moment depends on current conditions. After the vipaka, javana cittas arise. These javana cittas can be lobha-mula, dosa- mula, moha-mula or kusala. "Input" to the thought process [what happens to us] is fixed by past kamma and current conditions. "Output" of the thought process [kamma created by javana cittas] can one of many, many options. When expressed this way, it certainly appears as though there is a "choice" going on. Let's look a bit closer at what happens. The javana cittas arise conditioned by the input and our accumulations, limited by carita. ========= > The main difficulty seemed to centre on conditionality, choice and, > particularly, the creation of new kamma. If there is no choice, no > control - if "everything is by conditions", how is it that "the > everchanging process conveniently called Reg or Christine" with no > control of kamma creating action, then inherits certain miserable > kammic fruits, and another everchanging process (conveniently > called "Andrew, KenH or Steve") also with no choice, no control of > kamma creating action then inherits delightful results? how can > one "improve" (setting aside that there is 'no-self' to improve) or, > alternatively, can we really 'choose' to alter behaviour? And back in > a circle to the perceived lack of fairness in inheriting vipaka at > all when there is no real choice in action ...'; this led to "won't > we all get to Nibanna (or not, as the case may be) eventually, so why > bother with 'seeking' deliverance?", and 'can one, anyway'? ================= What is your current situation right now and how did it arise? You are reading this message because you have access to a computer (conditions) and you have an interest in this subject (accumulations). Looking backward, it seems intuitive that the current situation did not arise randomly; there were conditions and accumulations which caused it to arise. Looking backward, we can probably put together a very rough sketch of what led to the current situation. Does it not therefore make sense that future "current situations" will also be a result of conditions and accumulations? Does this make the future pre-destined? Our vision of the past is hazy at best; our vision of the future is even less clear. How can we say that the future is pre-destined if we accept that there is no way that we could forsee or anticipate it? One year ago, I was attending my weekly Abhidhamma class when the teacher asked for a volunteer to teach the beginner's class in 2002. These were the conditions. Because of my good and bad accumulations (love of the Dhamma, desire to improve my understanding of the Dhamma, pride, etc.), I volunteered. Before the class, there is no way that I could have anticipated that he would ask for volunteers. Was it "pre-destined" that I would be start being an Abhidhamma teacher in 2002? My answer is, "the question should not arise". Reading this message may be a condition for one person to "decide to sit back and wait for Nibbana". For another person, this message may be a condition to think, "Rob is an arrogant @$#%&*!" Yet another person may have the following thought arise, "Now I understand why the concepts of free-will, choice and predeterminism are based on wrong-view of self." It all depends on accumulations. Does this help at all? Extreme Metta, Rob M :-) 17584 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:05am Subject: [dsg] Re: [determing stage" Hi Larry, Rob K and Sarah can correct any of my mistakes. --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Robert, Rob, & Sarah, > > Would it be correct to say kamma is always just? Good intentions always > produce good results, eventually. When a good intention seems to produce > a bad result, the result is actually the result of some other bad > intention? I would not apply an ethical term such as "always just" to kamma. Kamma is a natural law, like gravity. Is gravity "always just"? Gravity applies to all things with mass all of the time. Does this "non-partiality" of gravity make it "always just"? The law of kamma applies to all beings all of the time. Does this "non- partiality" make it "always just"? > > Kamma result is rootless (causes no further kamma), does that mean it is > desireless? Is rootlessness a good thing? Do you like it? Kamma result (vipaka) is rootless and therefore does not contain lobha (desire). I guess that this makes vipaka desireless. You ask, "Is rootless a good thing?" What do you mean by good? If you mean "kusala" then the answer is that rootless is not "good" because it has no roots (positive or negative roots). You ask, "Do you like it?" If you mean "Do you like vipaka?", then I must confess that usually I do like it and this is what keeps me bound to samsara. :-( > > Is it correct that all experience is accumulated by sanna (memory)? Are > accumulations memories? Are they rootless? Sanna doesn't accumulate anything. Sanna marks an object and recognizes a previous mark on an object. The marking of sanna is extremely superficial; seeing things as they truly are is conditioned by panna. Memory is the macro-scale description of gazillions of sanna working together. Accumulations are not memories. Accumulations are created by cetana, memories are created by sanna. I think of accumulations as a mixture of latent tendencies and my character, quite distinct from my memories. Accumulations are not cittas and therefore the question of "rootless" is not valid. Accumulations condition (together with current conditions) the arising of javana cittas which is where the issue of "roots" arise. > > Does kamma result (vipaka) condition the arising of accumulations and > then those accumulations condition javana cittas which are the root > (kamma causing) consciousnesses (cittas) lust, hatred, bewilderment and > their opposites? Bingo! That is my understanding. > How does intention come into the picture here? Does > intention arise only with a javana citta? Does intention always produce > kamma? Does lust, hatred, bewilderment etc. only arise with javana > cittas? The cetasika cetana has two functions, in cittas without roots, it plays the role of coordinating / organizing the other cetasikas to do their function. In cittas with roots (only javana cittas have roots), the cetasika has the additional function of intention / volition / creating kamma. The commentary describes the role of cetana in a javana citta as, "Like a boss who directs workers and also does his share of the work as well; it is exceedingly energetic" > > Why aren't accumulations included in citta process? > I assume that "citta process" means "thought process". The description of the thought process is a listing of the order of cittas which arise. The description of the thought process does not go into the issue of why each citta arises (at least, not that I have read, if one of the commentaries has this information, I would be really keen to read it). Accumulations are not cittas, they are part of the "why" issue. Metta, Rob M :-) 17585 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:10am Subject: Re: Right livelihood - Samma-ajiva Hi All, What about somebody in marketing or sales (I am not talking about the "used car salesperson" here). Is that wrong livelihood as well? Metta, Rob M :-) --- "Andrew " wrote: > Hi Azita, Jon & all > Thanks for your replies which I did find most useful. As an > ex-lawyer, I was actually considering whether the practice of law is > right livelihood. Over the last year, I've lost count of the number > of articles I've read on legal professional ethics. Of interest is > the strong "representational" view that a lawyer must do everything to > advantage the client short of misleading the court or breaking the > law. This usually leads to disadvantaging the client's adversary. > Bhikkhu Bodhi writes of samma-ajiva that we should earn a living "in > ways which do not entail harm or suffering for others". Is the lawyer > acting on instructions from a malicious client practising wrong > livelihood because of the harm done to the client's adversary? > Bhikkhu Bodhi also says that if your work violates Right Speech, it is > wrong livelihood. How does this relate to the lawyer seeking to > discredit a witness on cross-examination? I know Jon has a legal > background like me and I'm not expecting anyone to answer these > questions. They came to mind during my reading. Whereas initially, I > thought "of course being a lawyer is right livelihood", I am now more > of the view that it is one of those occupations that may or may not be > right livelihood depending upon how it is practiced. > Andrew 17586 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:16am Subject: Re: A 'Funny' Question Hi Swee Boon, What would motivate me to tell my friend about my attainment? The Buddha was certainly not "shy" about mentioning his own attainment. I suspect that the Buddha's motivation was to use this as a teaching aid. Very interesting question. Metta, Rob M :-) --- "nidive " wrote: > Hi ALL, > > Here's a 'funny' question. > > If let's say you attained the first stage of awakening of a > sotapanna, would you confide your attainment with any close Dhamma > friends? Or would you rather keep it to yourself? > > NEO Swee Boon 17587 From: chase8383 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:34am Subject: Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and vipaka? Hi Christine Christine: "I tried to imagine not seeking answers but found I would need to become a different person ... I could agree they were a hindrance if by 'answers' you meant merely the proliferation of thought. But I tend to see 'looking for answers' as 'looking for truth' (in the Dhamma)." Well, let me ask you. Is it what you learn that's important, or is it what falls away? Is it the addition, or is it the subtraction that counts? If we get involved in something new, something we have a preconceived notion about. In understanding it, our notions of it have to fall away. So are we looking for "answers", or are we just allowing our concepts to fall away so we can perceive the truth of it? That's what I meant. Peace, David 17588 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas Howard You explain in a later post that you are basically following the paticca-samuppada (dependent origination) here. However, it may be more helpful to consider paticca-samuppada separately from the series in which moments of consciousness a (citta-vitthi) arise, which is the sequence of events you are describing. Citta-vitthi explains the sequence of moments of consciousness that occur when, say, a sense-object impinges on a sense-door and is experienced by the sense-door consciousness. In paticca-samuppada (which explains the forces at work that keep us in the round of births and deaths), the various links are not each successive moments of consciousness. I'd like to suggest that, from the point of view of the development of the path, the important thing to know in relation to the 'seeing experience' is that it comprises 2 separate and distinct dhammas, one (seeing consciousness) that experiences an object and another (visible object) that does not. I believe that we don't know visible object for what it really is – just that which is experienced through the eye-door – despite the fact that it is with us for virtually the whole of our waking life. So here's an alternative reflection to yours below ;-)). Open your eyes, and consider what's there that's not there when your eyes are closed. That's one way of describing visible object. Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and James) - > Some thoughts. Yes, open your eyes and there's a lamp on a table on > top of a carpet and next to a chair in the room. What is all that? It's as follows: > Experience (by means of volition) the sequence of events we call > "opening our eyes", and there is activated the operation of discernment > [sankhara -> vi~n~nana]. Because the required discernment is operative, there > can arise a visual object (an image) [vi~n~nana -> namarupa]. Because the > required image is available the sight sense door can be activated [namarupa -> > salayatana]; actually, the coming together of discernment (vi~n~nana), sense > object (namarupa), and sense door *is* the contact. Contact is followed by > feeling. Then things seem to become personal - what one feels one recognizes > (and our concepts come into play, making us see "external objects" such as > lamps etc). This is my understanding. > > With metta, > Howard 17589 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:22am Subject: Re: Hello(Venerable PiyaDhammo) Hello Robert, Thank you for the welcome. I hope to continue to share and contribute when possible. As you probably know I will be in Thailand for some time. Perhaps, we might actually have the oppurtunity to meet at some point in time if you still travel there much? I revisited the post I wrote that you forwarded from D-l.. Actually, in hindsight if I cut through the humor, and that it is situationally fiction, all the reasons for my going forth are in that piece. Have you heard from Dan? Is he well? Good to here from you Robert. May you take care of yourself happily. May we all keep up the practice....Drop the unwholesome, cultivate the wholesome, and purify the mind. Your friend in Dhamma Phra Piyadhammo > Dear Venerable, > Thanks for joining the list. I'm sure any contibutions you make will be > much appreciated. There is actually a conversation between you (when > you were a layman) and Dan ,that I forwarded from D-l, in the useful > posts under "light relief". > Robert 17590 From: nidive Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 7:07am Subject: Re: A 'Funny' Question Hi robmoult, > What would motivate me to tell my friend about my attainment? Encouragement... that there indeed is a way out of samsara. That I know there is that WAY. That that WAY is attainable by those who practise the Dhamma diligently. Not to give up. Sharing... as a form of dana, sharing of merit. > The Buddha was certainly not "shy" about mentioning his own > attainment. I suspect that the Buddha's motivation was to use this > as a teaching aid. I don't think that confiding about one's attainment with those close to the Dhamma is anything wrong. There were Bikkhus and Bikkhunis who declared their attainment to the Buddha, isn't it? Since there is no Buddha now, the closest is our Dhamma friends and Bikkhus. NEO Swee Boon 17591 From: nidive Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 7:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] A 'Funny' Question Hi Sarah, > Is there any purpose or benefit in telling others about these > particular cittas or experiences? Curious.... As a form of encouragement that there is a way out of samsara. That I know that WAY. That anybody who practises the Dhamma diligently will attain that WAY too someday. Not to give up. As a 'living' example. As a form of sharing of merit, performing Dhamma dana. Lately, I developed this theory of why the Buddha said the beginning is beginningless, meaning that there is no beginning to samsara. It goes like this: (1) Condition C1 exists for Vipaka V1 to arise which then results in Condition C2. (2) Condition C2 then exists for Vipaka V2 to arise which then results in Condition C3. (3) Condition C3 then exists for Vipaka V3 to arise which then results in Condition C4. As we can see, we can continue forwards into the future on and on and it would never end. Supposing now that we are in Condition C9999999, can we assume Condition C1 to be the beginning of samsara? The answer is no, because Condition C1 requires a previous vipaka to arise. Now, supposing that this previous vipaka is present (Vipaka V0), can we assume Vipaka V0 to be the beginning of samsara? The answer is again no, because Vipaka V0 requires a previous condition to arise (or to be created, i.e. kamma to be created). As we can see, we can continue backwards into the past on and on and it would never end (or rather 'begin'). I thought this was very interesting. NEO Swee Boon 17592 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 8:41am Subject: Re: The Power of Kusula --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Robert K and Group, > Is it the case that one kusala moment overcomes countles akusala > moments? According to Ken H, 'long ago and far away' in a dsg post, > Robert K told him that kusala was derived from the same word as kusa > grass - the significance being that kusala 'cuts two ways'. Ken H > said last weekend that he had been meaning to ask Robert K what this > meant but just 'hadn't got around to it'. (howls of derision from > assembled puthujjana's). ___________________________ Ken H has a good memory and thanks for bringing this up Christine, The quote: "Kusa grass cuts a part of the hand with both edges. Even so kusala cuts off both sections of passions - those that have arisen and those that have not arisen" (abhidhammathasangaha). It can seem discouraging once we realise that the moments of akusala in a day far outnumber the moments of kusala. If it was simpoly a matter of each being of equal power then it would be impossible to ever end samsara. However the moments with right view have an extraordinary strength to be able to eliminate akusala. For example one might have some type of clinging to ritual. An extreme case: one thinks that by washing in the river and chanting or praying one is purifying oneself. This is a strong delusion but if one hears the right Dhamma one will give up such practice like dropping a hot rock. It won't be practiced again (at least in this life). In the same way insight can understand that all that arises is anatta and by that wrong views are increasingly subliminated until maggacitta permenently eradicates wrongview. I think it should be understaod that the sense desire cannot be eliminated at all before all wrong view and silabataparamasa (clinging to sila and wrong pratice) is gone. Hence the most important type of kusala is that associated with the insight into the conditioned nature of dhammas. I think one may still be mired in sense desire, still have greatly more akusala cittas arising than kusala but be lessening the clinging to self and that will lead gradually toward freedom. Robert 17593 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and v... Hi, Rob (and Christine) - Here are some thoughts on this matter. They are not Dhamma, but just my own thoughts which are hopefully not in contradiction to the Dhamma. There are *many* namarupic streams of experience, each of which we can think of, conventionally, as either a person or a world. (Actually, even the notion of a single such stream is conventional.) These experiential streams are not isololated, self-existent things, but are aspects or parts of an interacting, interconnected whole. The acts of volition arising in any mindstream have primary effect within that mindstream itself, but also ultimately influence all the others. The determination of the realm of experience into which a namarupic stream is "born" is vipaka of kamma previously ocurring in that stream. Others with similar kammic history are born into "the same" realm (although the realms of experience of two different streams are never identical). A given realm of experience is the joint-creation of the kamma of a multitude of beings, with the specifics of one's own experiences the result largely of one's own kamma, but also of the kamma of others. It is a vast, extraordinarily complex, interactive network. From the perspective of the network as a whole, if there were such such a perspective, perhaps events proceed deterministically. But from the limited perspective of a single mindstream, that is not so. What occurs in "one's world" is multiply conditioned but most directly by one's own volitional actions. Those actions are, of course, constrained by what is possible, and what is possible is determined by conditions, conditions brought into being by oneself and by others in varying degrees and strengths. The main condition directly influencing one's volition is desire, and the fact that we can will and act based on our desire is generally what we mean by the ability to exercise "free will". Even though our volition doesn't arise randomly (and what sort of "prize" would random volition be?), volition does occur, it is most strongly based on our own wishes, and it is the primary but not exclusive determiner of the events that will befall us. For example, when A does something to B, it is a direct consequence of factors within A (mainly volition) and within "the shared world" of A and B, plus the kamma that put B into the circumstances making it possible for A to do to B what A does. This kamma of B is among the conditions leading to the event, but, all told, it is a minor factor. The action of A is "owned" by A, and while B's kamma played some role in the event, B can neither be praised nor blamed, at least in any primary sense, for A's action. In a sense, every event is an occurrence within a vast, interactive kammic network, centering on one namarupic stream, or a few, or many, but ultimately going way beyond any of these. This, in part, is perhaps one reason why full individual "control" is an illusion. But also, because there are so *many* influences on any event, most with small impact, volition looms large, and there *is* choosing. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/11/02 6:39:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Hi Christine, > > Let me try and share my "Ah-ha" moment. > > --- "christine_forsyth > " wrote: > >Dear Group, > > > >A fair amount of time last weekend was spent in trying to move > from > >deep misunderstanding towards slightly shallower misunderstanding > of > >what kamma is, what vipaka is, what part conditionality and > anatta > >had in the mix, what, if any, choice we had. From this came the > >question of just how fair was vipaka if we are just choiceless > robots > >and automata (the word puppet wasn't mentioned...:-)). Some in > the > >group were still at a stage where they found the very idea of nama > >and rupa rather novel. > > > > ======= > > There are a gazillion vipakas waiting to happen at any moment. Each > of the vipakas were "created" by a past action. Which vipaka arises > at each moment depends on current conditions. After the vipaka, > javana cittas arise. These javana cittas can be lobha-mula, dosa- > mula, moha-mula or kusala. > > "Input" to the thought process [what happens to us] is fixed by past > kamma and current conditions. "Output" of the thought process [kamma > created by javana cittas] can one of many, many options. When > expressed this way, it certainly appears as though there is > a "choice" going on. Let's look a bit closer at what happens. The > javana cittas arise conditioned by the input and our accumulations, > limited by carita. > > ========= > > >The main difficulty seemed to centre on conditionality, choice > and, > >particularly, the creation of new kamma. If there is no choice, > no > >control - if "everything is by conditions", how is it that "the > >everchanging process conveniently called Reg or Christine" with no > >control of kamma creating action, then inherits certain miserable > >kammic fruits, and another everchanging process (conveniently > >called "Andrew, KenH or Steve") also with no choice, no control of > >kamma creating action then inherits delightful results? how can > >one "improve" (setting aside that there is 'no-self' to improve) > or, > >alternatively, can we really 'choose' to alter behaviour? And back > in > >a circle to the perceived lack of fairness in inheriting vipaka at > >all when there is no real choice in action ...'; this led > to "won't > >we all get to Nibanna (or not, as the case may be) eventually, so > why > >bother with 'seeking' deliverance?", and 'can one, anyway'? > > ================= > > What is your current situation right now and how did it arise? You > are reading this message because you have access to a computer > (conditions) and you have an interest in this subject > (accumulations). Looking backward, it seems intuitive that the > current situation did not arise randomly; there were conditions and > accumulations which caused it to arise. Looking backward, we can > probably put together a very rough sketch of what led to the current > situation. > > Does it not therefore make sense that future "current situations" > will also be a result of conditions and accumulations? Does this > make the future pre-destined? Our vision of the past is hazy at > best; our vision of the future is even less clear. How can we say > that the future is pre-destined if we accept that there is no way > that we could forsee or anticipate it? > > One year ago, I was attending my weekly Abhidhamma class when the > teacher asked for a volunteer to teach the beginner's class in 2002. > These were the conditions. Because of my good and bad accumulations > (love of the Dhamma, desire to improve my understanding of the > Dhamma, pride, etc.), I volunteered. Before the class, there is no > way that I could have anticipated that he would ask for volunteers. > Was it "pre-destined" that I would be start being an Abhidhamma > teacher in 2002? My answer is, "the question should not arise". > > Reading this message may be a condition for one person to "decide to > sit back and wait for Nibbana". For another person, this message may > be a condition to think, "Rob is an arrogant @$#%&*!" Yet another > person may have the following thought arise, "Now I understand why > the concepts of free-will, choice and predeterminism are based on > wrong-view of self." It all depends on accumulations. > > Does this help at all? > > Extreme Metta, > Rob M :-) > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17594 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas Hi, Jon - In a message dated 12/11/02 9:09:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Howard > > You explain in a later post that you are basically following the > paticca-samuppada (dependent origination) here. However, it may be > more helpful to consider paticca-samuppada separately from the series > in which moments of consciousness a (citta-vitthi) arise, which is > the sequence of events you are describing. > > Citta-vitthi explains the sequence of moments of consciousness that > occur when, say, a sense-object impinges on a sense-door and is > experienced by the sense-door consciousness. In paticca-samuppada > (which explains the forces at work that keep us in the round of > births and deaths), the various links are not each successive moments > of consciousness. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: That's quite possibly so. Do you have a sutta (ot other) reference for that? (I do think there is a temporal, predecessor relation implied, but not necessarily that of immediate predecessor. The relationship among vi~n~nana, namarupa, and salayatana, however, might be more of a logical-dependency realtion than a temporal one. I'm not very sure about that. ----------------------------------------------------- > > I'd like to suggest that, from the point of view of the development > of the path, the important thing to know in relation to the 'seeing > experience' is that it comprises 2 separate and distinct dhammas, one > (seeing consciousness) that experiences an object and another > (visible object) that does not. I believe that we don't know visible > object for what it really is – just that which is experienced through > the eye-door – despite the fact that it is with us for virtually the > whole of our waking life. > > So here's an alternative reflection to yours below ;-)). Open your > eyes, and consider what's there that's not there when your eyes are > closed. That's one way of describing visible object. > -------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't see that as an alternative view. It is my position as well. We open our eyes and what appears is visual object. As it is, there is no lamp or table or anything else. These "things" arise later and are mind-constructed. --------------------------------------------- > > Jon > > ====================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17595 From: James Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 9:38am Subject: Re: Show Off --- Star Kid wrote: > Hi Philip > > I am your sister Janet! I have read your first letter > and I think it's very bad, you can do it better > because your such a show off! Anyway, I am going to > tell Mum about your letter! (Ha! Ha!) > > Work well soon! > > Janet Chui: 8 years old. > My hobbies are: playing table tennis and reading. > > What is Buddhism? What help us? Please write to me. > > > Janet. Hi Star Kid Janet! How are you doing? I hope you are doing fine. Are you getting excited about Christmas? I hope you are trying to get along with your brother Philip. Though he may not say it all the time or show it all the time, I am sure he cares about you very much. I had a little sister and when we were growing up together I used to like to make her mad at me. It was very easy to do and I liked to see her reaction. I thought it was very funny. :-) Once she got so mad at me she threw a pair of scissors at me! :-) But now she is dead, she died pretty young (23), and I never got to tell her how much she meant to me. I think she knew, but I should have been a little nicer to her to show her more. Janet, please don't take your brother Philip for granted. He could be gone before you know it. And I bet you are really proud that he is your brother; I know that my sister was proud of me. Try to get along this Christmas and shoot for all year long. You ask, "What is Buddhism?" and "What can help us?" Gosh, these seem like simple questions, easy to answer, but they aren't. Buddhism is different to different people depending on what they need at the time. Buddhism is about kindness, generosity, honesty, goodness, truth, compassion; and Buddhism is also about wisdom, tranquility, and ultimate truth. Some people think that all of these things are different, but the Buddha knew better. He taught all of them because they are really all about the same thing. Put simply, Buddhism is about people. Buddhism is about you and me and your brother and all of us. It is about how we can live the best way possible without hurting each other and ourselves. What can help us? Well, Janet, think about all of the bad things that have ever happened to you in your life. I bet when you think about them, really hard, you will see that they were all caused because someone wasn't acting or thinking in the right way. Some people think that it is impossible to know what is the `right way' and what is the `wrong way' to act or think. That is silly talk. The Buddha told everyone exactly the right way they should act and think. It is called the Eightfold Path and the lessons are: 1.See things the right way 2.`Want to do things' in the right way 3.Talk to others in the right way 4.`Do things' in the right way 5.Work or go to school in the right way 6.Make your actions `balanced in the middle' in the right way 7.Pay attention to yourself, others, and the world in the right way 8.Make your mind `sharp' in the right way If we all do these eight things, at all times, it will help us. We will know the joy of having a happy family all the way up to the joy of knowing the ultimate truth. But, like your questions, these things are not so simple. Most people cannot do most of these things and so the world can be awfully unhappy at times. You ask the question `What can help us?' because we all do need help. I know that I am thankful that the Lord Buddha spent his life answering this question for us all. But now you, Philip, I, and everyone must take the responsibility to follow his lessons. It is a path that is taken step by step. Janet, I hope one of your steps this Christmas is to let Philip know how important he is to you. And if he does the same for you or not, that doesn't matter. We all walk the path by ourselves. Have a Happy Holidays. Love, James 17596 From: peterdac4298 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 0:50pm Subject: Re: Wrong speech in Jest Hi Christine I mentioned this kind of humour because it was exactly what Ajahn Cha used to do with devastating effect. But then he was an exponent of keeping the Dhamma simple, '...just so...', or, '...just that much...', etc. He was such a brilliant mimic, the victim never knew what was the more embarrassing - the truth of what he had just heard about himself, or his temporary inability to control his ludicrously headless response! He almost never, as far as I knew, ever needed to apologize to anyone. Certainly not to me! For the rest of us, we can merely look at the arising of confusion when confronted by all the different factors that come into play. Seeing the characteristics of that doubt, that is where the Dhamma is, that's it's true nature: when seen with sufficient clarity, when seen often enough, is what ultimately liberates us from it. Cheers Peter --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Peter, > > Thanks for your reply - mostly I agree - but when you said "Anything > can backfire and blow up > in one's face, but if one's conscience is clear then there is no > regret beyond the need to assure the offended person that no offence > was intended", I wondered if we ever really know our own intentions > fully? Realities are such fleeting paramattha dhammas and are beyond > control. An example of brushing away an ant was given on the w/e - > that it was not clearly kusala or akusala because of mixed motives - > kindness in wishing to be gentle with another tiny being, annoyance > at the physical feel and surprise of little crawling feet, and > conceit at 'Oh what a good Buddhist I am in not killing an ant'. > It is hard enough in everyday life when guided by the Precepts to > know our true motives - how much harder, at least for me, when there > is the overlay of humour. > > metta, > Christine > --- "peterdac4298 > " wrote: > > Hi Christine > > > > Maybe humour can be quite skillful as a way to make the recipient > > see some point that they might otherwise be reluctant to see, > > especially if they end up laughing at themselves and their own > > shortcomings. 17597 From: peterdac4298 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 1:15pm Subject: Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and vipaka? Hi Christine I thought that was what the path was all about. Seeing the nature of doubt, confusion and various other kinds of Dukkha: seeing them just as they are. The quotes from K. Sujin in other recent posts seem to me to be pointing at this too: well at least including this possibility. Cheers Peter --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Peter, > 'One should find out for oneself' is almost a mantra on this List > also. Have you ever found out for yourself? If so, a hint would be > appreciated. :) > Let's advocate for the Rights of those who require (or is that > desire) spoon feeding! :) > > metta, > Christine > > --- "peterdac4298 " > wrote: > > Hi Christine > > Every time I have put this kind of question to a teacher at some > > time or other I have invariably had the same response. Namely to > be > > urged to see for oneself. > > Cheers > > Peter 17598 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 1:38pm Subject: [dsg] Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and v... Hi Howard, I really like what you have written. I have inserted some questions. --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Rob (and Christine) - > > Here are some thoughts on this matter. They are not Dhamma, but just > my own thoughts which are hopefully not in contradiction to the Dhamma. > There are *many* namarupic streams of experience, each of which we can > think of, conventionally, as either a person or a world. (Actually, even the > notion of a single such stream is conventional.) These experiential streams > are not isololated, self-existent things, but are aspects or parts of an > interacting, interconnected whole. ======= My first impression is that a "namarupic stream of experience" might be a fancy way of saying "self". Then I noticed that you wrote, "person or a world"; interesting, do you mean that "the world" has nama (mind)? Have you run across the concept of "an interacting, interconnected whole" in the Dhamma? ====== > The acts of volition arising in any > mindstream have primary effect within that mindstream itself, but also > ultimately influence all the others. ======= I think that what you are saying is that kamma is what interconnects everything. I can see how my actions impact those with whom I have immediate contact (conditions are created), but are you suggesting, "I influence 'Howard' and because I influence 'Howard', the way in which 'Howard' influences his wife (with whom I have no direct contact, promise :-) ) will be impacted... therefore I have an indirect influence on 'Howard's wife' and an even more indirect influence on 'the friend of Howard's wife"? =========== > The determination of the realm of > experience into which a namarupic stream is "born" is vipaka of kamma > previously ocurring in that stream. Others with similar kammic history are > born into "the same" realm (although the realms of experience of two > different streams are never identical). A given realm of experience is the > joint-creation of the kamma of a multitude of beings, with the specifics of > one's own experiences the result largely of one's own kamma, but also of the > kamma of others. It is a vast, extraordinarily complex, interactive network. ========== Are you saying that the world arises because of collective kamma? Does this imply that rocks and trees arise because of collective kamma? BTW, the Abhidhamma says that rocks and trees arise because of utu, not kamma (I am not trying to shoot down your argument, I am trying to understand it better... it sounds interesting). =========== > From the perspective of the network as a whole, if there were such such a > perspective, perhaps events proceed deterministically. But from the limited > perspective of a single mindstream, that is not so. =========== I think that we are saying the same thing here; that the concept of predeterminism doesn't apply from our own frame of reference. =========== > What occurs in "one's world" is multiply conditioned but most > directly by one's own volitional actions. Those actions are, of course, > constrained by what is possible, and what is possible is determined by > conditions, conditions brought into being by oneself and by others in varying > degrees and strengths. The main condition directly influencing one's volition > is desire, and the fact that we can will and act based on our desire is > generally what we mean by the ability to exercise "free will". ========== I think that our volition is conditioned by our accumulations and desire is certainly a major accumulation in each of us. However, there are many moments when other accumulations take centre stage. Please explain how acting based on desire means exercising "free will". I am confused here. ========== > Even though > our volition doesn't arise randomly (and what sort of "prize" would random > volition be?), volition does occur, it is most strongly based on our own > wishes, and it is the primary but not exclusive determiner of the events that > will befall us. For example, when A does something to B, it is a direct > consequence of factors within A (mainly volition) and within "the shared > world" of A and B, plus the kamma that put B into the circumstances making it > possible for A to do to B what A does. This kamma of B is among the > conditions leading to the event, but, all told, it is a minor factor. The > action of A is "owned" by A, and while B's kamma played some role in the > event, B can neither be praised nor blamed, at least in any primary sense, > for A's action. =========== Could we say that volition plays the "active role" in determining what happens to us, while conditions have a "passive role"? Let us expand on your example of A doing something to B, let us say for example that A hits B. From the perspective of A ------------------------- The hitting arose because of conditions (the presence of B is one of the conditions) and accumulations (in this case probably anger). The impersonal law of kamma ensures that a seed of future akusala vipaka is sown and it may impact A in the future (all beings are the owners of their own kamma). From the perspective of B ------------------------- Being hit arose because of conditions (the presence of A is one of the conditions) that allowed a past akusala kammic effort to develop into a vipaka at that moment. The impersonal law of kamma has played its part when the vipaka arose. ============ > In a sense, every event is an occurrence within a vast, interactive > kammic network, centering on one namarupic stream, or a few, or many, but > ultimately going way beyond any of these. This, in part, is perhaps one > reason why full individual "control" is an illusion. But also, because there > are so *many* influences on any event, most with small impact, volition looms > large, and there *is* choosing. ============== Howard, I am enjoying your post. Metta, Rob M :-) 17599 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 1:47pm Subject: Re: A 'Funny' Question Hi Swee Boon, I was answering from a layperson's perspective because I am pretty sure that there is a Vinaya rule that prohibits monks or nuns from discussing their attainments. I believe that during the Buddha's time, it was common for monks or nuns to go to the Buddha (or the Buddha would go to them) to confirm that they had attained a certain stage. Being able to see this type of thing, the Buddha could tell the monk / nun if they were on the right path. In other words, it was part of the way in which the Buddha instructed the monks / nuns. I have the impression that it wasn't a casual chat, but might even have been a structured ceremony. Perhaps someone closer to the Vinaya can help me out here. Metta, Rob M :-) --- "nidive " wrote: > Hi robmoult, > > > What would motivate me to tell my friend about my attainment? > Encouragement... that there indeed is a way out of samsara. That I > know there is that WAY. That that WAY is attainable by those who > practise the Dhamma diligently. Not to give up. > Sharing... as a form of dana, sharing of merit. > > > The Buddha was certainly not "shy" about mentioning his own > > attainment. I suspect that the Buddha's motivation was to use this > > as a teaching aid. > I don't think that confiding about one's attainment with those close > to the Dhamma is anything wrong. There were Bikkhus and Bikkhunis > who declared their attainment to the Buddha, isn't it? > Since there is no Buddha now, the closest is our Dhamma friends and > Bikkhus. > > NEO Swee Boon 17600 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:21pm Subject: Re: Right livelihood - Samma-ajiva Hi Rob, Andrew and all, Glad to see Azita's and Jon's replies to the first post in this thread. On another tack, there is a note attached to the verse on Wrong Livelihood in MN 117 - note 1110 (Bodhi) says 'These are wrong means for bhikkhus to acquire their requisites; they are explained at Vsm I, 61-65. MA says that those mentioned in the sutta are not the only kinds of wrong livelihood, which included any mode of earning one's living that involves transgression of the precepts. At AN 5:177/iii.208 the Buddha mentions five kinds of wrong livelihood for lay people: dealing in arms, beings, meat, intoxicants, and poisons. So apart from the five kinds of wrong livelihood listed above, it is 'not transgressing the Precepts' that determines the mode of working within any other livelihood. Andrew - I don't know much about the profession of Law, but isn't there something in the Ethics of a Solicitor that if they *know* (perhaps by private confession) their client is guilty they can withdraw service? A bit like the 'First, Do no harm' of the Medical profession, except the lawyer themselves is included in the assessment of who can be harmed. Isn't the division into specialties e.g. property, litigation, criminal etc an attempt at controlling not only the quantity of work but also the type of case one deals with, usually for reasons of expertise? Couldn't this be used as a skilfull means not to deal with types of cases more likely to have ethical concerns for the individual solicitor/barrister? i.e. seek training and employment if an ethically safer specialty? In my own case, as a hospital social worker - it *seems* to be a profession of Right Livelihood. But there are daily dilemmas. I cannot refuse to see any patient at the hospital in need (and would not). I have had to work out (within the legal framework of the state, and the policies and work instructions of my employer) how I deal with, for example, women seeking abortions, in a way that does not leave the woman in distress, but considers kamma and vipaka including that of the little one, the woman, myself, and the clinicians who would perform the procedure. As well, I need to take care that I am not imposing my religious values on someone who does not hold the same view. I also cannot refuse (and would not) to see perpetrators of violent or sexual crimes against children who are distressed over that (or not) or over another matter. (And who am I to set myself apart from these persons anyway - that is just mana - perhaps somewhere in Samsara I, too, was such a one.) So would it be fair to say that a Buddhist should look at Word of the Buddha first in choosing a livelihood, but after that it is it is not the "who" or the "what", but the "how" of practising of the Dhamma in daily life. And this presupposes one is lucky enough to have a choice of livelihood. Sometimes in this world there is no choice other than of one particular type of work or starvation. metta, Christine --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi All, > > What about somebody in marketing or sales (I am not talking about > the "used car salesperson" here). Is that wrong livelihood as well? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > 17601 From: James Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:26pm Subject: Re: A 'Funny' Question --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Swee Boon, > > I was answering from a layperson's perspective because I am pretty > sure that there is a Vinaya rule that prohibits monks or nuns from > discussing their attainments. > > I believe that during the Buddha's time, it was common for monks or > nuns to go to the Buddha (or the Buddha would go to them) to confirm > that they had attained a certain stage. Being able to see this type > of thing, the Buddha could tell the monk / nun if they were on the > right path. In other words, it was part of the way in which the > Buddha instructed the monks / nuns. I have the impression that it > wasn't a casual chat, but might even have been a structured ceremony. > > Perhaps someone closer to the Vinaya can help me out here. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Rob M, A monk or nun can disclose the attainment of a certain stage of insight to anyone, but to lie about such knowingly is one of the highest offenses, a Parajika offense, and is cause for permanent expulsion from the Sangha. The rule is as follows: "Should any bhikkhu, without direct knowledge, boast of a superior human state, a truly noble knowledge and vision as present in himself, saying, "Thus do I know; thus do I see," such that regardless of whether or not he is cross-examined on a later occasion, he -- being remorseful and desirous of purification -- might say, "Friends, not knowing, I said I know; not seeing, I said I see -- vainly, falsely, idly," unless it was from over-estimation, he also is defeated and no longer in communion." Metta, James 17602 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:28pm Subject: Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and vipaka? Hi Peter, I agree with you. Just ruefully wishing there was an easy certain method of gaining liberation, instead of having to find it for oneself through all the meandering paths and dead end streets of daily life. It seems so very difficult, so much at stake, and no guarantees that one won't slip backwards for many lives. Sometimes I'm torn between living the dhamma 'as if my hair was on fire' and 'just going with the flow'. metta, Christine --- "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi Christine > > I thought that was what the path was all about. Seeing the nature > of doubt, confusion and various other kinds of Dukkha: seeing them > just as they are. The quotes from K. Sujin in other recent posts > seem to me to be pointing at this too: well at least including this > possibility. > > Cheers > Peter 17603 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 3:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Dear Kom and all, Thanks Kom. Most of us do find humour in embarrassing things happening to others. There is even a weekly T.V. program called 'Funniest Home Videos' which consists of unexpected, usually embarassing, things happening people which their families and friends send in. I wonder if anyone has ever done an analysis of exactly what humour is - often it shows up the incongruities in daily life, but, as well, laughter seems to be a 'symptom of relief' that whatever is happening is happening to someone else and not to me. Thanks for the great reminders of the Buddha's teaching on Right Speech, and the importance of kindness as a measuring stick. metta, Christine --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: <>> "I am sometimes inspired by the Buddha's teaching of good speeches. He said, he wouldn't himself speak unless 5 factors are met: 1) Truthful 2) Useful, inclining toward the dhamma 3) Appropriate for the time (Inappropriate speech renders the speech non-useful) 4) With well-spoken words 5) With kindness Do we speak with kindness all the time, even among friends in Dhamma? Sometimes we joke because it entertains us, sometimes because it entertains others, and sometimes it gives other happiness. Even if we cannot be like the Buddha, but that doesn't really prevent us from learning the benefit of good speeches, spoken with kindness." 17604 From: peterdac4298 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 3:29pm Subject: Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and vipaka? Hi Christine --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Peter, > > I agree with you. Just ruefully wishing there was an easy certain > method of gaining liberation, instead of having to find it for > oneself through all the meandering paths and dead end streets of > daily life. My wish too. > It seems so very difficult, so much at stake, and no > guarantees that one won't slip backwards for many lives. Yep, with you there too. > Sometimes I'm torn between living the dhamma 'as if my hair was on > fire' and 'just going with the flow'. > A bit like swings and roundabouts! What ever it takes to get back to the balance. Or as James would say, finding our centre. > metta, > Christine > Cheers Peter > 17605 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 3:32pm Subject: [dsg] Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and v... > There are *many* namarupic streams of experience, each of which we can > think of, conventionally, as either a person or a world. (Actually, even the > notion of a single such stream is conventional.) To think of namarupic streams of experience (whatever that is) as a person, as what you are is to fall into self-view. Metta, Victor 17606 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 3:49pm Subject: The Three Abstinences Dear Group, (especially those in the Right Livelihood, and Wrong Speech corners) Just another thought after browsing the notes that KenH sent me of the w/e SEQ.dsg meeting. There was some discussion about the three abstinences (virati- cetasikas). These are not often mentioned on dsg. (?) Actually I couldn't find anything on a search of the archives - abstinence from wrong speech, abstinence from wrong action, abstinence from wrong livelihood. Would it be fair to say that Abstinence means more than just 'not doing', it means 'choosing not 'to do' when the opportunity 'to do' has arisen.' e.g. 'biting one's tongue' and defeating a desire to reply to an insult by using scintillatingly devastating Wrong Speech, or, 'catching and transporting the cane toad to where it can't poison the dog's water rather than clobbering it with a cricket bat' (abstinence from wrong action)? metta, Christine 17607 From: peterdac4298 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 3:58pm Subject: Re: A 'Funny' Question Hi Rob, James and all Due to the severity of the Parajika offence outlined by James above, most Bhikkhus won't even discuss the subject of their attainments in any manner with lay people, though they will quite happily let a lay person talk about their own. Amongst themselves monks often talk about it in general terms using anecdotes as well as their own experiences for reference where it would be relevant, and some of these stories can be very funny. But as regards path stages and attainments, it is almost always usual for a more junior monk to seek out the Abbott on such matters. "... unless it was from over-estimation,..." This is an escape clause that the Buddha allowed, but most Bhikkhus are so keen to avoid any doubt at all in the minds of their supporting communities that it is almost never invoked, in that they just don't say anything at all about any kind of attainment whatsoever. Cheers Peter --- "James " wrote: > --- "robmoult " > wrote: > > Hi Swee Boon, > > > > I was answering from a layperson's perspective because I am pretty > > sure that there is a Vinaya rule that prohibits monks or nuns from > > discussing their attainments. > > > > I believe that during the Buddha's time, it was common for monks > or > > nuns to go to the Buddha (or the Buddha would go to them) to > confirm > > that they had attained a certain stage. Being able to see this > type > > of thing, the Buddha could tell the monk / nun if they were on the > > right path. In other words, it was part of the way in which the > > Buddha instructed the monks / nuns. I have the impression that it > > wasn't a casual chat, but might even have been a structured > ceremony. > > > > Perhaps someone closer to the Vinaya can help me out here. > > > > Metta, > > Rob M :-) > > Rob M, > > A monk or nun can disclose the attainment of a certain stage of > insight to anyone, but to lie about such knowingly is one of the > highest offenses, a Parajika offense, and is cause for permanent > expulsion from the Sangha. The rule is as follows: > > "Should any bhikkhu, without direct knowledge, boast of a superior > human state, a truly noble knowledge and vision as present in > himself, saying, "Thus do I know; thus do I see," such that > regardless of whether or not he is cross-examined on a later > occasion, he -- being remorseful and desirous of purification -- > might say, "Friends, not knowing, I said I know; not seeing, I said > I see -- vainly, falsely, idly," unless it was from over- estimation, > he also is defeated and no longer in communion." > > Metta, James 17608 From: bodhi2500 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 3:47pm Subject: Re: Out of Cooran - Metta is first "developed" towards oneself :) Hi Sarah --- Sarah wrote: ..... Sarah: Would you kindly in turn give me some refs as to where it (Sabbattataaya) occurs w/r to the brahmaviharas? .... Steve: As far as I can tell "Sabbattataaya" only occurs with reference to the Brahmavihara's, usally in the stock discription (and a few slight variants,(Mahagovinda Sutta D.19) of the development of the Brahmavihara's. > "He abides pervading one quarter with a mind imbued with loving- kindness(compassion,mudita,upekkha),likewise the 2nd,likewise the 3rd,likewise the 4th;so above,below,around,and everywhere, and "to all as to himself"(Sabbattataaya) he abides pervading the all encompassing world with a mind imbued with loving-kindness (compassion,mudita,upekkha),abundant,exalted,immeasurable,without hostility and without ill will." Equally(saabattataaya):to all classed as inferior,medium,superior,friendly,hostile,neutral, etc. just as to oneself (attataa); equality with oneself(atta-samataa) without making the distinction "This is another being" in what is meant. or alternatively equally (sabbattataaya) is with the whole state of ones mind; not reserving even a little ,is what is meant. "Sabbattataaya also occurs in the Appamannavibhango in the Vibhanga quite a few times, but it seems always in the same context(I dont have a eng. translation) --------------------- Sarah: I'd also be glad for the Pali (and yr literal translation) for key phrases in the Visud. which are so often quoted. In fact when you've collected all the relevant terms, perhaps you may add them with expanatory comments we can refer to as needed. --------------------- Steve: I'll try to find the relevant Pali passages, but as for a translation and explanation, I think I better leave that up to someone who has a better understanding of Pali and Dhamma than me. Vis. IX8> First of all it should be developed only towards oneself,doing it repeatedly thus: 'May I be happy and free from suffering' or 'May I keep myself free from enmity, affliction and anxiety and live happily'. Pali> Sabbapa.thama.m pana 'aha.m sukhito homi niddukkho'ti vaa, 'avero abyaapajjo aniigho sukhii attaana.m pariharaamii'ti vaa eva.m punappuna.m attaniyeva bhaavetabbaa. ..... A.K. Warders intro to Pali has > Sabbattataa - > non-discrimination (all-self-ness) considering all beings as like > oneself, putting oneself in the place of others. ..... Sarah ..or treating others as we would like to be treated?? ..... Steve: yes, I think so ..... Sarah: I just went to an earlier post I wrote to look at whether this term in used in the Udana verse (quoted in the Vism) and commentary notes and would like to give a link to this post as some of the comments may be useful to consider for other relevant threads such as conceit and discouragement and self-attachment too: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m5476.html ------------ Steve: I dont think the term is in the Udana or its commentary.(perhapes a variant of it may be,I'm not sure) ----------- Sarah: This is the extract with the actual commentary notes: ***** After King Pasenadi and Queen Mallika concluded that indeed there was no one dearer than themselves, the Buddha spoke these lines in Udana, 5- 1, `Dear' (Masefield trans): `Having explored all quarters with the mind, one would simply not attain that dearer than the self in any place; thus is the self dear separately to others - therefore one desiring self should not harm another.' The commentary adds: `.....One would simply not attain that dearer than the self in any place (n'ev'ajjhagaapiyataram attanaa kvaci): whatever man, seeking out with every endeavour someone else (more) excessively dear than the self, would neither attain nor behold (such) in any place, anywhere in the (ten) quarters.Thus is the self dear separately to others (evam piyo puthu attaa paresa.m): thus is the self alone dear separately, severally, to this and that being, by way of the non-discovery of anyone dearer than the self. Therefore one desiring self should not harm another (tasmaa na hi.mse param attakaama): since each being holds the self dear in that way, is one desiring happiness for that self, one for whom dukkha is repulsive, therefore one desiring self, in wanting well-being and happiness for that self, should not harm, should not kill, should not even antagonise with the hand....and so on, another being, upwards from and including even a mere ant or (other) samll insect. for when dukkha is caused by oneself to some other, that (dukkha) is, after an interval of time, observed in one's (own) self, as though it were passing over therefrom. for this is the law of karma.' ****** Steve, really appreciating your participation. As Christine said, this is a thread that never dies (or sth like that), so will appreciate anything you find or quote too. Sarah ====== Thank-you. Steve 17609 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:00pm Subject: nibbana Dear group, I have been trying to figure out the difference between the experience of nibbana during a path moment and the rest of the life of an ariyan. It seems like when a stream enterer, for example, experiences nibbana it must be something like the absolute certainty that he will never again be interested in formulating an opinion or believing in anything. That experience is temporary but its truth is not. Subsequently, the stream enterer can at any time notice that he is not interested in forming an opinion but the particular experience of "never again" is rare and takes special conditions to experience it. That is why the meditative attainment of cessation is not nibbana, because it is temporary. There is no finality to it. All this leads me to believe that nibbana is a mere cessation. The defilements that have ceased for a stream enterer have simply ceased and that is his portion of nibbana. There is nothing more to it. When an arahat dies the kind of consciousness necessary to generate a new life cannot arise because that kind of consciousness is a defilement that no longer arises. So that's the end of the arahat, kaput, nothing beyond. Anyone who asserts that nibbana must be other than a mere cessation must find that otherness in the ariyan's life because the cessation of defilements is nibbana and that cessation is lived with. What do you think? Larry 17610 From: peterdac4298 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:23pm Subject: Re: The Three Abstinences --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, (especially those in the Right Livelihood, and Wrong > Speech corners) > Would it be fair to say that Abstinence means more than just 'not > doing', it means 'choosing not 'to do' when the opportunity 'to do' > has arisen.' e.g. 'biting one's tongue' and defeating a desire to > reply to an insult by using scintillatingly devastating Wrong Speech, > or, 'catching and transporting the cane toad to where it can't > poison the dog's water rather than clobbering it with a cricket bat' > (abstinence from wrong action)? > > metta, > Christine Hi Christine At Wat Ba Pong and branches, where forest rats, (looking more like mice to me) plagued the monastery kitchen, were routinely caught, kept in a paper bag over night (for some reason they never tried to get out of these bags, even though their jaws were very powerful and teeth needle sharp). We released them the following mornings on alms round at any place considered to be midway between the Wat and the village to which the monks would be visiting that morning. Cheers Peter 17611 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:33pm Subject: Re: nibbana Hi Larry, I'm weak in this area, but let me put my two cents worth in. --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Dear group, > > I have been trying to figure out the difference between the experience > of nibbana during a path moment and the rest of the life of an ariyan. > It seems like when a stream enterer, for example, experiences nibbana it > must be something like the absolute certainty that he will never again > be interested in formulating an opinion or believing in anything. That > experience is temporary but its truth is not. Subsequently, the stream > enterer can at any time notice that he is not interested in forming an > opinion but the particular experience of "never again" is rare and takes > special conditions to experience it. That is why the meditative > attainment of cessation is not nibbana, because it is temporary. There > is no finality to it. > > All this leads me to believe that nibbana is a mere cessation. The > defilements that have ceased for a stream enterer have simply ceased and > that is his portion of nibbana. There is nothing more to it. When an > arahat dies the kind of consciousness necessary to generate a new life > cannot arise because that kind of consciousness is a defilement that no > longer arises. So that's the end of the arahat, kaput, nothing beyond. > Anyone who asserts that nibbana must be other than a mere cessation must > find that otherness in the ariyan's life because the cessation of > defilements is nibbana and that cessation is lived with. > > What do you think? ========= During a path moment and during fruit moments, nibbana is the object of the citta. What makes a path moment special is that it has the function of uprooting defilements (uprooting only needs to happen once): - Stream entry eradicates wrong view, envy, avarice and doubt - Once returning doesn't eradicate anything, it just weakens - Non-returning eradicates sensual greed, hatred and worry - Arahant eradicates delusion, shamelessness, recklessness, restlessness, other forms of lobha (clining to existence), conceit, sloth and torpor Any further cittas after the path citta that also take nibbana as an object will be fruit cittas (until the next cleansing, vodana, occurs). Does this help? Metta, Rob M :-) 17612 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:22pm Subject: Re: The Three Abstinences Hi Christine, --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Would it be fair to say that Abstinence means more than just 'not > doing', it means 'choosing not 'to do' when the opportunity 'to do' > has arisen.' There are three degrees of Abstinence (in increasing order): - Abstaining in spite of opportunity obtained (momentary) - Abstaining because of observance of precepts (temporary) - Abstaining by way of eradication (permanent, for ariyans) Does this answer the question? Metta, Rob M :-) 17613 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [determing stage" H Rob, Thanks for your reply. You didn't answer the question do good intentions always produce good results, never bad results. The reason I ask is because intentionality doesn't usually figure into conventional understanding of cause and effect. So cause and effect and kammic cause and result seem to be operating in different realms but somehow together. Correct? You say rootlessness isn't good by definition but I would say it is ultimately good just because it causes no harm. What is your reasoning that memory and accumulations are different and only javana cittas are accumulated? Is learning javana cittas or resultant? Does sanna play a role in remembering accumulations in connection with kamma resultant consciousness and thence coordinating with intention and root (kamma causing) consciousnesses? Thanks for your help. Larry 17614 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: nibbana Hi Rob, What's the difference between the experience of nibbana and the living of nibbana? Larry 17615 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 0:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? In a message dated 12/10/2002 7:34:49 PM Pacific Standard Time, Bodhi2500@a... writes: > Both voidness and empty are contemplation on not self. Nibbana is both the > ultimate voidness but it is not empty? > > Steve > Hi Steve. In this context I interpret the word empty to mean:--"empty of satifaction." In this case I believe "empty" is being used as a basic evaluation rather than a statement of ultimate meaning. Support for that conclusion is based on the listing in the Patisambhidamagga that describes "conditions as empty" and the "unconditioned as not empty." Since a large part of this list is evaluation oriented, and it only seems to make sense to interpret it this way, I think it is likely a correct interpretation. TG 17616 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 0:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? In a message dated 12/10/2002 9:30:08 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Thanks Steve, > > Ritta and sunna seem like synonyms. Any ideas on in what sense nibbana > is not empty? > > Larry > Hi Larry Check out my response to Steve and see what you think. :) TG 17617 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 5:04pm Subject: Re: The Three Abstinences Hi Peter, Thanks for telling us such a satisfying story! I catch the cane toads in plastic shopping bags (so I don't have to touch them or their poison glands) and take them up the road to the only street light in the area (attracts a food source of moths etc.) and release them. Though I now wonder about the poor moths and my responsibility in their deaths. The dog and local moths vs the moths up the road .... And I DO understand the sensitivity of Aussie Environmentalists to not eradicating this introduced pest which is devastating to small fauna. But it is another Being, and our individual behaviour is covered by the Dhamma, so what is one to do? metta, Christine > Hi Christine > > At Wat Ba Pong and branches, where forest rats, (looking more like > mice to me) plagued the monastery kitchen, were routinely caught, > kept in a paper bag over night (for some reason they never tried to > get out of these bags, even though their jaws were very powerful and > teeth needle sharp). We released them the following mornings on > alms round at any place considered to be midway between the Wat and > the village to which the monks would be visiting that morning. > > Cheers > Peter 17618 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 5:07pm Subject: Re: The Three Abstinences Hi RobM, This is v.interesting. Could you give me a reference to look up about the momentary, temporary, permanent bit? Thanks, Christine :-) --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Christine, > > --- "christine_forsyth > " wrote: > > Would it be fair to say that Abstinence means more than just 'not > > doing', it means 'choosing not 'to do' when the opportunity 'to > do' > > has arisen.' > > There are three degrees of Abstinence (in increasing order): > - Abstaining in spite of opportunity obtained (momentary) > - Abstaining because of observance of precepts (temporary) > - Abstaining by way of eradication (permanent, for ariyans) > > Does this answer the question? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17619 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 1:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi TG Thanks. Yes that makes sense to me. I was also thinking how Nibbana is not-empty, seeing that Nibbana is a paramattha Dhamma and all Paramattha Dhamma's have there own charateristics, then Nibbana is not-empty of it own charateristics. But I know that idea doesnt gel with the Patisam. quote ie. the Khandha's are not-empty of their own charateristics as well. Does anyone know what the Abhidhamma states as Nibbana's own charateristics(sabhava??)? Thanks Steve TGrand458@a... writes: > > Hi Steve. > > In this context I interpret the word empty to mean:--"empty of > satifaction." > In this case I believe "empty" is being used as a basic evaluation rather > than a statement of ultimate meaning. Support for that conclusion is based > > on the listing in the Patisambhidamagga that describes "conditions as > empty" > and the "unconditioned as not empty." Since a large part of this list is > evaluation oriented, and it only seems to make sense to interpret it this > way, I think it is likely a correct interpretation. > > TG > Bodhi2500@a... writes: > Both voidness and empty are contemplation on not self. Nibbana is both the > ultimate voidness but it is not empty? > > Steve > 17620 From: peterdac4298 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 5:28pm Subject: Re: Freewill is out?!;-)?!:-) --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Peter, > > --- "peterdac4298" > "...Cover > story: > > > > In simpler terms, would this period of clear reviewing (should it > > ever arise) be as useful as similar periods of either cultivation > or > > investigation? Presumably it would depend on such things as the > > degree of clarity and compassion accompanying it, etc. > > I'm not sure that I would make that conclusion. At this point, the > Buddha was already enlightened, so there was no need for further > purification. > > However, for those of us who are not enlightened, I belive that > contemplating on the Dhamma (or Abhidhamma) is probably kusala > (depending on the motivation). > > Hard to make comparisions of the relative value of "one hour of > cultivating jhana" vs. "one hour of vipassana" vs. "one hour of > studying the dhamma". In general, the kammic weight depends on the > strength of the volition. > > Hope that I understood and answered your question. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Thanks Rob This is well worth reflecting on. Seeing it expressed in the words of another certainly makes for much better clarity. Cheers Peter 17621 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:48pm Subject: Re: The Three Abstinences Hi Christine, From Nina's book, "Cetasikas" p301: There are different degrees of abstinence and the Atthasåliní (I, Book I, Part III, Chapter VI, 103, 104) distinguishes between three kinds: abstaining "inspite of opportunity obtained", abstaining because of observance (of precepts) and abstaining by way of eradication. There is more in this book as well as additional references. Metta, Rob M :-) --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi RobM, > > This is v.interesting. Could you give me a reference to look up > about the momentary, temporary, permanent bit? > > Thanks, > Christine :-) > > --- "robmoult " > wrote: > > Hi Christine, > > > > --- "christine_forsyth > > " wrote: > > > Would it be fair to say that Abstinence means more than just 'not > > > doing', it means 'choosing not 'to do' when the opportunity 'to > > do' > > > has arisen.' > > > > There are three degrees of Abstinence (in increasing order): > > - Abstaining in spite of opportunity obtained (momentary) > > - Abstaining because of observance of precepts (temporary) > > - Abstaining by way of eradication (permanent, for ariyans) > > > > Does this answer the question? > > > > Metta, > > Rob M :-) 17622 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:00pm Subject: Re: The Power of Kusula Hi RobertK (Frank) and all, Thanks for this reply. I did wonder how we were ever going to get out of Samsara if there wasn't a different weighting of kusala and akusala moments. It is a relief to have it confirmed. :) This also answers something Frank asked in his great post on "Forgiveness" dsg post no.17380 3) "right effort" - two parts that strive to eliminate arisen defilements, and unarisen defilements! Eliminating unarisen defilements is especially interesting. How does one do this? (left as an exercise to the reader." Did you mean to say "silabataparamasa (clinging to SILA and wrong practice)" ? I thought it was 'attachment to mere rules and ritual'. metta, Christine --- "rjkjp1 " wrote: > Ken H has a good memory and thanks for bringing this up Christine, > The quote: "Kusa grass cuts a part of the hand with both edges. Even so > kusala cuts off both sections of passions - those that have arisen and > those that have not arisen" (abhidhammathasangaha). > It can seem discouraging once we realise that the moments of akusala in > a day far outnumber the moments of kusala. If it was simpoly a matter of > each being of equal power then it would be impossible to ever end > samsara. However the moments with right view have an extraordinary > strength to be able to eliminate akusala. > For example one might have some type of clinging to ritual. An extreme > case: one thinks that by washing in the river and chanting or praying one > is purifying oneself. This is a strong delusion but if one hears the right > Dhamma one will give up such practice like dropping a hot rock. It won't > be practiced again (at least in this life). > In the same way insight can understand that all that arises is anatta and > by that wrong views are increasingly subliminated until maggacitta > permenently eradicates wrongview. > I think it should be understaod that the sense desire cannot be eliminated > at all before all wrong view and silabataparamasa (clinging to sila and > wrong pratice) is gone. Hence the most important type of kusala is that > associated with the insight into the conditioned nature of dhammas. I think > one may still be mired in sense desire, still have greatly more akusala > cittas arising than kusala but be lessening the clinging to self and that will > lead gradually toward freedom. > Robert 17623 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 7:20pm Subject: [dsg] Re: [determing stage" Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > You didn't answer the question do good intentions > always produce good results, never bad results. The reason I ask is > because intentionality doesn't usually figure into conventional > understanding of cause and effect. So cause and effect and kammic cause > and result seem to be operating in different realms but somehow > together. Correct? I gotta be careful about my definitions; I am defining "good" as meaning kusala, a citta with alobha, adosa and perhaps even amoha (panna). Using this definition, the cittas which are good include: 1. Sense sphere wholesome (i.e. javana cittas) 2. Sense sphere resultant (i.e. Bhavanga cittas for most humans / Devas; disabled humans and earth bound Devas can have rootless bhavanga cittas and also registration cittas) 3. Sense sphere functional (i.e. javana cittas for arahants) 4. Rupavacara / Arupavacara / Lokutara Vipaka cittas, except those included under item 3 above (i.e. "what happens to us") are called akusala / kusala to identify the type of javana that was their seed. What happens to us is not inherently "good" or "bad", these types of vipaka cittas have no roots. To put it another way, a kusala javana citta can only lead to a "kusala" vipaka citta (this is true by definition). The only difference between a kusala vipaka citta and an akusala vipaka citta is the source. A kusala vipaka citta and an akusala vipaka citta have the same possible set of cetasikas. There is no inherent difference between the two. A vipaka citta arises (either kusala or akusala, it doesn't matter which) in the thought process. Our accumulations condition our javana citta in the thought process (javana cittas are inherently good or bad, except for an arahant). > > You say rootlessness isn't good by definition but I would say it is > ultimately good just because it causes no harm. > According to my definition above, "causing no harm" is not enough to be called "good". > What is your reasoning that memory and accumulations are different and > only javana cittas are accumulated? Is learning javana cittas or > resultant? Does sanna play a role in remembering accumulations in > connection with kamma resultant consciousness and thence coordinating > with intention and root (kamma causing) consciousnesses? Let's leave the realm of Abhidhamma for a moment and consider the difference between accumulations and memory. I am drawn to study the Abhidhamma (while others are not) because of accumulations. Some people are quick to get angry (while others are not) because of accumulations. I remember my wife's beautiful face because I have seen it before. I remember the way to the office because I have driven there before. To me, accumulations and memories seem completely separate. Javana cittas are active. Other cittas are passive. When a javana citta arises, cetana causes the seed of a vipaka to be created. Cetana also creates an impression or deepens an impression in the accumulations (something like a habit is created or reinforced). I see learning as a combination of memory and accumulations working together. If we remember accumulations; then the object of the citta is a concept (the concept of accumulations), not the accumulations themselves. When I remember that I have a tendency to get angry, sanna is marking and remembering the concept of "a tendency to get angry". I hope that this is helpful. Metta, Rob M :-) 17624 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 7:48pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi Steve; --- Bodhi2500@a... wrote: > > Does anyone know what the Abhidhamma states as Nibbana's own > charateristics(sabhava??)? I can't remember where I noted this down from, but: Characterisitc: Tranquility Function: Non-ceasing Manifestation: Being without symbol Proximate Cause: None Is this what you were looking for? Metta, Rob M :-) 17625 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 7:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi TG & Steve, "Empty of satisfaction" could work in the sense of not desireable. So nibbana is not undesirable while impermanence _is_ undesirable. I think Howard's reading of "not ceased" also makes sense. The main problem with a double negative is that it comes close to attributing a positive quality to nibbana, but there is no strong indication that nibbana has positive qualities. Here is something from Vism. XVI 66: It [Nibbana] has peace as its characteristic. Its function is not to die; or its function is to comfort. It is manifested as the signless; or it is manifested as non-diversification. Larry 17626 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:50pm Subject: [dsg] Re: nibbana Hi Larry, I understand Nibbana as an object of a citta (i.e. this explains "experiencing Nibbana"; I don't know what it might mean to "live Nibbana" except to dwell on the experience for an extended period (seven days maximum, I understand). Metta, Rob M :-) --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Rob, > > What's the difference between the experience of nibbana and the living > of nibbana? > > Larry 17627 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 8:13pm Subject: Re: The Power of Kusula Hi all, As Christine, Steven and Andrew have already reported, the weekend at Cooran was very pleasant and rewarding. The quality of our discussions improves with every meeting: I didn't need to prod anyone back `on-topic' and Christine, with her mountain of reference books, made the difference between Dhamma discussion and uninformed speculation. I've been suffering my usual fear of message-posting which is lamentable, especially when so many of you have shown interest and willingness to help with our questions. It's been inspirational to read all your helpful comments. I'm glad to see that Azita plans to join us one day; and what a pity it is that we came so close to but missed out on, a visit from Robert K. If any dsg people are planning to visit Brisbane or its near North Coast, we'll be only too happy to schedule our meetings to suit. Rob K, I see that the `power of kusala' question I've been meaning to ask you since 8th August 2002, has been asked on my behalf (everything's rush, rush, rush these days :-)), and that you have answered it, thank you. I appreciate your explanation of how just a momentary insight can result in the dropping of a strong delusion (e.g., in the efficacy of ritual bathing and prayer). On the subject of prayer, here's an extract from "What the Buddha REALLY Taught" by David Maurice: "The Buddha taught that it was of no use to pray to any `God' to help one. There was a custom at the time that when a man died his friends and relatives would gather and pay priests who would say prayers for the departed, praise him highly and `speed him heavenward.' The Buddha said it would be of no use casting a huge rock into a deep pool and with joined palms praising it and saying: `Rise up, good rock, float ashore, good rock!' And in similar manner, it was of no use praising a man who had been a killer, a thief, a slanderer, one given to bad sexual practices and so on and expecting that to help him to heaven. Conversely, if a man led a good life, nobody could keep him, when reborn, in a low state. (Samyuttanikaya: Salayatanasutta)" Kind regards Ken H 17628 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 9:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: nibbana Hi Rob, By living nibbana I mean that a sotapanna's entire life as a sotapanna is living without certain defilements. No more ditthi, for example. That is the nibbana of ditthi, a mere cessation. It is nibbana element because it is a finality. There will never again be a ditthi in his continuum. Seeing that as a finality is the experience of nibbana in a path moment. There is no difference between the two experiences, life experience and path moment, in terms of the cessation of ditthi, but the path moment cannot be experienced during life experience without special conditions. Correct? Larry 17629 From: Andrew Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 10:21pm Subject: Re: Right livelihood - Samma-ajiva --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > > Andrew - I don't know much about the profession of Law, but isn't > there something in the Ethics of a Solicitor that if they *know* > (perhaps by private confession) their client is guilty they can > withdraw service? That's right. A lawyer cannot accept instructions to mislead the court or defeat justice. The legal profession does have high ethical standards that I think are generally consistent with sila. However, in practice, the ethical aspects can sometimes be easily overlooked. Some litigation lawyers go all out for a "win", perhaps not the best result from a "justice" point of view. That puzzled me for a long while, actually. Does Dhamma have a concept of "justice"? In my experience, most clients consider justice to be "getting what I want"!! I decided that justice per se was not a part of Dhamma. > > So would it be fair to say that a Buddhist should look at Word of the > Buddha first in choosing a livelihood, but after that it is it is not > the "who" or the "what", but the "how" of practising of the Dhamma > in daily life. Yes, I agree with your conclusion. Rob M asks about salespeople. What about bankers, too. Usury is said to be wrong livelihood. Anybody work in the credit card dept of a bank? (joke) 17630 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 8:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [determing stage" Thanks Rob, I think I will wait for further accumulations before I can understand these issues. Thanks for your help. Larry 17631 From: James Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 11:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Hey All, I would challenge anyone to read this sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-111.html and then state that the Buddha didn't have a sense of humor, crack jokes, startle people for comic effect, or misrepresent the truth for comic effect. Metta, James 17632 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 9:29pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? --- Bodhi2500@a... wrote: > Does anyone know what the Abhidhamma states as Nibbana's own > charateristics(sabhava??)? >_______________ Dear Steve, From A Survey of Paramattha Dhamma by Sujin Boriharnwanaket: http://www.abhidhamma.org/Para2.htm "Nibbåna paramattha dhamma can be classified according to three characteristics: voidness, suññatta signlessness, animitta desirelessness, appanihita Nibbåna is called voidness, suññatta, because it is void of all conditioned= realities (saòkhåra dhammas). It is called signlessness, animitta, because it is void of "signs", characteristics, of conditioned realities. I= t is called desirelessness, appanihita, because it is without any basis of desire, namely, conditioned realities. "endquote Robert 17633 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 0:37am Subject: Posts slow in appearing Dear Group, Don't know if anyone else is having this problem - posts from Oz have been taking an hour or two to appear on the List despite getting the message 'your message has been posted'. So far I've resisted the impulse to send twice, spared you all that at least. :-) metta, Christine 17634 From: Sarah Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 11:31pm Subject: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Sailor.......lawyer, used car salesman Dear All, Thank you for all the helpful reminders on right speech and the other discussion topics from the weekend gathering of the SE Qld branch;-). When my brothers and I were small and counted our cherry stones, the fear was that we might end up as a ‘beggarman or thief’. On DSG it might be a ‘lawyer or used car salesman’;-) Like the lads in Cooran, when I’m with my brothers (which is not often) we laugh and tease each other and it’s usually kindly and affectionately intended. To change our ways of interaction would seem most unnatural, just as it would to my students to be forced to be serious all the time;-( I think the greatest error in understanding when we consider right speech, action and livelihood relates to conceptual and conventional ideas of ‘situations’ without any understanding of momentary consciousness which changes rapidly as we know. We forget completely that these 5fold or 8fold factors refer to the 3 viratis (abstinences). I’m not sure it’s therefore useful in any way to consider being a hospital worker or teacher, for example, as any more ‘right’ as a way of livelihood than being a used car salesman or any other livelihood. There are a mass of opportunities in a day for good and bad intentions and deeds regardless. ***** I’d like to type out the following section from B.Bodhi’s CMA (Abhidammatthasangaha)p.88 with brief comments in between sections: QUOTE #6 The Abstinences (virati) -3 1) Sammavaacaa 2)sammaakammanto 3)sammaa-aajiivo caa ti tisso viratiyo naama 1) Right Speech, 2) right action, and 3)right livelihood: these three are termed abstinences. Guide to #6 The abstinences: The viratis are three beautiful mental factors which are responsible for the deliberate abstinence from wrong conduct by way of speech, action, and livelihood. In mundane consciousnes, the viratis are operative only on an occasion when one intentionally refrains from a wrong mode of conduct for which an opportunity has arisen. When a person refrains from evil deeds without an opportunity for their performance arising, this is not a case of virati but one of pure moral conduct (sila). The commentators distinguish three types of virati: 1)natural abstinence; 2)abstinence by undertaking precepts; and 3)abstinence by eradication.” **** Details of the three types are given in the text. Whether it is ‘natural’ abstinence or abstinence by following the precepts, it is the momentary restraint that is referred to. The only way that any kind of sila will really be developed is when it is accompanied by wisdom which can understand the value and distinction between moments of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ and which will lead to the eradication of the tendency to perform unwholesome deeds. I don’t understand it to be a matter of choosing the ‘right’ job, refraining from laughter and fun (unless one is a monk) or otherwise trying to ‘fix’ the situation in an unnatural manner. ***** QUOTE “The viratis comprise three distinct mental factors mentioned in the text: right speech, right action, and right livelihood. 1) Right Speech (sammaavaacaa): Right speech is the deliberate abstinence from wrong speech: from false speech, slander, harsh speech, and frivolous talk. 2) Right action (sammaakammanta): Right action is the deliberate abstinence from wrong bodily action: from killing, stealing, and sexual misconduct. 3) Right livelihood (sammaa-aajiiva): Right livelihood is the deliberate abstinence from wrong livelihood, such as dealing in poisons, intoxicants, weapons, slaves, or animals for slaughter. The three viratis have the respective charactaristics of non-transgression by bodily misconduct, by wrong speech, and by wrong livelihood. Their function is to shrink back from evil deeds. They are manifested as the abstinence from such deeds. Their proximate causes are the special qualities of faith, shame, fear of wrongdoing, fewness of wishes, etc. They should be regarded as the mind’s aversion to wrongdoing.” ***** Whatever our lifestyle - whether working with people, accounts, testubes or surfboards, whether eating, sitting, walking, talking or watching the ‘footie’, there are countless moments of lobha, dosa and moha in a day. There are many opportunites for unwise speech or action. Understanding the various phenomena when they appear for an instant is the way that sila will become firmly established naturally and without ‘forcing’. We know, for example, there is a lot of lobha when we eat or watch TV; the solution is not to stop eating or stop watching TV. I’ll sign off with a sobering reminder I find helpful which Nina quotes in ‘Cetasikas’: QUOTE “The Visuddhimagga (1, 154) mentions the following dangers of failure in virtue: ‘....Furthermore, on account of his unvirtuousness and unvirtuous person is displeasing to deities and human beings, is uninstructable by his fellows in the life of purity, suffers when unvirtuousness is censured, and is remorseful when the virtuous are praised.....’ “ ****** May we all be ‘instructable’ by our ‘fellows in the life of purity’. Looking forward to further comments. Sarah ===== 17635 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 1:04am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Dana with things that are precious to us Dear Ven Yanatharo, --- "ven.yanatharo.bikkhu" wrote: > Dear Peter, as many of you in the list, you people follow the books but > very > little you guys know about the really life of Bikkhus. ..... With all respect, I understand that Peter and some other members on the list have been bhikkhus and appreciate the difficulties and value in following all the rules. I also believe it is useful to discuss the Vinaya and its importance. This may be one of the few places on the net where it is possible. It is an integral part of the Tipitaka after all. While it is skilful and wise not to cause offence if it can be helped, the Sangha also have a very special opportunity to educate the public with regard to the vinaya and all aspects of the Tipitaka. I hope these comments do not seem disrespectful and are not intended as such. Sarah ====== 17636 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 1:14am Subject: Re: Posts slow in appearing Hi Christine, I am tempted to make a derogatory comment about Australians, but I realize that there are many of you out there :-) In any case, it would be akusala, wrong speech. If it makes you feel any better, posts from China are taking just as long; I suspect it is a Yahoo! problem. Metta, Rob M :-) --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, > > Don't know if anyone else is having this problem - posts from Oz have > been taking an hour or two to appear on the List despite getting the > message 'your message has been posted'. > So far I've resisted the impulse to send twice, spared you all that > at least. :-) > > metta, > Christine 17637 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 11:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Hi James, To me it just seems that the Buddha was trying to speak to this man on a level he would understand. I think it would be an area that the Buddha was familiar with - a good understanding of the breeding and training of horses would have been a requirement of the ruling and warrior classes which I understand the Buddha came from. It was something he had in common with Kesi, a skillful means of joining with him, and isn't that where all communication starts? It is natural that people talk in the terms used in their everyday work when discussing other matters. I have a number of dairy farms and horse properties in my area. In conversation, these people often sprinkle their speech with terms like "keeping a tighter rein on the young filly" i.e. supervise their teenage daughter more closely, or, "time to put the old bull out to pasture" i.e. teasing the husband about growing older. They are just using descriptive language that even I understand. An untrainable horse IS killed. It would have been a well known fact. Kesi would have understood the simile, which would not have seemed very strange or startling in that society. I see no untruths or jokes, but rather a great sensitivity to and a use of language that would be familiar and meaningful to Kesi. metta, Christine --- "James " wrote: > Hey All, > > I would challenge anyone to read this sutta: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-111.html > > and then state that the Buddha didn't have a sense of humor, crack > jokes, startle people for comic effect, or misrepresent the truth > for comic effect. > > Metta, James 17638 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 1:29am Subject: [dsg] Re: nibbana Hi Larry, My understanding is that when the Sotapanna magga citta arises, it wipes out the accumulations which can allow wrong view to arise. During the life of a Sotapanna, there are still gazillions of kammic seeds which given the right conditions could spring into wrong view (from past kammic actions), but without the accumulation to provide the condition, they can't arise. Those particular kammic seeds become inoperative (ahosi). I am not sure of your phrase "the nibbana of ditthi". I thought that Nibbana is an object of a citta, nothing more. I don't understand how Nibbana can be applied to anything. Am I wrong? Is Nibanna more than just the object of a citta? Metta, Rob M :-) --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Rob, > > By living nibbana I mean that a sotapanna's entire life as a sotapanna > is living without certain defilements. No more ditthi, for example. That > is the nibbana of ditthi, a mere cessation. It is nibbana element > because it is a finality. There will never again be a ditthi in his > continuum. Seeing that as a finality is the experience of nibbana in a > path moment. There is no difference between the two experiences, life > experience and path moment, in terms of the cessation of ditthi, but the > path moment cannot be experienced during life experience without special > conditions. Correct? > > Larry 17639 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 3:10am Subject: Re: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Sailor.......lawyer, used car salesman Hi Sarah and Group, --- Sarah wrote: "I think the greatest error in understanding when we consider right speech, action and livelihood relates to conceptual and conventional ideas of `situations' without any understanding of momentary consciousness which changes rapidly as we know. We forget completely that these 5fold or 8fold factors refer to the 3 viratis (abstinences). I'm not sure it's therefore useful in any way to consider being a hospital worker or teacher, for example, as any more `right' as a way of livelihood than being a used car salesman or any other livelihood. There are a mass of opportunities in a day for good and bad intentions and deeds regardless." -------------------------------------- C: Now this is where I have a problem with understanding. I don't think anyone was suggesting a hospital worker or teacher was a more "right" livelihood than a used car salesman. Andrew merely mentioned the used car salesman as a joke. However I think the Vanijja Sutta clearly indicates there are some jobs that are more "wrong" than others. Anguttara Nikaya V.1777 'Vanijja Sutta' Business (Wrong Livelihood)"Monks, a lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in living beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison. "These are the five types of business that a lay follower should not engage in." C: "Should not engage in" seems quite definite to me. A question for me is, are these the only wrong livelihoods or was this list just an indicator of types of livelihoods that lay disciples should not engage in? And if we are seriously trying to live according to the Teachings, shouldn't Right Livelihood be a major consideration? metta, Christine 17640 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 3:24am Subject: Re: Hello(Venerable PiyaDhammo) Dear Ven. Phra Piyadhammo, It's great to hear from you. Sorry I couldn't make the trip to NC for your ordination as planned. My schedule has been quite busy of late, and it is unbecoming of a householder to shirk his obligations to other people. I do hope all is well with you. Best wishes, Dan --- "phrapiyadhammo " wrote: > Hello Robert, > > Thank you for the welcome. I hope to continue to share and contribute > when possible. As you probably know I will be in Thailand for some > time. Perhaps, we might actually have the oppurtunity to meet at some > point in time if you still travel there much? I revisited the post I > wrote that you forwarded from D-l.. Actually, in hindsight if I cut > through the humor, and that it is situationally fiction, all the > reasons for my going forth are in that piece. > > Have you heard from Dan? Is he well? Good to here from you Robert. > May you take care of yourself happily. May we all keep up the > practice....Drop the unwholesome, cultivate the wholesome, and purify > the mind. > > Your friend in Dhamma > Phra Piyadhammo > > > Dear Venerable, > > Thanks for joining the list. I'm sure any contibutions you make > will be > > much appreciated. There is actually a conversation between you > (when > > you were a layman) and Dan ,that I forwarded from D-l, in the > useful > > posts under "light relief". > > Robert 17641 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 3:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Hi Christine & James, Yes, it’s an interesting sutta. wrote: > > To me it just seems that the Buddha was trying to speak to this man > on a level he would understand. I think it would be an area that > the Buddha was familiar with - a good understanding of the breeding > and training of horses would have been a requirement of the ruling > and warrior classes which I understand the Buddha came from. > I agree with these sentiments. ..... > --- "James > > I would challenge anyone to read this sutta: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-111.html > > > > and then state that the Buddha didn't have a sense of humor, crack > > jokes, startle people for comic effect, or misrepresent the truth > > for comic effect. ..... For the arahants all lobha has been eradicated (and also for the anagamis except for a few very refined kinds not related to sense-pleasures). I’m just looking at the PTS translation by Woodward, but no commentary notes are given. Hopefully B.Bodhi will add some with his new translation. Just a few phrases for your interest to compare -it’s very similar to B.Thanissaro’s: Instead of “I kill him, Kesi”, PTS has “I destroy him, Kesi!” and then: “ ‘True it is, Kesi, that taking life does not become a Tathagata. yet if the man to be trained submits not to the training by mildness, by harshness or both together, then the Tathagata thinks it is not worth while to admonish that man, nor do his wise fellows in the God-life think it worth while to admonish that man. This, kesi, is destruction for a man in the discipline of the Ariyan, - when both the Tathagata and his fellows in the God-life think it not worth while to admonish him.’........” These are very useful reminders, thanks James. I don’t read them as being humourous at all, though I understand why you read them this way. They are similar to the one I just quoted from Visuddhimagga (1, 154) about the ‘unvirtuous person’ who is ‘uninstructable by his fellows in the life of purity’. Sarah ====== 17642 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 5:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Right livelihood - Samma-ajiva Andrew As others have pointed out, 'Right Livelihood' in fact refers to a moment at which there is wholesome abstinence from a breach of the precepts in the course of earning one's livelihood. So it reflects the level of sila and understanding of the person in question rather than the nature of the occupation he pursues. Of course, some jobs by their very nature necessarily involve much wrong livelihood (like the 5 occupations named in the sutta quoted by Christine), so these would be best avoided if possible (but there is no rule about this). But outside of such occupations, it is really up to the individual to act appropriately -- no-one can 'make' one breach the precepts. BTW, note that the 5 occupations mentioned in the sutta do not include, for example, being a soldier, presumably because one could be a soldier without being called upon to take another's life. To repeat, the question of whether a person carries on his/her occupation skilfully and without breach of the precepts usually comes down to a matter of the individual's choice/accumulations and level of understanding. Factors such as peer pressure and the 'norms' of the particular occupation can make ethical conduct more difficult, but if one appreciates the great value of it then ways can usually be found. It's a bit like the issue of dealing with household pests other than by reaching for the spray gun/poison bait – if you give some thought to it, it's usually possible to find a workaround. Jon --- "Andrew " wrote: > Hi Azita, Jon & all > Thanks for your replies which I did find most useful. As an > ex-lawyer, I was actually considering whether the practice of law > is > right livelihood. Over the last year, I've lost count of the > number > of articles I've read on legal professional ethics. Of interest is > the strong "representational" view that a lawyer must do everything > to > advantage the client short of misleading the court or breaking the > law. This usually leads to disadvantaging the client's adversary. > Bhikkhu Bodhi writes of samma-ajiva that we should earn a living > "in > ways which do not entail harm or suffering for others". Is the > lawyer > acting on instructions from a malicious client practising wrong > livelihood because of the harm done to the client's adversary? > Bhikkhu Bodhi also says that if your work violates Right Speech, it > is > wrong livelihood. How does this relate to the lawyer seeking to > discredit a witness on cross-examination? I know Jon has a legal > background like me and I'm not expecting anyone to answer these > questions. They came to mind during my reading. Whereas > initially, I > thought "of course being a lawyer is right livelihood", I am now > more > of the view that it is one of those occupations that may or may not > be > right livelihood depending upon how it is practiced. > Andrew 17643 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 0:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and v... Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/11/02 5:14:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I really like what you have written. I have inserted some questions. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I'll ty my best at giving answers. ---------------------------------------------- > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi, Rob (and Christine) - > > > > Here are some thoughts on this matter. They are not Dhamma, > but just > >my own thoughts which are hopefully not in contradiction to the > Dhamma. > > There are *many* namarupic streams of experience, each of > which we can > >think of, conventionally, as either a person or a world. > (Actually, even the > >notion of a single such stream is conventional.) These > experiential streams > >are not isololated, self-existent things, but are aspects or parts > of an > >interacting, interconnected whole. > > ======= > > My first impression is that a "namarupic stream of experience" might > be a fancy way of saying "self". Then I noticed that you > wrote, "person or a world"; interesting, do you mean that "the > world" has nama (mind)? > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: A namarupic stream of experience is a conditioned flow of events which are elements of the five khandhas. The stream is, relative to itself, "the all", and it is, conceived of, as a whole, both as the world and as the empirical self. But any one stream of becoming is one of many mutually interactive streams - it does not exist isolatedly. The elements of each stream that are not conceptual constructs are paramattha dhammas. --------------------------------------------------- > > Have you run across the concept of "an interacting, interconnected > whole" in the Dhamma? > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Not in so many words. But the Buddha was not a solipsist. He recognized a multiplicity of beings and worlds, and certainly he recognized the obvious interactions among them. The perspective I suggest here is an attempt to go a bit beyond the mundane reality I express in the last sentence to an understanding of it from a phenomenalist-abhidhammic-kammic vantage point. ---------------------------------------------------- > > ====== > > >The acts of volition arising in any > >mindstream have primary effect within that mindstream itself, but > also > >ultimately influence all the others. > > ======= > > I think that what you are saying is that kamma is what interconnects > everything. > --------------------------------------------- Howard: I see kamma as the creative and motive force, but not just the kamma of one "person". ---------------------------------------------- I can see how my actions impact those with whom I have > > immediate contact (conditions are created), but are you > suggesting, "I influence 'Howard' and because I influence 'Howard', > the way in which 'Howard' influences his wife (with whom I have no > direct contact, promise :-) ) will be impacted... therefore I have > an indirect influence on 'Howard's wife' and an even more indirect > influence on 'the friend of Howard's wife"? > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Somewhat, yes. I am saying that our volitional actions spread out in waves of (ever-weakening) influence. Moreover, I am saying that kamma is a world-builder! There is no need for a creator god - creatrion is ongoing. -------------------------------------------------- > > =========== > > >The determination of the realm of > >experience into which a namarupic stream is "born" is vipaka of > kamma > >previously ocurring in that stream. Others with similar kammic > history are > >born into "the same" realm (although the realms of experience of > two > >different streams are never identical). A given realm of > experience is the > >joint-creation of the kamma of a multitude of beings, with the > specifics of > >one's own experiences the result largely of one's own kamma, but > also of the > >kamma of others. It is a vast, extraordinarily complex, > interactive network. > > ========== > > Are you saying that the world arises because of collective kamma? > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't like the term 'collective kamma', because it suggests group action and the results of that. But there is individual kamma, and the kamma of different beings, especially those who are kammically connected will interact. --------------------------------------------------- > > Does this imply that rocks and trees arise because of collective > kamma? BTW, the Abhidhamma says that rocks and trees arise because > of utu, not kamma (I am not trying to shoot down your argument, I am > trying to understand it better... it sounds interesting). --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well ... yes, that's what this implies. BTW, of course biologists will confirm that heat is needed for the growth of trees, and geologists will talk about heat and igneous rocks. But all the "things" of this world and all other worlds are conceptual constructs or pa~n~natti, and kamma is the (ultimate) creator. I make no presuppositions about the existence of external objects such as rocks "actually" existing "out there". Rocks are part of my world of experience, due to kamma and to the constructive capacity of mind. ------------------------------------------- > > =========== > > >From the perspective of the network as a whole, if there were such > such a > >perspective, perhaps events proceed deterministically. But from > the limited > >perspective of a single mindstream, that is not so. > > =========== > > I think that we are saying the same thing here; that the concept of > predeterminism doesn't apply from our own frame of reference. > > =========== > > > What occurs in "one's world" is multiply conditioned but > most > >directly by one's own volitional actions. Those actions are, of > course, > >constrained by what is possible, and what is possible is > determined by > >conditions, conditions brought into being by oneself and by others > in varying > >degrees and strengths. The main condition directly influencing > one's volition > >is desire, and the fact that we can will and act based on our > desire is > >generally what we mean by the ability to exercise "free will". > > ========== > > I think that our volition is conditioned by our accumulations and > desire is certainly a major accumulation in each of us. However, > there are many moments when other accumulations take centre stage. > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: And how did they get formed? ---------------------------------------------- > > Please explain how acting based on desire means exercising "free > will". I am confused here. > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Frankly, I think that the notion of 'free will' is probably incoherent. If someone is pressed to say what they mean by it, usually nothing worthwhile will emerge! ;-) But in colloquial usage, when someone says "I have free will", they typically mean that they can do what they wish (subject to some constraints). ----------------------------------------------- > > ========== > > >Even though > >our volition doesn't arise randomly (and what sort of "prize" > would random > >volition be?), volition does occur, it is most strongly based on > our own > >wishes, and it is the primary but not exclusive determiner of the > events that > >will befall us. For example, when A does something to B, it is a > direct > >consequence of factors within A (mainly volition) and within "the > shared > >world" of A and B, plus the kamma that put B into the > circumstances making it > >possible for A to do to B what A does. This kamma of B is among > the > >conditions leading to the event, but, all told, it is a minor > factor. The > >action of A is "owned" by A, and while B's kamma played some role > in the > >event, B can neither be praised nor blamed, at least in any > primary sense, > >for A's action. > > =========== > > Could we say that volition plays the "active role" in determining > what happens to us, while conditions have a "passive role"? > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, perhaps. I think I would sooner use 'primary' and 'secondary' rather than 'active' and 'passive'. ------------------------------------------------ > > Let us expand on your example of A doing something to B, let us say > for example that A hits B. > > From the perspective of A > ------------------------- > The hitting arose because of conditions (the presence of B is one of > the conditions) and accumulations (in this case probably anger). The > impersonal law of kamma ensures that a seed of future akusala vipaka > is sown and it may impact A in the future (all beings are the owners > of their own kamma). > > From the perspective of B > ------------------------- > Being hit arose because of conditions (the presence of A is one of > the conditions) that allowed a past akusala kammic effort to develop > into a vipaka at that moment. The impersonal law of kamma has played > its part when the vipaka arose. > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Sure, it is possible that A has served as the vehicle for the fruition of some akusala kamma of B. But it is also possible that no kamma vipaka was being brought to the fore, and that A is now, in a sense, in the kammic debt of B. But this is guesswork on my part. What if B stands for Buddha? ;-) -------------------------------------------------- > > ============ > > > In a sense, every event is an occurrence within a vast, > interactive > >kammic network, centering on one namarupic stream, or a few, or > many, but > >ultimately going way beyond any of these. This, in part, is > perhaps one > >reason why full individual "control" is an illusion. But also, > because there > >are so *many* influences on any event, most with small impact, > volition looms > >large, and there *is* choosing. > > ============== > > Howard, I am enjoying your post. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: That pleases me, Rob. I hope that there is some merit to it and that it is not fully off-base. I readily admit that it is merely a point of view, and I do not hold it in a firm grasp. ---------------------------------------------------- > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > =========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17644 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 7:21am Subject: Re: Hello(Venerable PiyaDhammo) Dear Dan, Hope you and your family are well. It is good to see you here also. I understand your obligations to others. Thank you for the kind words and best wishes. Much Metta to you and yours, Phra Piyadhammo > Dear Ven. Phra Piyadhammo, > It's great to hear from you. Sorry I couldn't make the trip to NC for > your ordination as planned. My schedule has been quite busy of late, > and it is unbecoming of a householder to shirk his obligations to > other people. I do hope all is well with you. > > Best wishes, > > Dan 17645 From: James Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 7:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Sarah and Christine, Smiles and Salutations! Well, I don't think either one of you met my challenge. You did not show that the Buddha did not crack a joke, a very dark joke actually, in your interpretations of this sutta. Both of you miss the main thing that shows that it is a joke. Of course the Buddha turns it into a lesson, as humor is often used, but he first uses humor. Let me give you some hints: Don't look at the subject matter, horse training, jokes can occur in any setting; and don't look at the follow up explanation of the Buddha, jokes don't last forever and he did have a lesson to teach. Look at the events immediately following the words of the Buddha. There you will find the humor. And I am not going to point it out directly. Like insight, jokes are either something you get or something you don't. When they are explained, the experience is lost in translation. Christine wanted to know what makes something funny. Richard F. Taflinger comes up with some pretty good guidelines in his "A Theory of Comedy": 1) it must appeal to the intellect rather than the emotions; 2) it must be mechanical; 3) it must be inherently human, with the capability of reminding us of humanity; 4) there must be a set of established societal norms with which the observer is familiar, either through everyday life or through the author providing it in expository material, or both; 5) the situation and its component parts (the actions performed and the dialogue spoken) must be inconsistent or unsuitable to the surrounding or associations (i.e., the societal norms); and 6) it must be perceived by the observer as harmless or painless to the participants. When these criteria have been met, people will laugh. If any one is absent, then the attempt at humor will fail. The Buddha spoke against humor at some else's expense, not all humor in general—according to my interpretation of that teaching to his son. Granted, the Buddha didn't go around cracking jokes all of the time, but I don't think that was a sign of his enlightenment (Mahayana records tell of many subsequent Buddhas [arahants] who did crack jokes and laugh all the time…hence, `The Happy Buddha'…who I am beginning to resemble with all the food this holiday season ). I believe the Lord Buddha's predominately cool temperament was a result of him being raised as a Prince. Royality is expected and taught to act dignified and proper at all times and any type of humor is supposed to be dry and subtle at the very least. The Buddha was always a leader, even when seeking enlightenment. He would obviously know the responsibility that position held, social customs and mores expected, and was therefore prim and proper most of the time. Question: Did the Buddha ever smile? I think he must have. He wasn't Vulcan . Side Note: Sarah, you write, "For the arahants all lobha has been eradicated (and also for the anagamis except for a few very refined kinds not related to sense-pleasures)." Now, this statement really makes me smile. Please take the following statements as kind and not nasty: Just how many arahants and anagamis have you psychoanalyzed to make this determination? This is an `allness' statement and, giving the diversity of human nature, `allness' statements are very unlikely to be correct when applied to humans (or anything really). This is another issue I have with the Abhidhamma. It leads people to believe they know something that they cannot possibly know. The Buddha taught not to believe something unless it is experienced first-hand, and yet the Abhidhamma asks people to believe all sorts of things not experienced first-hand. That is, if it is to be taken literally; if it is to be taken symbolically, that is another issue. I eagerly await Nina's response to that. And, according to the Sutta Pitaka, arahants still have traces of defilements (of which `lobha', greed, is one) or they would disappear in a puff of smoke . Even the Lord Buddha had traces of defilements but his were practically nil because he had been purifying his karma stream for so many eons (according to the suttas and him…but that is up for argument also). Smiling Metta, James Ps. I find Thanissaro's translations of the suttas without equal. "I destroy him, Kesi" would not make any sense in context to the remainder of the sutta. Why would the Buddha say, "I destroy him, Kesi" and then later say, "`True it is, Kesi, that taking life does not become a Tathagata…" I can `destroy' someone's reputation; I can `destroy' a building, etc. This is obviously about taking life, `killing' as opposed to `destroying'. Thanissaro has proven time and time again that he knows these important subtleties in the English Language. We should all thank our lucky stars he decided to become a monk rather than a field more lucrative. 17646 From: nidive Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 8:34am Subject: Re: nibbana Dear Larry, > Anyone who asserts that nibbana must be other than a mere > cessation must find that otherness in the ariyan's life because > the cessation of defilements is nibbana and that cessation is > lived with. > What do you think? I agree with you: nibbana is cessation. Anyone who says that nibbana is equivalent to "anatta" or "emptiness" misses the whole point. If nibbana is equivalent to "anatta" or "emptiness", there could be no escape from that which is Conditioned, i.e. cittas, cetasikas and rupas, which are themselves "anatta" or "empty". Nibbana is the cessation of that arising, the cessation of that momentary existence, and the cessation of that dissolution. NEO Swee Boon 17647 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 8:50am Subject: Silabbata-paramasa Christine: Did you mean to say "silabbataparamasa (clinging to SILA and wrong practice)" ? I thought it was 'attachment to mere rules and ritual'. --------------- Dear Christine, Oh yes, I meant to say it. I sort of hoped though that I'd get away without having to explain it:). Silabbataparamasa: A common translation of this term is "attachment to mere rules and rituals." And this is a good translation for the more gross forms but doesn't quite clarify the meaning of the more subtle types. The meaning of sila is habit -which can be right or wrong. And in fact even right sila can be part of silabbataparamsa: In the Visuddhimagga XV11267. : "[he] thinks through Silabbataparamasa, 'This rite and ritual leads him who perfects it to perfect bliss... So silabataparamsa is a condition for all three namely the sense-desire, fine-material and immaterial kinds of becoming with their analysis and their synthesis". Thus one cane even develop jhana, be perfect in conduct but still be mired in silabbataparamasa. However, lets just consider the clinging which is very gross: When I first started in buddhism I grasped on to sila once I heard that it was the basis for all attainments. But grasping is always without wisdom and so it actualy made my life more difficult. Since then I see many new buddhists getting more uptight, having guilty feelings etc because of not comprehending that the path leads towards freedom- not entrapment. And the entrapment related to wrong practice can be gross or subtle. If right view is developing there will be a letting go of these aspects of grasping little by little. Needless to say this is much more profound than thinking, "ok sila and practice can be grasped, thus I'll run amok to show my lack of clinging". A good explanation of this is the conversation between Venerable Piyadhammo(David)and Dan (nice to see him on the list today ) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/8673 Robert ADVERTISEMENT 17648 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 4:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Hi, James - In a message dated 12/12/02 3:32:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > > Hey All, > > I would challenge anyone to read this sutta: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-111.html > > and then state that the Buddha didn't have a sense of humor, crack > jokes, startle people for comic effect, or misrepresent the truth > for comic effect. > > Metta, James > ========================== I read the sutta. I agree with your evaluation except for the business of the Buddha's being misleading, for that was only momentary and was *immediately* followed by the clarification that metaphor was being used. With metta-for you, ;-) Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17649 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 1:10pm Subject: [dsg] Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and v... Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I hope that there is some merit to it and that > it is not fully off-base. I readily admit that it is merely a point of view, > and I do not hold it in a firm grasp. > ---------------------------------------------------- Thanks for clarifying those points. I understand your perspective better now. I would like to continue this thread in a slightly different way. I think we can agree that your point of view is a very liberal interpretation of the Dhamma as laid out in the Tipitaka and supporting commentaries / subcommentaries. You've obviously done some thinking about this. I am assuming that your decision to take a very liberal approach arises because you are not comfortable with a more literal approach to the Tipitaka. I would be interested in knowing in what areas the Tipitaka just doesn't feel right for you. My intention is not to argue with you but to explore those areas more deeply. Would you be interested in continuing this thread using this approach? Metta, Rob M :-) 17650 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 1:16pm Subject: Re: Silabbata-paramasa Dear Robert, and all, You say: "even right sila can be part of silabbataparamsa" and "lets just consider the clinging which is very gross: When I first started in buddhism I grasped on to sila once I heard that it was the basis for all attainments. But grasping is always without wisdom and so it actualy made my life more difficult." C: I agree that grasping is without wisdom, but diligently following the basic ethical teaching of the Blessed One, not doing evil, cultivating virtue and purifying the mind doesn't necessarily equate to clinging, does it? Without 'seeing danger in the slightest fault', without cultivating sila to be as close as possible to the templates laid down in the Suttas, wouldn't one be likely to be deluded, find moral loopholes, convince oneself that what one really wants to do is part of a 'higher wisdom' free from 'rules' and 'precepts'? Perhaps that is more nearly clinging ... clinging to self? Thanks for this post which has left me a little bemused and reflecting. metta, Christine --- "rjkjp1 " wrote: 17651 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 9:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and v... Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/12/02 4:10:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > >--------------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > I hope that there is some merit to it and that > >it is not fully off-base. I readily admit that it is merely a > point of view, > >and I do not hold it in a firm grasp. > >---------------------------------------------------- > > Thanks for clarifying those points. I understand your perspective > better now. I would like to continue this thread in a slightly > different way. > > I think we can agree that your point of view is a very liberal > interpretation of the Dhamma as laid out in the Tipitaka and > supporting commentaries / subcommentaries. > > You've obviously done some thinking about this. I am assuming that > your decision to take a very liberal approach arises because you are > not comfortable with a more literal approach to the Tipitaka. I > would be interested in knowing in what areas the Tipitaka just > doesn't feel right for you. My intention is not to argue with you > but to explore those areas more deeply. > > Would you be interested in continuing this thread using this > approach? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > ============================== I will start right now. I have no argument with the Tipitaka nor do I think that my interpretation contradicts it, but is simply a way of understanding it. Though I have no ready reference (I'm quite poor at citations), I believe there are places in the suttas where this very body-mind is identified as both the empirical person and as "the world". The five khandhas (of a single namarupic stream) are "the world", and nibbana, their cessation, is "the end of the world". In some sutta, that is the answer the Buddha gives for how one reaches the "end of the world". So, I am in line with the suttas in that respect. Also, that such phenomena as solidity, sights, sounds, touch sensations, feelings, volition, discernment etc, etc, all "internal phenomena", constitute a greater reality than trees, rocks, cars, and people, the apparent "external" entities that Abhidhamma, explicity, and the suttas, less explicitly, dismiss as mind-constructed pa~n~natti puts me somewhat in line with both of those baskets My phenomenalist interpretation of the Dhamma is not cut from whole cloth. It has been noted by many that Buddhism is, if not an outright species of phenomenalism, at least a species of phenomenology. Also, that kamma, defined by the Buddha as volition and volitional action, is the motive force of the world is at least implicit in the Dhamma. This in fact, may be why the Theravadins understand the paranibbana of an arahant as constituting an irreversible leaving of the world, for there remains no further kamma vipaka to sustain the wheel of becoming. (Actually, some Mahayanists accept this as well. Nagarjuna seems to express this at the end of his discussion of the 12-link wheel of dependent origination in his Mulamadhymikakarika.) That sentient beings living in a common realm cognize the same or similar "external things" clearly points to their having similar kammic accumulations - at least it does to me. So I view shared realms of experience as the result, directly and indirectly, of kammic contributions of many "beings". Now, if I'm wrong on this, well, that's okay. I have nothing riding on it. All that I consider of major importance is to walk lightly through life, without grasping - or as little as possible, following the Buddha's prescription for liberation, and with love and compassion for my fellow travellers. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17652 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 2:17pm Subject: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path In the Vibhangha, The Book of Analysis. The second book of the Abhidhamma. Translated from the Pali of the Burmese Chatthasangiti Edition by, Pathamakyaw Ashin Thittila (Setthila) Aggamahpandita. Pali Text Society Oxford. Chapter 11 Analysis of the Path Constituents #2 Analysis According to Abhidhamma, starting with verse number 490. through verse number 492. gives an analysis of the Eight Constituent Path with the factors, of course as we all know are: right view, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. Then verse 493. States the Five Constituent Path is: right view, right thought, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. Of course Sammaditthi and Sammasankappa are Panna. Sammavayama, Sammasati, and sammasamadhi are Samadhi. Verse 494. states: Therein what is the Five Constituent Path? Herein at the time when a Bhikkhu develops supramundane jhana tending to release, dispersive of continuing rebirth and death; he for the abandoning of wrong view, for entering of the first stage, aloof from sense pleasures, attains and dwells in the first jhana that is hard to practice and knowledge slowly acquired; at that time there is the Five Constituent Path right view, right thought, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. Verses 495. through 497. give an analysis of the five factors right view, right thought, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration. In Dhamma Metta Phra Piyadhammo 17653 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 9:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Hi, Bhante - In a message dated 12/12/02 5:19:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, phrapiyadhammo@y... writes: > > In the Vibhangha, The Book of Analysis. The second book of the > Abhidhamma. Translated from the Pali of the Burmese Chatthasangiti > Edition by, Pathamakyaw Ashin Thittila (Setthila) Aggamahpandita. > Pali Text Society Oxford. > > Chapter 11 Analysis of the Path Constituents #2 Analysis According to > Abhidhamma, starting with verse number 490. through verse number 492. > gives an analysis of the Eight Constituent Path with the factors, of > course as we all know are: right view, right thought, right speech, > right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, > right concentration. > > Then verse 493. States the Five Constituent Path is: right view, > right thought, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. > Of course Sammaditthi and Sammasankappa are Panna. Sammavayama, > Sammasati, and sammasamadhi are Samadhi. > > Verse 494. states: Therein what is the Five Constituent Path? Herein > at the time when a Bhikkhu develops supramundane jhana tending to > release, dispersive of continuing rebirth and death; he for the > abandoning of wrong view, for entering of the first stage, aloof from > sense pleasures, attains and dwells in the first jhana that is hard > to practice and knowledge slowly acquired; at that time there is the > Five Constituent Path right view, right thought, right effort, right > mindfulness, right concentration. > > Verses 495. through 497. give an analysis of the five factors right > view, right thought, right effort, right mindfulness, and right > concentration. > > In Dhamma > Metta > Phra Piyadhammo > > > ============================ Thank you for this, Bhante! You are so fortunate to have an English-language version of the Abhidhamma available to you. Actually, I would presume that good fortune had nothing to do with it, but only good kamma! :-) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17655 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 4:14pm Subject: Friday nonsense [Re: Posts slow in appearing] Hi RobM, How fortuate you only THOUGHT of making disparaging remarks about the intellectual capabilities of Australians. :) (do I sound fierce?) :) If you had, I would have been forced to sound The Australaise and call out the Aussies on the List to attend to you. A bit of a problem with the two hour delay at that point. :) This would have been excruciating to you, as I would have had to sing it to the tune of Onward Christian Soldiers, and insert within the dotted lines the Great Australian Adjective. "Fellers of Australier, Blokes an' coves an' coots, Shift yer --- carcases, Move yer --- boots. Gird yer --- loins up, Get yer --- gun,(perhaps as a buddhist I should substitute 'bun'?) Set the --- enermy An' watch the blighters run." (C.J. Dennis) On the other hand, I could simply unmask the identity of the only person who couldn't find others he knew in the Shangri-la lobby in HK. Who sat three tables away behind a pot plant, and had to ring on his mobile phone after 45 minutes so someone could walk twenty feet and escort him? But I won't. :-) {Can you tell I'm still on holidays?} much metta, Christine (clearly practising abstinence from any form of right speech) --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Christine, > > I am tempted to make a derogatory comment about Australians, but I > realize that there are many of you out there :-) > 17656 From: peterdac4298 Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 4:25pm Subject: Re: The Three Abstinences Hi Christine Ajhan Cha would tell us to watch the perplexity, doubt and confusion in the moment that they arose, 'cause that is where we get enlightened. From his pov, the whole point of the Vinaya is two fold, a/ the basis for developing tranquility, and b/ just this kind of predicament. I have heard of one instance, and I think it was Ajhan Sumedho who told the story, that there was an occasion of termite infestation of one of the monastery buildings, might have been a sala or a kuti. On this occasion there was no alternative but to kill the insects. Ajhan Cha took part in, if not actually led, the operation too. Needless to say this situation was distinctly a one off. Sangha credibility would never have survived a repetition. Fortunately, to my knowledge, the need for such extreme measures has never since arisen. Cheers Peter --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Peter, > > Thanks for telling us such a satisfying story! I catch the cane > toads in plastic shopping bags (so I don't have to touch them or > their poison glands) and take them up the road to the only street > light in the area (attracts a food source of moths etc.) and release > them. Though I now wonder about the poor moths and my responsibility > in their deaths. The dog and local moths vs the moths up the > road .... > And I DO understand the sensitivity of Aussie Environmentalists to > not eradicating this introduced pest which is devastating to small > fauna. But it is another Being, and our individual behaviour is > covered by the Dhamma, so what is one to do? > > metta, > Christine > > > Hi Christine > > > > At Wat Ba Pong and branches, where forest rats, (looking more like > > mice to me) plagued the monastery kitchen, were routinely caught, > > kept in a paper bag over night (for some reason they never tried to > > get out of these bags, even though their jaws were very powerful > and > > teeth needle sharp). We released them the following mornings on > > alms round at any place considered to be midway between the Wat and > > the village to which the monks would be visiting that morning. > > > > Cheers > > Peter 17657 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 4:38pm Subject: Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Howard, I think that I am starting to understand where my confusion is coming from. Allow me to define two different views; an "ethical view" and a "scientific view". I see these two views as quite distinct and perhaps even unrelated. For example, in the past century there has been major scientific progress, but it could be said this has not translated into ethical progress. I see Buddhism as working in the domain of the "ethical view". I see the ethical view as purely internal and as such, I strongly agree with your phenomenological approach. Last night I read that the proximate cause of rupa is "consciousness (vinnana)", according to Abhidhammatthasangahadipanipali (that's a mouthful!). Saying that consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise clearly supports a phenomenological perspective. Rupa only has relevance in the ethical view when it touches consciousness. Again, ethical view is purely internal. But what about that "stuff" out there that doesn't touch consciousness (i.e. the "sound" from the tree that falls in the forest with none to hear it)? I believe that according to Buddhism, this is not rupa because there is no consciousness. It is "out there", it is external. The "stuff" that is "out there" (the external stuff that doesn't touch consciousness) is not part of the ethical view. The ethical view does not make any statements about its existence or non- existence; it is simply not on the radar screen. Using strict definitions, I can't call it "rupa", so I will call it "apur" (rupa spelled backwards; I checked in my 1778 page Pali-English dictionary and apur is not already taken as a word :-) ). Apur is part of the scientific view. Scientists can write volumes about their analysis of apur and their models for apur. That is fine. The scientific view does not enter into the ethical realm. Last weekend, I attended a two day long Buddhist seminar that touched on the issues of ethics of cloning and euthanasia. Boy, are there challenges when science and ethics try to meet! As a Buddhist, I look at rupa from a purely phenomenological perspective. As a man of science, I look at apur from a purely non- phenomenological perspective. This does not create a dichotomy for me. What creates problems is when I try to mix views. If I try to extend the concept of rupa into the domain of science, I look like an Aristotelian (centuries out of date). Trying to take a scientific view on ethical issues is equally futile. Howard, I expect that you agree with most of what I am saying so far. Now let's look at "kamma". It is a critical part of the Buddhist ethical view. It says in a Sutta somewhere, "All beings are owners of their own kamma."; this emphasizes the "internal" nature of kamma. But what about the kamma of another being? Because it is not touching us at the moment, this "outside kamma", which I will call "ammak" ("ammak" is not in the big dictionary either). I have a hard time placing ammak in the scientific realm, but as it is external, it is not part of the ethical view. I would even go so far as to say that ammak is not part of Buddhism! Let's return to A hitting B. From the perspective of A, B is a condition and B's ammak is not relevant. From a phenomenological perspective, conditions exist but ammak does not. Similarly, from the perspective of B, A is a condition and A's ammak is not relevant. When the Buddha said, "Nibbana is the end of the world", he was speaking from an internal, phenomenological perspective, not from a scientific perspective. To summarize this long post, I am getting confused because I sense that you are moving a bit too freely between the ethical view and the scientific view. I could go on for a while longer, but this message is getting long and I want to get your feedback on what I have written so far. Metta (and "Attem") Rob M :-) 17658 From: James Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 4:48pm Subject: Re: The Three Abstinences --- "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi Christine > > Ajhan Cha would tell us to watch the perplexity, doubt and confusion > in the moment that they arose, 'cause that is where we get > enlightened. From his pov, the whole point of the Vinaya is two > fold, a/ the basis for developing tranquility, and b/ just this kind > of predicament. > > I have heard of one instance, and I think it was Ajhan Sumedho who > told the story, that there was an occasion of termite infestation of > one of the monastery buildings, might have been a sala or a kuti. > On this occasion there was no alternative but to kill the insects. > Ajhan Cha took part in, if not actually led, the operation too. > > Needless to say this situation was distinctly a one off. Sangha > credibility would never have survived a repetition. Fortunately, to > my knowledge, the need for such extreme measures has never since > arisen. > > Cheers > Peter Dear Peter, Thanks for this story. I was not aware of this story about Ajahn Chah and it is good to hear. I was recently at Wat Nanachat (August, 2002), within walking distance of Wat Pah Pong, with the goal of ordaining and the insect problem (not just termites) must have gotten much worse since Ajahn Chah's death. I felt, deep in my bones, that the entire area needed a thorough insect extermination. And I would single-handedly do it also!! -- For the sake of the Sangha and the sake of the insects. That such shortsighted silly people in the area don't see as much, I have no idea. I disagree that such an act would destroy Sangha credibility. And if it did, then so be it. In that case, it would demonstrate that the Sangha had lost its credibility anyway. Metta, James 17659 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 4:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Howard, Your welcome. Came across the Five Constituent Path in my studies and thought I would share it. Right now Phra Maha Arkorn is having me memorize Vibangha and chant it in Pali also (besides the English language version of the Abhidhamma). Much Metta Phra Piyadhammo > ============================ > Thank you for this, Bhante! You are so fortunate to have an > English-language version of the Abhidhamma available to you. Actually, I > would presume that good fortune had nothing to do with it, but only good > kamma! :-) > > With metta, > Howard 17660 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 11:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, Rob - I find this a very interesting post of yours. I can see points of agreement between us and points of difference. I will give a full reply to this, but not immediately. I couldn't do it justice right now, because I'm running a bit of a fever and posibly have a recurrence of asthmatic bronchitis that landed me in the hospital a few months ago. (I hope to see the doctor tomorrow.) Please, in a week or so, if I haven't replied yet, do give me a reminder. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/12/02 7:40:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > I think that I am starting to understand where my confusion is > coming from. > > Allow me to define two different views; an "ethical view" and > a "scientific view". I see these two views as quite distinct and > perhaps even unrelated. For example, in the past century there has > been major scientific progress, but it could be said this has not > translated into ethical progress. > > I see Buddhism as working in the domain of the "ethical view". I see > the ethical view as purely internal and as such, I strongly agree > with your phenomenological approach. Last night I read that the > proximate cause of rupa is "consciousness (vinnana)", according to > Abhidhammatthasangahadipanipali (that's a mouthful!). Saying that > consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise clearly > supports a phenomenological perspective. > > Rupa only has relevance in the ethical view when it touches > consciousness. Again, ethical view is purely internal. But what > about that "stuff" out there that doesn't touch consciousness (i.e. > the "sound" from the tree that falls in the forest with none to hear > it)? I believe that according to Buddhism, this is not rupa because > there is no consciousness. It is "out there", it is external. > > The "stuff" that is "out there" (the external stuff that doesn't > touch consciousness) is not part of the ethical view. The ethical > view does not make any statements about its existence or non- > existence; it is simply not on the radar screen. Using strict > definitions, I can't call it "rupa", so I will call it "apur" (rupa > spelled backwards; I checked in my 1778 page Pali-English dictionary > and apur is not already taken as a word :-) ). > > Apur is part of the scientific view. Scientists can write volumes > about their analysis of apur and their models for apur. That is > fine. The scientific view does not enter into the ethical realm. > Last weekend, I attended a two day long Buddhist seminar that > touched on the issues of ethics of cloning and euthanasia. Boy, are > there challenges when science and ethics try to meet! > > As a Buddhist, I look at rupa from a purely phenomenological > perspective. As a man of science, I look at apur from a purely non- > phenomenological perspective. This does not create a dichotomy for > me. What creates problems is when I try to mix views. If I try to > extend the concept of rupa into the domain of science, I look like > an Aristotelian (centuries out of date). Trying to take a scientific > view on ethical issues is equally futile. > > Howard, I expect that you agree with most of what I am saying so > far. Now let's look at "kamma". It is a critical part of the > Buddhist ethical view. It says in a Sutta somewhere, "All beings are > owners of their own kamma."; this emphasizes the "internal" nature > of kamma. But what about the kamma of another being? Because it is > not touching us at the moment, this "outside kamma", which I will > call "ammak" ("ammak" is not in the big dictionary either). > > I have a hard time placing ammak in the scientific realm, but as it > is external, it is not part of the ethical view. I would even go so > far as to say that ammak is not part of Buddhism! > > Let's return to A hitting B. From the perspective of A, B is a > condition and B's ammak is not relevant. From a phenomenological > perspective, conditions exist but ammak does not. Similarly, from > the perspective of B, A is a condition and A's ammak is not relevant. > > When the Buddha said, "Nibbana is the end of the world", he was > speaking from an internal, phenomenological perspective, not from a > scientific perspective. > > To summarize this long post, I am getting confused because I sense > that you are moving a bit too freely between the ethical view and > the scientific view. > > I could go on for a while longer, but this message is getting long > and I want to get your feedback on what I have written so far. > > Metta (and "Attem") > Rob M :-) > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17661 From: selamat at cbn Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 5:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Bhante Piyadhammo, do you have the English version of Yamaka? I try to look after the book everywhere but have not found it. metta, selamat rodjali dhamma study group bogor indonesia ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 7:52 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path > Howard, > > Your welcome. Came across the Five Constituent Path in my studies and > thought I would share it. Right now Phra Maha Arkorn is having me > memorize Vibangha and chant it in Pali also (besides the English > language version of the Abhidhamma). > > Much Metta > Phra Piyadhammo > > > ============================ > > Thank you for this, Bhante! You are so fortunate to have an > > English-language version of the Abhidhamma available to you. > Actually, I > > would presume that good fortune had nothing to do with it, but only > good > > kamma! :-) > > > > With metta, > > Howard 17662 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 5:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Howard, I know you will take care of yourself, but I have to say it...please do take care of yourself. Please, let us know how you are doing after you go to the doctor tommorow! Metta, May you be healthy and strong, May you take care of yourself Phra Piyadhammo 17663 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 5:45pm Subject: Re: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Hello Selamat, Our Wat has the entire Tipitaka in Thai, Pali, and English. Unfortunantley our Chaowat was very kind and let a westerner borrow the Yamaka. It has been a couple of years, and the person never returned it. Fortunantly it is all he took, and thankfully our Chaowat has been kind only once concerning the English Tipitaka! The book may be out of print by the Pali text society. Mrs. Rhys Davids called it a valley of dry bones a hundred years ago, and probably killed much of any intrest in it. Metta In Dhamma Piyadhammo Bhikkhu > Bhante Piyadhammo, > do you have the English version of Yamaka? I try to look after the book > everywhere but have not found it. > > metta, > selamat rodjali > dhamma study group bogor > indonesia 17664 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 5:50pm Subject: Take Care of Yourself Hi Howard, Please take care of yourself - I can wait a week or more; your health is very important. Metta, Rob M :-) 17665 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 0:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, Bhante - Thank you! You are very kind. I'm sure I'm pretty much okay. My fever isn't anywhere as high as last time (when it exceeded 104 F). With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/12/02 8:12:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, phrapiyadhammo@y... writes: > Howard, > > I know you will take care of yourself, but I have to say it...please > do take care of yourself. Please, let us know how you are doing after > you go to the doctor tommorow! > > Metta, May you be healthy and strong, > May you take care of yourself > Phra Piyadhammo > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17666 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 0:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Take Care of Yourself Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/12/02 8:51:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Please take care of yourself - I can wait a week or more; your > health is very important. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > ====================== Thank you, Rob! I hope to continue our conversation soon! With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17667 From: James Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 6:05pm Subject: Re: Take Care of Yourself Dear Howard, Oh my goodness! That sounds quite serious! Words like `hospital', `asthmatic bronchitis', and `fever' don't sound good to me…and ring many warning bells. Eeeekkkk!! Being ever mindful of myself (transient self), I realize the subtle and not-so- subtle attachment I have to you. Dhamma Grandpa, please take care! I, if not many more, depend on you. Good thoughts for your speedy recovery!! Metta, James 17668 From: dragonwriter2 Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 6:06pm Subject: Christine Re: Emptiness? Hi Christine, Thanks for your reply and an overt apology for not replying sooner :) "Are you still in Sulawesi?" No May you be happy May you be well May you be at ease Metta, Simon 17669 From: selamat at cbn Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 5:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Ven Bhante, greatly appreciate your info. We still wait the info till the book returned to your Wat. Or does anyone in this mail list have the book? Abhidhamma is great for our practice in daily life. May ven Bhante and all in this list ever grow in the Dhamma. metta, selamat ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 8:45 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path > Hello Selamat, > > Our Wat has the entire Tipitaka in Thai, Pali, and English. > Unfortunantley our Chaowat was very kind and let a westerner borrow > the Yamaka. It has been a couple of years, and the person never > returned it. Fortunantly it is all he took, and thankfully our > Chaowat has been kind only once concerning the English Tipitaka! The > book may be out of print by the Pali text society. Mrs. Rhys Davids > called it a valley of dry bones a hundred years ago, and probably > killed much of any intrest in it. > > Metta > In Dhamma > Piyadhammo Bhikkhu > > > Bhante Piyadhammo, > > do you have the English version of Yamaka? I try to look after the > book > > everywhere but have not found it. > > > > metta, > > selamat rodjali > > dhamma study group bogor > > indonesia > > 17670 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 6:21pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Dear Selamat, A note to make a correction. I talked to another Bhikkhu here and he said the book that is missing is The Points of Contoversy (Kathavatha). He said that the Pali Text Society never published the Yamaka. Sorry about the confusion. It happened when I checked for Yamaka in our Tipitaka and could not find it. I remembered that my Achaan had lent a Book of the Abhidhamma which was not ever returned. I assumed that was the missing book was the Yamaka. Metta Phra Piyadhammo > Ven Bhante, > greatly appreciate your info. We still wait the info till the book returned > to your Wat. Or does anyone in this mail list have the book? > > Abhidhamma is great for our practice in daily life. > > May ven Bhante and all in this list ever grow in the Dhamma. > > metta, > selamat 17671 From: selamat at cbn Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 6:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path ok Bhante, no problem. anumodana for your kind attention. muditacittena, selamat ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 9:21 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path > Dear Selamat, > > A note to make a correction. I talked to another Bhikkhu here and he > said the book that is missing is The Points of Contoversy > (Kathavatha). He said that the Pali Text Society never published the > Yamaka. Sorry about the confusion. It happened when I checked for > Yamaka in our Tipitaka and could not find it. I remembered that my > Achaan had lent a Book of the Abhidhamma which was not ever returned. > I assumed that was the missing book was the Yamaka. > > Metta > Phra Piyadhammo > > > Ven Bhante, > > greatly appreciate your info. We still wait the info till the book > returned > > to your Wat. Or does anyone in this mail list have the book? > > > > Abhidhamma is great for our practice in daily life. > > > > May ven Bhante and all in this list ever grow in the Dhamma. > > > > metta, > > selamat > > 17672 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 7:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Hi Selamat, Try this: http://www.pariyatti.com/book.phtml?prod_id=132765 Larry 17673 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 7:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Hi again Selamat, I just noticed. Its in pali. Sorry Larry ps: maybe you could translate it 17674 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 7:07pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Dear Selamat, I have heard from a gentleman in Malaysia that the Burmese have translated the Yamaka into English (presumably sponsored by the Department for the Promotion and Propagation of the Sasana). I have a copy of their Dhammasangani translation. It's not great, but it beats the Mrs. Rhys Davids translation from 1900. My Dhs. says it was "Printed in the Union of Myanmar at the AZ Offset by U Myint Wynn Maung (04504), 118 Pathein Myay Quarter, Dawpn Township, Yangon." You could try contacting them about Yamaka. Mrs. Rhys Davids "valley of dry bones" comment dampened any potential interest of mine in Yamaka before that interest could even sprout. That changed when I read a wonderful and insightful essay by Ledi Sayadaw in the "Journal of the Pali Text Society" (v. VII, pp. 115- 163). The essay is entitled "Some points in Buddhist doctrine," and much of it is derived from his understanding of Yamaka -- great stuff. The "pairs" may be "dry bones" to some, but careful consideration of the pairs can surely clarify subtle shades of meanings of various concepts (one would think). If you should come across a copy, please let me know how I could too! (Best to do it off- list because I rarely pop in at dsg these days.) Dan > > Ven Bhante, > > greatly appreciate your info. We still wait the info till the book > returned > > to your Wat. Or does anyone in this mail list have the book? > > > > Abhidhamma is great for our practice in daily life. > > > > May ven Bhante and all in this list ever grow in the Dhamma. > > > > metta, > > selamat 17675 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 8:43pm Subject: Re: Ethical View vs. Scientific View --- "robmoult " wrote: >. Last night I read that the > proximate cause of rupa is "consciousness (vinnana)", according to > Abhidhammatthasangahadipanipali (that's a mouthful!). Saying that > consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise clearly > supports a phenomenological perspective. > > the "sound" from the tree that falls in the forest with none to hear > it)? I believe that according to Buddhism, this is not rupa because > there is no consciousness. ______________________ Dear Rob M, Could you give the full references that support these conclusions. Robert 17676 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 8:49pm Subject: Re: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Sailor.......lawyer, used car salesman Hi Sarah, This takes me back to the dsg discussion meeting held on a balcony of the Noosa Sheraton in July. One of your old friends, (Gilli?), and I were giving you the third degree. We were trying to impress upon you, the need for social and environmental action. I should add that you and Jon put us all to shame, being as you are, the most considerate and responsible couple a person could ever hope to meet. But there you were, seemingly unimpressed by the need to go out and make the world a better place.(!) I think you gave the example of a person actually bulldozing a tree -- you said we can't know the state of his mind at any one moment. It could be kusala; while, with a person planting a tree or waving a protest banner, it could be akusala. I couldn't see that tree planting, even though ultimately unreal, was not better than bulldozing. I nodded in pretend agreement, vowing to myself that I would eventually understand what on earth you were on about. Well, here's my chance because you have put the same sort of thing down in writing. It's probably no different from the usual explanations of absolute reality verses conventional reality, but for some reason, it's particularly hard for me to grasp. Whenever this point is grasped, I think there will be more acceptance of our present circumstances. Even Red Cross volunteers won't consider themselves superior to butchers and vice versa. In reality, there are no Red Cross volunteers, no butchers, no occupations, just nama and rupa . -- the real Right Livelihood can occur anywhere at any time. It's hard to grasp and sometimes, we don't want to grasp it. The main thing is that we're working on it :-) Kind regards Ken H --- Sarah wrote: 17677 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 9:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Dear Phra Piyadhammo, Thank you for providing the reference and interesting/dificult points from the Vibhanga: --- "phrapiyadhammo " wrote: ..... > Then verse 493. States the Five Constituent Path is: right view, > right thought, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. > Of course Sammaditthi and Sammasankappa are Panna. Sammavayama, > Sammasati, and sammasamadhi are Samadhi. > > Verse 494. states: Therein what is the Five Constituent Path? Herein > at the time when a Bhikkhu develops supramundane jhana tending to > release, dispersive of continuing rebirth and death; he for the > abandoning of wrong view, for entering of the first stage, aloof from > sense pleasures, attains and dwells in the first jhana that is hard > to practice and knowledge slowly acquired; at that time there is the > Five Constituent Path right view, right thought, right effort, right > mindfulness, right concentration. > > Verses 495. through 497. give an analysis of the five factors right > view, right thought, right effort, right mindfulness, and right > concentration. ..... I wonder if you have a copy of the commentary to the Vibhanga. the Sammohavinodani (Dispeller of Delusion) in your monastery also? It gives very detailed additional commentary notes on this section of the Abhidhamma which I find very helpful (too much to type out). In brief it explains that in this particular context the noble (ariyo) eighfold path is meant: “...although “eightfold” is not said, it should nevertheless be understood as eightfold, for there is no supramundane path called fivefold. This is the agreed commentary of the teachers here.” A lot of detail is given including interesting reference to some of the MN suttas being discussed in other threads. The 3 virati “occur previously purified.” If you don’t have access to the commentary and would like me to add more detail, pls let me know. You may also like to review some earlier posts on the 5-fold/8-fold posts under 'Eightfold Path' in Useful Posts. It’s hard for me to imagine memorizing the Vibhanga in Pali. Anumodana in your efforts in these endeavours. Sarah ====== 17678 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 9:31pm Subject: Re: Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Rob K, The book that I was reading is "An Introduction to Theravada Abhidhamma" by G. D. Sumanapala (Prof of Pali and Buddhist Studies at University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka). It was published by Buddhist Research Society Singapore in 1998. In Chapter 5, "The Abhidhamma Analysis of the Four Realities (Paramatthadhamma)", on p79 of this text, it says: According to the four way of definition: 1. the characterisitic of rupa is molestation 2. its function is scattering or dispersing 3. its manifestation is abyakata 4. its proximate cause is consciousness (vinnana) For point 4 above, there is an end-note referencing page 10 of Abhidhammatthasangahadipanipali. It does not give any other details. The rest of the message is my own conclusions. Metta, Rob M :-) --- "rjkjp1 " wrote: > --- "robmoult > " wrote: > >. Last night I read that the > > proximate cause of rupa is "consciousness (vinnana)", according to > > Abhidhammatthasangahadipanipali (that's a mouthful!). Saying that > > consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise clearly > > supports a phenomenological perspective. > > > > > the "sound" from the tree that falls in the forest with none to hear > > it)? I believe that according to Buddhism, this is not rupa because > > there is no consciousness. > ______________________ > Dear Rob M, > Could you give the full references that support these conclusions. > Robert 17679 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 11:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Sailor.......lawyer, used car salesman Hi Ken H, ( Chris, ‘n All) We both really enjoyed our discussions with you and other friends in Noosa. Any 'third degree' questioning was done so skilfully and pleasantly that it was no hardship at all. Thanks for reminding me of the topics. When I wrote the post yesterday, we hadn’t read any of the ones that had come in earlier that day on ‘Rt Livelihood’ including Christine’s helpful reminders about the ‘how’ rather than the ‘what’. Although we’re only joking most the time when we talk about the poor used car salesmen or other favourite ‘targets’, I think some of our ideas can be very deep-rooted as you explain so well yourself: -- "kenhowardau " wrote: > > Whenever this point is grasped, I think there will be > more acceptance of our present circumstances. Even Red > Cross volunteers won't consider themselves superior to > butchers and vice versa. In reality, there are no Red > Cross volunteers, no butchers, no occupations, just nama > and rupa . -- the real Right Livelihood can > occur anywhere at any time. It's hard to grasp and sometimes, > we don't want to grasp it. The main thing is that we're working > on it :-) .... Yes, it’s similar to our deep-seated beliefs in a favourable time, place and position to develop satipatthana. So often we fail to see the entrenched lobha and views behind these ideas. As Christine said, there has been very little discussion on Right Livelihood or the 3 viratis on DSG to date, especially considering how much there has been on other topics such as ‘luminous’ and nibbana;-) I’m glad you’ve all raised these points with some good team-work and sharing of drafts folder notes;-). Prompted by your comments (and at the risk of over-kill), let me add a few more quotes and comments: ***** From the Vibhanga (PTS transl p.311): “Therein what is right livelihood? That which is avoiding, desisting from, refraining from, abstaining from, not committing, not doing, being guiltless of, not over-stepping the limit of, destroying the causeway to wrong livelihood: right livelihood, path constituent, included in the path. This is called right livelihood.” ***** As with all other path factors, this refers to a single citta or series of citta arising together with the other 5-fold (mundane) or 8-fold (supramundane) path factors. As you suggest, it can arise anywhere, anytime when there is the opportunity for abstaining from wrong livelihood or transgression of the precepts in one’s daily work. ***** From Sammohavinodani1 (PTS transl by Nanamoli,p.142): “Right Livelihood ---------------------- In the description of Right Livelihoos, iddha (“here”) means “in the dispensation”. Ariyasaavako (“the noble disciple”) means the disciple of the Noble enlightened One. Micchaa-aajiva.m pahaaya (“abandoning wrong livelihood”) means by the profitable livelihood taught by the Enlightened One. Jiivita.m kappeti (“makes his living”): makes the process of life proceed. And also because there is abstaining from transgression in the body door by one consciousness and from transgression in the speech door by another, therefore this arises multiple moments in the prior stage. But at the moment of the path, profitable abstention called Right Livelihood arises singly, fulfilling the path factor by accomplishing non-arising because of cutting-away the foundation of the volition connected with the bad conduct of wrong livelihood which has arisen through the seven courses of action in the two doors. This is Right Livelihood” ***** We can see how understanding of realities - of namas and rupas - as you say, leads to restraint of the senses and developed sila in all forms: “Whenever a monk perceives a form with the eye, a sound........he neither adheres to the appearance as a whole, nor to its parts. And he strives to ward off that through which evil and unwholesome things, greed and sorrow, would arise, if he remained with unguarded senses; and he watches over his senses, restrains his senses” (MN 38, Nyantiloka transl) ***** (By ‘he’ watches or remains, should be understood sati, panna and so on). I’m sure we’re all concerned to ‘make the world a better place’ and invariably will consider lifestyles and conventionally regarded livelihoods or ‘causes’ rather than the development of satipatthana as being the ‘solution’. This reflects our lack of confidence in the Teachings as I see it. Even if we consider the monk’s life as being the ‘purest’ way of life, we may again forget what the real meaning of ‘Right Livelihood is: ***** From the Sammohavinodani1, p.176 “...But it is the volition which occurs in one who goes to a monastery, (thinking:) ‘I will go forth for the purpose of perfecting virtue,’ in one going forth and in one who, having reached the fulfilment of his wish, adverts: ‘I am indeed well and truly gone forth,’ in one exercising the Patimokkha restraint, in one reviewing such requisites as the robes, in one exercising restraint in the eye door regarding visible data, etc which have come into focus there, and in one ourifying his livelihood, that is called “made by virtue”. It is the volition which occurs in one who, according to the path of insight given in the Patisambhida, develops eye as impermanent, painful, no-self, in one who develops ear..mind..visible data...ageing and death as impermanent, painful and no-self, that is called “made by development”. “ ***** Just to emphasise the point that there can be many good and bad actions performed by us all for the sake of livelihood (though as others have mentioned, there may be more opportunities for ‘good’ or ‘bad’ in particular lifestyles), let me add one last quote to show that it is the deeply rooted kilesa, whatever the lifestyle, that are the real problem: ***** From Sammohavinodani 11, p.266 “Aajiivakabhaya.m (“fear due to livelihood”) is fear arisen due to livelihood, mode of life. that is to be found both in the householder and in one gone forth. Herein, many unprofitable things have been done by a householder for the sake of a livelihood; then when hell appears at the time of death, fear arises. By one gone forth also much wrong seeking (for requisites) has been done; then when hell appears at the time of his death, fear arises. This is called “fear due to livelihood”." **** As you said, Ken, the points are not easy to grasp and none of us start off with any right view;-). The dhamma is indeed deep and profound. It’s also liberating. Thanks Ken & Chris for your encouragement to consider further. Sarah ===== 17680 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 11:27pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Dear Sarah, James, and Christine, The commentaries don't have much on what the Buddha said, but has this: Kesi is the name of the horse trainer. He is a trainer because he trains horses that should be trained (to behave appropriately). The trainer appropriately maintains the horse by giving fine food, pure water, and fine words before the training, making this a gentle training. When he trains by tying the mouth, tying the knees, and stabbed with stick (???), whip, and harsh words, this is harsh training. If he does both when appropriate, it is both gentle and harsh training. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: Sarah [mailto:sarahdhhk@y...] > Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 3:28 AM > Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest > > > Hi Christine & James, > > Yes, it’s an interesting sutta. > wrote: > > > > To me it just seems that the Buddha was trying > to speak to this man > > on a level he would understand. I think it > would be an area that > > the Buddha was familiar with - a good > understanding of the breeding > > and training of horses would have been a > requirement of the ruling > > and warrior classes which I understand the > Buddha came from. > > > I agree with these sentiments. > ..... > > --- "James > > > I would challenge anyone to read this sutta: > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-111.html > > > > and then state that the Buddha didn't have a sense of humor, crack > > jokes, startle people for comic effect, or misrepresent the truth > > for comic effect. ..... For the arahants all lobha has been eradicated (and also for the anagamis except for a few very refined kinds not related to sense-pleasures). I’m just looking at the PTS translation by Woodward, but no commentary notes are given. Hopefully B.Bodhi will add some with his new translation. Just a few phrases for your interest to compare -it’s very similar to B.Thanissaro’s: Instead of “I kill him, Kesi”, PTS has “I destroy him, Kesi!” and then: “ ‘True it is, Kesi, that taking life does not become a Tathagata. yet if the man to be trained submits not to the training by mildness, by harshness or both together, then the Tathagata thinks it is not worth while to admonish that man, nor do his wise fellows in the God-life think it worth while to admonish that man. This, kesi, is destruction for a man in the discipline of the Ariyan, - when both the Tathagata and his fellows in the God-life think it not worth while to admonish him.’ ........” These are very useful reminders, thanks James. I don’t read them as being humourous at all, though I understand why you read them this way. They are similar to the one I just quoted from Visuddhimagga (1, 154) about the ‘unvirtuous person’ who is ‘uninstructable by his fellows in the life of purity’. Sarah ====== 17681 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 11:28pm Subject: Re: Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Rob K （again）； I admit that I do not understand the proper definition of “Phenomenologyâ€? and therefore my statement “Saying that consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise clearly supports a phenomenological perspective.â€? may be misleading。 My definition of “phenomenologyâ€? is “we focus on things that touch the mindï¼› things that do not touch the mind are outside the scope of study。â€? If this definition is wrong，then I apologize for any confusion caused。 Metta， Rob M ：-） --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Rob K, > > The book that I was reading is "An Introduction to Theravada > Abhidhamma" by G. D. Sumanapala (Prof of Pali and Buddhist Studies > at University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka). It was published by Buddhist > Research Society Singapore in 1998. > > In Chapter 5, "The Abhidhamma Analysis of the Four Realities > (Paramatthadhamma)", on p79 of this text, it says: > > According to the four way of definition: > 1. the characterisitic of rupa is molestation > 2. its function is scattering or dispersing > 3. its manifestation is abyakata > 4. its proximate cause is consciousness (vinnana) > > For point 4 above, there is an end-note referencing page 10 of > Abhidhammatthasangahadipanipali. It does not give any other details. > > The rest of the message is my own conclusions. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > > --- "rjkjp1 " > wrote: > > --- "robmoult > > " wrote: > > >. Last night I read that the > > > proximate cause of rupa is "consciousness (vinnana)", according > to > > > Abhidhammatthasangahadipanipali (that's a mouthful!). Saying > that > > > consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise > clearly > > > supports a phenomenological perspective. > > > > > > > > the "sound" from the tree that falls in the forest with none to > hear > > > it)? I believe that according to Buddhism, this is not rupa > because > > > there is no consciousness. > > ______________________ > > Dear Rob M, > > Could you give the full references that support these conclusions. > > Robert 17682 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 11:33pm Subject: Moderator bulletin Dear Group, TRIMMING OF POSTS and other reminders ====================================== For those who didn't see the last reminder, we'd appreciate your cooperation with trimming of messages. When replying to someone's post, please retain only those parts that are necessary for the reader to see. This is both for the convenience to fellow members and to minimise the size of the future archives (Yahoo are now imposing limits). Repeat 'offenders' are likely to receive an off-list reminder on this or other infringements, such as 'off-topic' subjects or failure to use an appropriate 'sign-off'. (Kom and Christine have been volunteered to help). Please take any such reminders -- which may just be in the form of a subject heading -- as well-meant prompts for the smooth-running of the list. Thanks for your cooperation. Jon & Sarah P.S. Comments to moderator messages off-list only. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17683 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 7:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Take Care of Yourself Hi, James - In a message dated 12/12/02 9:06:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Dear Howard, > > Oh my goodness! That sounds quite serious! Words > like `hospital', `asthmatic bronchitis', and `fever' don't sound > good to me…and ring many warning bells. Eeeekkkk!! > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: ;-) It's much less of a thing this time - no hospital in my near future, I'm sure! I probably just need a few days of prednisone and the right antibiotic, or even just the prednisone will sufice. ------------------------------------------------ Being ever > > mindful of myself (transient self), I realize the subtle and not-so- > subtle attachment I have to you. Dhamma Grandpa, please take care! > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Now I'm *really* feeling old! I'm old enough to be your father, James, but "Grandpa" is push! ;-)) [You're in your 30's I presume? My older son is 33.] ------------------------------------------------ > I, if not many more, depend on you. Good thoughts for your speedy > recovery!! > > ========================= You're *very* kind, James. Thanks a lot! I'll be fine. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17684 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 0:56am Subject: A mine of gems Dear Group, I suppose it's natural to have a 'favourite' among the Great Disciples - for me, it is Ananda. Ananda became a monk when he was thirty-seven years old and became a Sotapanna shortly thereafter, the Buddha was then fifty-five years old. Perhaps there were others of greater intellectual brilliance, perhaps not - Ananda wasn't just a thinking parrot or a living tape recorder. I've always felt that the gentle Ananda would understand people in their situations more acutely than the other great disciples. Even across the hurdle of time and through the filters of identity, gender and culture his intelligence, metta and karuna shine through. Ananda always seems so Real - there was no pretense or posturing as the perfect disciple to impress others, he didn't worry about making a mistake or not knowing everything, he seemed a genuinely loving person with the highest ethical standard. He wanted nothing for himself except perhaps progress on the Path, and so he engendered in others that most rare and precious of human responses, trust. He had the honour of being trusted by a Buddha, and the manner of his acceptance of the post of attendant shows the true calibre of the man. "It is time" [the Buddha] said, "to have a reliable, trustworthy attendant." He then asked if any of the assembled monks would like to be His personal attendant. All the noble ones gathered immediately responded to His request by offering their services. Ananda, however, who dearly wished to be His attendant, modestly held back, thinking, "The Buddha would surely appoint me if I were the most suitable person." The Buddha, with His divine eye, observed that many eons ago Ananda had aspired to be a personal attendant of a Buddha, the fulfilment of which was to occur during His reign. Refusing the offers of the other monks, He turned to Ananda and offered the post to him. Ananda agreed to accept the post if the Buddha would agree to eight conditions. Four of them related to the non-acceptance of gifts and favours from the Buddha. Ananda wanted to ensure that there would be no doubts cast that he had accepted this position in order to obtain material gain. The other four related to the performance of his duties while being mindful of his own advancement in the Noble Path. The Buddha agreed to Ananda's requests." (from Relatives and Disciples of the Buddha by Radhika Abeysekara.) Ananda was designated by the Buddha as the leader in five categories. They were: Erudition, Retentive memory, Good behaviour, Steadfastness, and Ministering of care. It is difficult to think of how bereft he must have been after the Blessed One's Parinibbana. Particularly when within a year, The Buddha, Sariputta, Moggallana and King Pasenadi had all died. But how fortunate we are that he endured in this life for so many more years as Guardian of the Dhamma. (Some Ananda verses from Great Disciples of the Buddha by Nyanaponika Thera and Hellmuth Hecker): "My companion has passed away, The Master, too, is gone. There is no friendship now that equals this: Mindfulness directed to the body. The old ones now have passed away, The new ones do not please me much, Today I meditate all alone Like a bird gone to its nest." ------------- And some added about Ananda afterwards: "Of great learning, bearer of the Dhamma, The guardian of the Great Seer's treasure, Ananda, the eye of the entire world, Was a dispeller of gloom on the darkness. The seer who was so retentive, Of keen memory and resolute, The elder sustaining the true Dhamma, Ananda was a mine of gems." ------------ metta, Christine 17685 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 5:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] question Stephen --- oreznoone@a... wrote: > <> I'm not sure about being 'symmetrical' but, yes, both would be instances of worldly conditions, for the recipient of the praise/blame (the hypothetical moderator). <<... in fact, the latter is perhaps likely to cause you harm (e.g., build your ego a bit) than the former, which I rather doubt would have much effect.>> I think you're saying that there would probably be more akusala conditioned by the praise than by the blame. I don't see how this can be known. A person's reaction depends on a number of factors including, of course, his/her accumulated tendencies, but also factors peculiar to the occasion in question. I really don't think it's possible to generalise on this, even for a given individual. <> Are you perhaps postulating action taken by the (hypothetical) moderator based solely or mainly on the akusala that is conditioned by the praise/blame in question, rather than on appropriate objective considerations? This is always possible, of course, since moderators are only human after all. But it would not necessarily be the case, since a moderator might be also be able to put personal considerations aside for the most part in such cases. I suspect I've missed your point somewhere, in which case, please feel free to say so. Jon 17686 From: Sarah Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 5:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Out of Cooran - Metta is first "developed" towards oneself :) Hi Steve, Thank you very much for all your helpful comments and translation points. I know Nina will also appreciate these too. --- "bodhi2500 " > "Sabbattataaya also occurs in the Appamannavibhango in the Vibhanga > quite a few times, but it seems always in the same context(I dont > have a eng. translation) > --------------------- I have an Eng translation but no Pali in it;-) There is a whole chapter of the 4 brahma viharas. Almost at the end under "2. The couplets", it says they "are external". I'm not sure what this refers to. You may also be interested to look at the very brief section in B.Bodhi's CMA if you have it (or another transl if not), 11,Guide to 5 & 7. Metta is given under adosa (non-hatred) . "When non-hatred appears as the sublime quality of loving-kindness (metta) it has the characteristic of promoting the welfare of living beings. its function is to prefer THEIR welfare....."(my caps). Karuna and mudita details under 'the illimitables': "Karuna, or compassion, has the characteristic of promoting the removal of suffering in OTHERS...." (my caps) "Mudita or appreciative joy, has the characteristic of gladness at the success of OTHERS....." (my caps). I doubt very much that there is any translation bias here;-) ..... > Steve: > > I'll try to find the relevant Pali passages, but as for a translation > and explanation, I think I better leave that up to someone who has a > better understanding of Pali and Dhamma than me. .... Anytime we take any translations as 'works in progress' here - just occasional phrases are very helpful as you've done in your post (mostly snipped, but saved for very useful reference). I'm sorry the timing to meet up in Thailand didn't quite work out but am very glad you were back in time to meet up with the group in Cooran. Sarah ===== 17687 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 5:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Hi James Buddha do not use humor at his teachings. The sutta is straight to the point. He is just using an indirect approach to educate and it does not mean to joke. With your reference in the theory of comedey... the first point "it must appeal to an intellect". Do u think it will appeal to a Buddha for an appeal to an intellect. Do u think Buddha needs to be reminded of humanity? Do u think buddha is confined by his upbrining as a prince even though he could see his own endless past lives. Buddha dont joke dont jest bc it is rooted in lobha. Be it Lobha in culture, in intellect or in humanity or in anything in fact By the way could you kindly state which Mahayana sutta that say some Buddha always crack jokes and laugh all the time. regards KC --- "James " wrote: > Sarah and Christine, > > Smiles and Salutations! Well, I don't think either one of you met > my challenge. You did not show that the Buddha did not crack a > joke, a very dark joke actually, in your interpretations of this > sutta. Both of you miss the main thing that shows that it is a > joke. Of course the Buddha turns it into a lesson, as humor is > often used, but he first uses humor. Let me give you some hints: > Don't look at the subject matter, horse training, jokes can occur > in > any setting; and don't look at the follow up explanation of the > Buddha, jokes don't last forever and he did have a lesson to teach. > > Look at the events immediately following the words of the Buddha. > There you will find the humor. And I am not going to point it out > directly. Like insight, jokes are either something you get or > something you don't. When they are explained, the experience is > lost in translation. > > Christine wanted to know what makes something funny. Richard F. > Taflinger comes up with some pretty good guidelines in his "A > Theory > of Comedy": > 1) it must appeal to the intellect rather than the emotions; > 2) it must be mechanical; > 3) it must be inherently human, with the capability of reminding us > > of humanity; > 4) there must be a set of established societal norms with which the > > observer is familiar, either through everyday life or through the > author providing it in expository material, or both; > 5) the situation and its component parts (the actions performed and > > the dialogue spoken) must be inconsistent or unsuitable to the > surrounding or associations (i.e., the societal norms); and > 6) it must be perceived by the observer as harmless or painless to > the participants. When these criteria have been met, people will > laugh. If any one is absent, then the attempt at humor will fail. > > The Buddha spoke against humor at some else's expense, not all > humor > in general—according to my interpretation of that teaching to his > son. Granted, the Buddha didn't go around cracking jokes all of > the > time, but I don't think that was a sign of his enlightenment > (Mahayana records tell of many subsequent Buddhas [arahants] who > did > crack jokes and laugh all the time…hence, `The Happy Buddha'…who I > am beginning to resemble with all the food this holiday season > ). I believe the Lord Buddha's predominately cool > temperament was a result of him being raised as a Prince. Royality > > is expected and taught to act dignified and proper at all times and > > any type of humor is supposed to be dry and subtle at the very > least. The Buddha was always a leader, even when seeking > enlightenment. He would obviously know the responsibility that > position held, social customs and mores expected, and was therefore > > prim and proper most of the time. Question: Did the Buddha ever > smile? I think he must have. He wasn't Vulcan . > > Side Note: Sarah, you write, "For the arahants all lobha has been > eradicated (and also for the anagamis except for a few very refined > > kinds not related to sense-pleasures)." Now, this statement really > > makes me smile. Please take the following statements as kind and > not nasty: Just how many arahants and anagamis have you > psychoanalyzed to make this determination? This is > an `allness' statement and, giving the diversity of human > nature, `allness' statements are very unlikely to be correct when > applied to humans (or anything really). This is another issue I > have with the Abhidhamma. It leads people to believe they know > something that they cannot possibly know. The Buddha taught not to > > believe something unless it is experienced first-hand, and yet the > Abhidhamma asks people to believe all sorts of things not > experienced first-hand. That is, if it is to be taken literally; > if > it is to be taken symbolically, that is another issue. I eagerly > await Nina's response to that. > > And, according to the Sutta Pitaka, arahants still have traces of > defilements (of which `lobha', greed, is one) or they would > disappear in a puff of smoke . Even the Lord Buddha had > traces of defilements but his were practically nil because he had > been purifying his karma stream for so many eons (according to the > suttas and him…but that is up for argument also). > > Smiling Metta, James > > Ps. I find Thanissaro's translations of the suttas without > equal. "I destroy him, Kesi" would not make any sense in context > to > the remainder of the sutta. Why would the Buddha say, "I destroy > him, Kesi" and then later say, "`True it is, Kesi, that taking life > > does not become a Tathagata…" I can `destroy' someone's reputation; > > I can `destroy' a building, etc. This is obviously about taking > life, `killing' as opposed to `destroying'. Thanissaro has proven > time and time again that he knows these important subtleties in the > > English Language. We should all thank our lucky stars he decided > to > become a monk rather than a field more lucrative. 17688 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 5:40am Subject: Re: A mine of gems --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, > > I suppose it's natural to have a 'favourite' among the Great > Disciples - for me, it is Ananda. ______________ Dear Christine, I don't know if you have read the commentary about the parinibbana of Ananda. From memory it says he rose into the air above the middle of the Ganges river, near Varansi I believe, so that disciples on both sides might see his final passing. It is said that the tears and lamentation at this time were even more than at the Buddha's parinibanna, so popular was he, among the people. zzzzrobert 17689 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 5:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Three Abstinences What has to come has to come, if the termites will to destroy the building so be it. Build another one or go to another place. It is not right for anyone to take away any lives. Why attach to form when one was homeless in the first place rgds KC --- "James " wrote: > --- "peterdac4298 > " wrote: > > Hi Christine > > > > Ajhan Cha would tell us to watch the perplexity, doubt and > confusion > > in the moment that they arose, 'cause that is where we get > > enlightened. From his pov, the whole point of the Vinaya is two > > fold, a/ the basis for developing tranquility, and b/ just this > kind > > of predicament. > > > > I have heard of one instance, and I think it was Ajhan Sumedho > who > > told the story, that there was an occasion of termite infestation > > of > > one of the monastery buildings, might have been a sala or a kuti. > > > On this occasion there was no alternative but to kill the > insects. > > Ajhan Cha took part in, if not actually led, the operation too. > > > > Needless to say this situation was distinctly a one off. Sangha > > credibility would never have survived a repetition. Fortunately, > > to > > my knowledge, the need for such extreme measures has never since > > arisen. > > > > Cheers > > Peter > > Dear Peter, > > Thanks for this story. I was not aware of this story about Ajahn > Chah and it is good to hear. I was recently at Wat Nanachat > (August, 2002), within walking distance of Wat Pah Pong, with the > goal of ordaining and the insect problem (not just termites) must > have gotten much worse since Ajahn Chah's death. I felt, deep in > my > bones, that the entire area needed a thorough insect extermination. > > And I would single-handedly do it also!! -- For the sake of the > Sangha and the sake of the insects. That such shortsighted silly > people in the area don't see as much, I have no idea. > > I disagree that such an act would destroy Sangha credibility. And > if it did, then so be it. In that case, it would demonstrate that > the Sangha had lost its credibility anyway. > > Metta, James 17690 From: James Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 5:49am Subject: [dsg] Re: Take Care of Yourself Dear Howard, Oh, it is good that it isn't so serious. Oops...I was going on your picture. I didn't know how old you are. The beard adds age. Maybe I should have written : Dhamma Santa? Do take care of yourself. Metta, James 17691 From: James Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 6:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi James > > Buddha do not use humor at his teachings. The sutta is straight to > the point. He is just using an indirect approach to educate and it > does not mean to joke. (Yes it is a joke. It is not straight to the point. He could have been much more straight to the point. Okay, since you don't seem to get the joke, I will try to translate without ruining it. The Buddha is asking Kesi how he trains horses...the difficulties involved. Kesi goes through a long description of how he trains them. Then the Buddha asks Kesi what he will do with the horse if it is untrainable. Kesi replies that he will have to kill the horse in that case so that it won't interfere with the training of the other horses. Then Kesi asks the Buddha how he trains monks. The Buddha goes through a long description of how he trains monks that parallels how Kesi trains horses. Then Kesi asks the Buddha what he does if a monk cannot be trained. The Buddha replies, with a straight face and very convincingly, "Then I kill that monk, Kesi." LOL! (Could you imagine the Buddha killing the monks who wouldn't take to training so they wouldn't 'ruin' the other monks?...it is a very dark joke). Kesi believes him, part of the humor, and the Buddha goes on to explain that what he means is that he will ignore that monk. Now, anyone with any intellect knows that killing a person and ignoring a person are hardly equal. And the Buddha could have just said that right at the start if his teachings were always "straight forward"; he didn't have to have Kesi believe, even for an instant, that the Buddha would knock off any untrainable monk. :-) > > With your reference in the theory of comedey... the first point "it > must appeal to an intellect". Do u think it will appeal to a Buddha > for an appeal to an intellect. Do u think Buddha needs to be > reminded of humanity? Do u think buddha is confined by his upbrining > as a prince even though he could see his own endless past lives. > > Buddha dont joke dont jest bc it is rooted in lobha. Be it Lobha in > culture, in intellect or in humanity or in anything in fact (These guidelines are for people, not Buddhas. They may apply to Buddhas as well, I am not sure of that one. But I didn't state that they applied to Buddhas) > > By the way could you kindly state which Mahayana sutta that say some > Buddha always crack jokes and laugh all the time. (I had read it in a book from the library, when I was first becoming a Buddhist, that described the personalities of 12 different Buddhas in China and Japan. I don't have the book any longer and I am not an expert in Mahayana texts to find it for you...which could be considered off-topic for this list if I did that anyway. But I am amazed that of all the 'Happy Buddha' statues in the world, laughing and smiling, you actually want me to pull out some suttas to prove it to you. Just look around and look in your heart. You will find the answer there.) > > > regards > KC Happy Holidays, James 17692 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 6:16am Subject: Re: Ethical View vs. Scientific View --- "robmoult < > > The book that I was reading is "An Introduction to Theravada > Abhidhamma" by G. D. Sumanapala (Prof of Pali and Buddhist Studies > at University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka). It was published by Buddhist > Research Society Singapore in 1998. > > In Chapter 5, "The Abhidhamma Analysis of the Four Realities > (Paramatthadhamma)", on p79 of this text, it says: > > According to the four way of definition: > 1. the characterisitic of rupa is molestation > 2. its function is scattering or dispersing > 3. its manifestation is abyakata > 4. its proximate cause is consciousness (vinnana) > > For point 4 above, there is an end-note referencing page 10 of > Abhidhammatthasangahadipanipali. It does not give any other details. > > ______________________ Dear Rob, You have many books that I don't (thanks very much for the Abhidhamma book that Jon passed on to me BTW). If you have the pasage in pali we could search it out. In the meantime how do you reconcile "that consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise " with the Abhidhammamatthasangaha: http://www.palikanon.com/abhidham/sangaha/chapter_6.htm " Material phenomena arise in four ways, viz: 1. Kamma, 2. Mind, 3. Seasonal Conditions, and 4. Food." Seasonal conditions is utu. In Survey of Paramattha Dhammas (appendix)p.274 http://www.abhidhamma.org/survey6.pdf "Rúpas which originate from kamma are called kammaja rúpas 1 Rúpas which originate from citta are called cittaja rúpas Rúpas which originate from temperature are called utuja rúpas Rúpas which originate from nutrition are called åhåraja rúpas" It says that the sound nonad may arise conditioned by either citta of utu: "The sound nonad, which is a kalåpa of nine rúpas: the eight inseparable rúpas and sound. If sound does not originate from citta, in the case of speech intimation, sound originates from temperature, such as the sound of traffic, or of a waterfall.""" Robert 17693 From: nidive Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 6:26am Subject: Re: Ethical View vs. Scientific View Dear Robert, > In the meantime how do you reconcile "that consciousness it is > a necessary condition for rupa to arise " with the > Abhidhammamatthasangaha: > http://www.palikanon.com/abhidham/sangaha/chapter_6.htm I wonder if Samyutta Nikaya XII.67, Nalakalapiyo Sutta, Sheaves of Reeds might help you: "Very well then, Kotthita my friend, I will give you an analogy; for there are cases where it is through the use of an analogy that intelligent people can understand the meaning of what is being said. It is as if two sheaves of reeds were to stand leaning against one another. In the same way, from name-&-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness, from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name & form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of suffering & stress. "If one were to pull away one of those sheaves of reeds, the other would fall; if one were to pull away the other, the first one would fall. In the same way, from the cessation of name-&-form comes the cessation of consciousness, from the cessation of consciousness comes the cessation of name-&-form. From the cessation of name-&- form comes the cessation of the six sense media. From the cessation of the six sense media comes the cessation of contact. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of feeling. From the cessation of feeling comes the cessation of craving. From the cessation of craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering & stress." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn12-067.html -------------------------------------------------------------- "And what is name-&-form? Feeling, perception, intention, contact, & attention: This is called name. The four great elements & the form dependent on the four great elements: This is called form. This name & this form are called name-&-form." [SN XII.2] NEO Swee Boon 17694 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 7:01am Subject: Re: Silabbata-paramasa --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > > C: I agree that grasping is without wisdom, but diligently following > the basic ethical teaching of the Blessed One, not doing evil, > cultivating virtue and purifying the mind doesn't necessarily equate > to clinging, does it? Without 'seeing danger in the slightest > fault', without cultivating sila to be as close as possible to the > templates laid down in the Suttas, wouldn't one be likely to be > deluded, find moral loopholes, convince oneself that what one > really wants to do is part of a 'higher wisdom' free from 'rules' > and 'precepts'? Perhaps that is more nearly clinging ... clinging to > self? > Thanks for this post which has left me a little bemused and > reflecting. >_____________________________- Dear Christine, Sometimes it's hard to explain many aspects of the teaching at the same time. The Cariyapitaka (Net of views p 300) says: "esteeming virtue as the foundation of all achievements, as the soil for the origination of all the Buddha qualities, the beginning, footing, head and chief of all the dhammas issuing in buddhahood…". Then again the Visuddhimagga XV11267 explains that even such pure conduct and practice that leads to the deva world and highest brahma world can still be silabbataparamasa : "So silabataparamsa is a condition for all three namely the sense-desire, fine-material (rupa-brahma)and immaterial kinds of becoming(arupa Brahma". Is this a conflict in the teachings? I don't think so. Sila is a necessary = part of the development of insight but sometimes we forget that sila is a really a very brief moment of conditioned nama. We tend to think I am keeping sila and that is still clinging to concept. As you say all types of extremes are possible: one may neglect sila altogether. I think the only way is to really learn to see the characteristics of dhammas; then, so I believe, panna will know what is ultimately right or wrong; it is never us actually who is or is not keeping sila. It may seem reckless but I have confidence that learning about the nature of conditioned dhammas means that a type of wisdom is developing that will gradually perceive rightness and wrongness in a more subtle way than any such reckoning done when the idea of self is still dominant. Robert 17695 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 7:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest > > (Yes it is a joke. It is not straight to the point. He could have > been much more straight to the point. Okay, since you don't seem > to get the joke, I will try to translate without ruining it. The > Buddha is asking Kesi how he trains horses...the difficulties > involved. Kesi goes through a long description of how he trains > them. Then the Buddha asks Kesi what he will do with the horse if > it is untrainable. Kesi replies that he will have to kill the > horse> in that case so that it won't interfere with the training of the > other horses. Then Kesi asks the Buddha how he trains monks. The > Buddha goes through a long description of how he trains monks that> parallels how Kesi trains horses. Then Kesi asks the Buddha what he does if a monk cannot be trained. The Buddha replies, with a > straight face and very convincingly, "Then I kill that monk, Kesi." > LOL! (Could you imagine the Buddha killing the monks who wouldn't > take to training so they wouldn't 'ruin' the other monks?...it is a > very dark joke). Kesi believes him, part of the humor, and the > Buddha goes on to explain that what he means is that he will ignore > that monk. Now, anyone with any intellect knows that killing a > person and ignoring a person are hardly equal. And the Buddha > could have just said that right at the start if his teachings were > always "straight forward"; he didn't have to have Kesi believe, > even > for an instant, that the Buddha would knock off any untrainable > monk. :-) KC: I think it is a matter of perspective. It can be meant to be shock so to jolt the person up. > > > > With your reference in the theory of comedey... the first point > "it > > must appeal to an intellect". Do u think it will appeal to a > Buddha > > for an appeal to an intellect. Do u think Buddha needs to be > > reminded of humanity? Do u think buddha is confined by his > upbrining > > as a prince even though he could see his own endless past lives. > > > > > Buddha dont joke dont jest bc it is rooted in lobha. Be it Lobha > in culture, in intellect or in humanity or in anything in fact > > (These guidelines are for people, not Buddhas. They may apply to > Buddhas as well, I am not sure of that one. But I didn't state > that they applied to Buddhas) KC: These guidelines are for everyone bc it is taughted by Buddha. If a teacher do not practise what he taught, then who will believe in him. Thus the sutta is not about humor, it is trying to jolt the person into reflection and hence leading to the path. > > > > By the way could you kindly state which Mahayana sutta that say > some > > Buddha always crack jokes and laugh all the time. > > (I had read it in a book from the library, when I was first > becoming > a Buddhist, that described the personalities of 12 different > Buddhas > in China and Japan. I don't have the book any longer and I am not > an expert in Mahayana texts to find it for you...which could be > considered off-topic for this list if I did that anyway. But I am > amazed that of all the 'Happy Buddha' statues in the world, > laughing > and smiling, you actually want me to pull out some suttas to prove > it to you. Just look around and look in your heart. You will find > > the answer there.) k: What you are describing is the Laughing Buddha. A chinese cultural effect on Metreiya Buddha. Kind rgds KC 17696 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 7:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A 'Funny' Question I think the reason behind why Buddha being affirmitive about his attainment is that at that time, there are many practitioner of different faith and some of them has claim they have reach enlightment (if my memory did not fail me). This is compounded by the fact that the Gods themselves think they are "better". He is not shy bc he wants the world to know that he is here to teach the path to enlightment and he is willing to take on the challenge and by doing that reaffirm his teaching to those who are skeptical about his teaching. There are also other reason, to attract those willing to learn to seek him out. kind rgds KC --- "nidive " wrote: > Hi robmoult, > > > What would motivate me to tell my friend about my attainment? > Encouragement... that there indeed is a way out of samsara. That I > know there is that WAY. That that WAY is attainable by those who > practise the Dhamma diligently. Not to give up. > Sharing... as a form of dana, sharing of merit. > > > The Buddha was certainly not "shy" about mentioning his own > > attainment. I suspect that the Buddha's motivation was to use > this > > as a teaching aid. > I don't think that confiding about one's attainment with those > close > to the Dhamma is anything wrong. There were Bikkhus and Bikkhunis > who declared their attainment to the Buddha, isn't it? > Since there is no Buddha now, the closest is our Dhamma friends and > > Bikkhus. > > NEO Swee Boon 17697 From: Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 2:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Take Care of Yourself Hi, James - In a message dated 12/13/02 8:50:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > > Dear Howard, > > Oh, it is good that it isn't so serious. Oops...I was going on your > picture. I didn't know how old you are. The beard adds age. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: In April I'll be 63. Not *real* old, yet not a kid either! Yes, the beard is aging, but I think I look better with it than without it. Interestingly (to me ;-), I think I am mentally and attitudinally younger right now than I've ever been in this lifetime! The aging process is fascinating, I find. It provides a conventional insight into anicca. (All of a sudden you look in a mirror and wonder "Where the hell did that old guy come from, and where did 'Howard' go!" And you look back in your mind at events and characters in earlier acts of this play we call "our life", and they seem to have been played out in another lifetime entirely. Fascinating. ------------------------------------------------- Maybe > > I should have written : Dhamma Santa? ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, t'is the season!! ------------------------------------------------- Do take care of > > yourself. > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks. I'm starting on a one-week prednisone regimen today which I'm certain will do the job. -------------------------------------------------- > > Metta, James > ======================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17698 From: Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 3:19am Subject: Brief Comment/NEO Swee Boon Re: [dsg] Re: Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, NEO Swee Boon - The sutta you reference here is one of my very favorites and one which I have long considered to be very important. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/13/02 9:28:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, nidive@y... writes: > Dear Robert, > > >In the meantime how do you reconcile "that consciousness it is > >a necessary condition for rupa to arise " with the > >Abhidhammamatthasangaha: > >http://www.palikanon.com/abhidham/sangaha/chapter_6.htm > > I wonder if Samyutta Nikaya XII.67, Nalakalapiyo Sutta, Sheaves of > Reeds might help you: > > NEO Swee Boon > > ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17699 From: James Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 8:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > KC: I think it is a matter of perspective. It can be meant to be > shock so to jolt the person up. Kenneth, I am open to the possibility that my interpretation of this sutta is incorrect and, if so, I would like to be taught the correct way to view this sutta. However, you don't provide any explanation or analysis for your determination that this sutta is simply about the Buddha 'shocking' Kesi to teach him a lesson. Why did he shock him? What was the lesson particular to Kesi that required him to be shocked to understand it? Can you give other examples of the Buddha purposefully shocking people to teach a lesson. Why did he do it in those instances? I don't see how you can declair, "The Buddha did not have a sense of humor...because I say he didn't have a sense of humor...and that is the end of that." Other religions may use that type of argumentation, but that doesn't float in Buddhism. This is a thinking person's religion and way of life. Metta, James 17700 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 0:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Hi James (Sarah, Ken) and all, The laughing fat buddha wasn't around until one and a half thousand years after the Buddha passed away. A cultural outgrowth of China and Japan, not of Theravada countries. He made his appearance in the 10th century, and is otherwise known as Hotei (Japan) and Pu-Tai (China) and embodies the ideals of the good life: i.e. health, happiness, prosperity and longevity. Buddhist notions of happiness based on self-mastery and enlightened insight were (somehow!) fused with popular Chinese and Japanese life-ideals of happiness through material prosperity. It is possible that The Laughing fat Buddha is modeled on an historical figure, a obese wandering Zen monk named Pu- tai, who allegedly claimed to be an incarnation of the future Buddha Maitreya (Chinese Mi-lo-fo; Japanese Miroku). Perhaps these comments about the Sutta at Access to Insight will be of assistance? "Kesi Sutta (AN IV.111) -- To Kesi the Horsetrainer. The Buddha explains to Kesi, a horsetrainer, how he teaches Dhamma. Kesi is so moved by the Buddha's explanation that he pledges to follow the Buddha for life. This brilliant exposition warrants careful study by all teachers -- not only of Dhamma -- as it reveals the multiple levels in which effective teaching operates: the Buddha speaks in terms that the listener understands (horsetraining), he uses similes to great effect, and he deftly answers the real question that lies behind the student's query ("Please, can you train me?"). " Maybe different cultural perceptions and personal life experiences are influencing how we view the telling of this teaching. To me, where farm animals are part of everyday life, there is no humour and no shock tactics. Perhaps to a town or city person it does seem unusual. I think to Kesi, the giving up on and exclusiion of a person may have seemed shocking (as it did to me) until put in realistic everyday terms he could understand. Kesi would have known, as the story unfolded, without even considering it, that the Buddha meant a relcalcitrant person would be put out of communion. He would not even have considered that the Buddha meant really killing. In my example, I didn't even consider that the parents would actually put a bridle and rein on the teenage daughter. I knew these things were used for restraint and control, therefore I knew they were talking about restraint and control of their daughter. Just so, Kesi wouldn't have needed to even consider that actual killing was meant, he would have known it meant all avenues of training had been explored, the person was unchangeable, therefore they would, at this time at least, have no further opportunities for training and interaction. {Note to James: Discussing this Sutta has been extremely helpful to me in putting another matter into perspective. So thank you for raising it} :-) metta, Christine --- "James " wrote: 17701 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 0:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Dear Sarah, Thank you for your response and an essential reminder. I posted the section from the Vibhangha that I did because I have heard people debate the Five Constituent path before. People often question,"well what about sila? Where did sila go?" This particular verse was selected specificaly beacause it does show, as you have stated there is no supramundane Five Constiuent Path in and of itself outside of the Noble Eight Fold Path. That, indeed, because a Bhikkhu has practiced mental development to the point of supramundane jhana tending to release, dispersive of continuing rebirth; he for the abandoning of wrong view, for entering of the first stage, aloof from sense pleasure....at that time there is the Five Constituent Path. It seems pretty clear that at this point of mental development described in detail in this verse that dasa sila is already kept by the Bhikkhu perfectly, happily, at this point ie., attainment of jhana factor tending towards release, dispersive of continuing rebirth and death, and having abandoned wrong view aloof from sense pleasures is stated quite clearly. The comentary, though, would be much appreciated as a side note. Thank you much if you would share some of it. Metta In Dhamma Phra Piyadhammo > "...although "eightfold" is not said, it should nevertheless be understood > as eightfold, for there is no supramundane path called fivefold. This is > the agreed commentary of the teachers here." > > A lot of detail is given including interesting reference to some of the MN > suttas being discussed in other threads. The 3 virati "occur previously > purified." > > If you don't have access to the commentary and would like me to add more > detail, pls let me know. You may also like to review some earlier posts on > the 5-fold/8-fold posts under 'Eightfold Path' in Useful Posts. > > It's hard for me to imagine memorizing the Vibhanga in Pali. Anumodana in > your efforts in these endeavours. > > Sarah > ====== 17702 From: peterdac4298 Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 1:40pm Subject: Re: A mine of gems Hi Christine It is interesting to note that you have not mentioned perhaps the most famous attribute to Ananda. After all it was he who asked the Buddha to admit women to the Sangha. Indeed, on later occasions, the Buddha found it necessary to rebuke Ananda for being too concerned for the welfare of the Bhikkhunies and not enough for his own practice. Cheers Peter --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, > > I suppose it's natural to have a 'favourite' among the Great > Disciples - for me, it is Ananda. Ananda became a monk when he was > thirty-seven years old and became a Sotapanna shortly thereafter, the > Buddha was then fifty-five years old. > metta, > Christine 17703 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 2:49pm Subject: Re: A mine of gems Dear Peter, On a number of lists (including this one) and over a period of time, I have found the topic of the Bhikkuni Sangha, and especially the issue of its Restoration in terms of the original, to be uncomfortable to many posters. Discussion is always adversarial. People tend to have definite views separated by impassable barriers. One side asks for investigation with loving-kindness, goodwill and compassion as to the possibility, the other side points to its impossibility according to scripture. One side goes ahead in some countries, and begins a process, the other side says, sadly, it will always be invalid. Having experienced the implacability of those of the 'God said ...'persuasion within the Christian context of the same issue, I have simply vacated the field. It remains a deep sorrow. So, It was not a case of 'failed to' but rather 'chose not to' in the interest of shining a broad light on this inspiring man and not narrowing the focus to what he is already revered for by countless men and women through the centuries. metta, Christine --- "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi Christine > > It is interesting to note that you have not mentioned perhaps the > most famous attribute to Ananda. After all it was he who asked the > Buddha to admit women to the Sangha. Indeed, on later occasions, > the Buddha found it necessary to rebuke Ananda for being too > concerned for the welfare of the Bhikkhunies and not enough for his > own practice. > > Cheers > Peter > > --- "christine_forsyth > " wrote: > > Dear Group, > > > > I suppose it's natural to have a 'favourite' among the Great > > Disciples - for me, it is Ananda. Ananda became a monk when he > was > > thirty-seven years old and became a Sotapanna shortly thereafter, > the > > Buddha was then fifty-five years old. > > > metta, > > Christine 17704 From: Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 9:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Out of Cooran - Metta is first "developed" towards oneself :) Hi Sarah In a message dated 13/12/02 11:15:53 PM E. Australia Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Metta is given under adosa (non-hatred) . "When non-hatred appears as the > sublime quality of loving-kindness (metta) it has the characteristic of > promoting the welfare of living beings. its function is to prefer THEIR > welfare....."(my caps). > > Karuna and mudita details under 'the illimitables': > "Karuna, or compassion, has the characteristic of promoting the removal of > suffering in OTHERS...." (my caps) > > "Mudita or appreciative joy, has the characteristic of gladness at the > success of OTHERS....." (my caps). > Yes, as far as my understanding goes all referances to the development of the Brahmavihara's in the Tipitaka and most of the commentries (That I have seen) are directed towards others. And for me at this point in time is the most beneficial way of looking at the Brahmavihara's. ie. When we see/understand Dukkha it is a condition for the arising of karuna for all beings, when we see someone experiance joy/success, it is a condition for the arising of mudita for others etc. Thank-you Steve 17705 From: James Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 5:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Christine and All, Thank you. You give a lot of facts, and quotes…but not much that I can grasp onto as a position. But this discussion reminds me again of why I am a Buddhist. You know, I always thought of Buddhism as a happy and joyful way of approaching life. A way of saying, "Yes, we are all suffering…and it is all quite unnecessary. It is possible to find true happiness in the here and now and the hereafter. And it if from your own efforts that such will be done." But since being a member of this group I have confronted such depressing positions as Nibbana as complete nothingness and void, the Buddha was practically a Vulcan and had no trace of humanity whatsoever, that inanimate objects (like rocks) have the intrinsic characteristic of suffering along with being hard and cold, and that joking, smiling, laughing, and happiness are all against Buddhism. I am not sure if this is a Buddhist group or a Silvia Plath fan club . I keep writing to kids to be happy, be optimistic, and know that everything is for a reason and that reason is good….but from the thinking of the vocal majority of this group I might as well tell them all to cut their wrists on the spot. There is nothing worth living for and there is nothing to attain. All is emptiness and emptiness is all…And `Have a Good, Mettiful Day' ;-) Rubbish and Nonsense!! So much has been lost and those who think they know don't really know anything. They only hear the empty echoes in their lonely heads as they lament to themselves. I just wanted to get this off my chest. I am sure the doomsayers will have much to say in response. Fine. But please, I want to urge everyone, don't think that all is forsaken! There is hope and there is happiness…all is not dukkha. Dukkha is a dream, Happiness is reality. Just take a Prozac and call me in the morning. Metta, James 17706 From: peterdac4298 Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 5:43pm Subject: Re: A mine of gems Hi Christine Yep! I'd have to agree, it sure is a contentious issue. I am sure you are familiar with all of this, though having just checked the archives to see some discussion last August ref Thailand, hope I'm not opening up a load of old wounds but instead would like to add what may be seen as a side note, rather than a major point. At Amaravati, the nuns have gone for something of a 'middle way'. They are fully kosher ten sila Sammaneriis. But their ten precepts have been expanded to include the entire Vinaya, edited and rearranged under the ten precepts, (much as the Visudhimagga has been edited and rearranged to accommodate all the old commentaries under the seven stages of purity). In addition, the nuns, (I am ashamed to say I'm not up to date on their current designation: last I new, they carried the title of Ayya, and am further ashamed to say I don't know what that means, but am pretty sure it is something rather good), have been given equivalent status to the Bhikkus: i.e., based on rains ordination, they have equal rank. What this means is that the intimidating and demeaning requirements of the original Bhikkuni order are abandoned and a more democratic system has been introduced, with all the training potential of the Bhikku Vinaya: i.e. they develop the same moral and skillful basis for developing Samadhi whilst falling into the same dilemmas and paradoxes as a Bhikku practicing the full Vinaya. This works quite well because the communities are kept well separated for formal purposes and accommodation etc. Though they eat and work together and share informal meetings where lay people would normally be present too. Whether all this would become universally acceptable, or not, is something else. But it may help to get a perspective on the issue to remember that the different sects of Bhikkus have all sorts of recognition problems wrt Bhikkus of other sects. Monks of one sect, when visiting monasteries of another, are routinely treated as lay men irrespective of home based seniority: e.g., are at the back of the line for receiving alms; allowed to stay for a maximum of three nights, or go through formal procedures to get special permission to stay any longer; and perhaps most significantly, are excluded from Patimokha assemblies with the host community. How this last one came about is something of a mystery when one remembers that causing a schism in the Bhikku community is a Parajika offence. Where, from a Vinaya pov, schism is interpreted as holding separate Patimokhas: unless one sees it as the result of the quirks of (much latter) political upheavals, i.e. a purely historical phenomena. In view of all this, your words seem to carry much wisdom: "...Having experienced the implacability of those of the 'God said ...'persuasion within the Christian context of the same issue, I have simply vacated the field. It remains a deep sorrow. ..." Paranoia is definitely involved in all this, and that is perhaps the cause for optimism. As we all know, such things being compounded conditions are subject to dissolution if wisdom prevails for long enough. I'm sure it will. Just hope the Bhikkunis of the future know what they are letting themselves in for! Cheers Peter --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Peter, > > On a number of lists (including this one) and over a period of time, > I have found the topic of the Bhikkuni Sangha, and especially the > issue of its Restoration in terms of the original, to be > uncomfortable to many posters. Discussion is always adversarial. > metta, > Christine 17707 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 7:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest James I think shock can be too strong a word, I mean he is trying to change the person perspective by using a more indirect approach. Sometimes Buddha used the indirect approach to teach pple, there are some suttas where he use different indirect approach. Presently I could not quote other sutta bc I am a lazy person to remember or to research or study into it. The rationale why Buddha don't have a sense of humour bc humour is rooted in the three akusala roots. How could a person not rooted in the three roots be capable of being humourous ? There is no need for him to be humorous to teach bc he knows it will not get the right result. Humor may get him more popular that is not what he wants. He is more interested in pple believing in his teaching rather by his humourous way. By all means that is no need to be humourous to be consider human, it is only an outgrowth of societal norms that one needs to be humorous. Buddhism is a way of like, it just a set of guidelines and is up to individual to investigate and as a result whether to follow or not to follow. It is not a compulsive doctrine, individual will choose on their own accord. It does not condemn anyone even the person done wrong bc kamma will do the work. It is a doctrine that give you ownership of your life and dont direct your life and it is up to you choose to follow or not to. Like when we investigate scientific experiements, there are hypothesis we want to confirm, Buddhism is like that, it set up the hypothesis and is up to us to think and investigate it. It is thinking as in the sense like an experiment, but like experiments it do have certain limitations, as it cannot allow everyone to do what they like or change the way what is define as an experiment. I think I being too long winded and may be out of point, so far science has not proved any concepts of Buddhism wrong and on the contrary it has proved it has been right. Sorry sometimes I just cannot explain things, I need some time to think. I hope this fullfil your questions, if not ask me in a different way as it will help me to think and as I say before I am a lazy peson. kind rgds KC > > Kenneth, > > I am open to the possibility that my interpretation of this sutta > is > incorrect and, if so, I would like to be taught the correct way to > view this sutta. However, you don't provide any explanation or > analysis for your determination that this sutta is simply about the > > Buddha 'shocking' Kesi to teach him a lesson. Why did he shock > him? What was the lesson particular to Kesi that required him to > be > shocked to understand it? Can you give other examples of the > Buddha > purposefully shocking people to teach a lesson. Why did he do it > in > those instances? > > I don't see how you can declair, "The Buddha did not have a sense > of > humor...because I say he didn't have a sense of humor...and that is > > the end of that." Other religions may use that type of > argumentation, but that doesn't float in Buddhism. This is a > thinking person's religion and way of life. > > Metta, James > > 17708 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 7:20pm Subject: Re: A mine of gems Hi Peter, Over this side of the world, I understand Ajahn Brahmavamso and Ajahn Vayama have a nun's monastery at Dhammasara, Perth, Western Australia. Ajahn Brahmavamso is the Abbot of Bodhinyana Monastery and Ajahn Vayama is the Abbott of Dhammasara Nun's Monastery. She is an Australian Ten-Precept nun who was ordained in Sri Lanka in 1985 with Ayya Khema at Parappuduwa Nun's Island, and who spent the first ten years of her monastic life there. In the mid 90's she lived in Amaravati and later at Wat Buddha Dhamma in New South Wales. She afterwards spent a year with the community of Ven. Ajahn Sumedho in England, before returning to live in Australia. Hopefully the same practices that are being instituted at Amaravati (i.e. non- intimidating and non-demeaning) are likely at Dhammasara ... You aren't 'opening up old wounds at all Peter, but providing me with a happiness on this hot afternoon here. I didn't know much about how Amaravati was going, thank you for telling us. metta, Christine --- "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi Christine > > Yep! I'd have to agree, it sure is a contentious issue. I am sure > you are familiar with all of this, though having just checked the > archives to see some discussion last August ref Thailand, hope I'm > not opening up a load of old wounds but instead would like to add > what may be seen as a side note, rather than a major point. > > At Amaravati, the nuns have gone for something of a 'middle way'. > They are fully kosher ten sila Sammaneriis. But their ten precepts > have been expanded to include the entire Vinaya, edited and > rearranged under the ten precepts, (much as the Visudhimagga has > been edited and rearranged to accommodate all the old commentaries > under the seven stages of purity). > > In addition, the nuns, (I am ashamed to say I'm not up to date on > their current designation: last I new, they carried the title of > Ayya, and am further ashamed to say I don't know what that means, > but am pretty sure it is something rather good), have been given > equivalent status to the Bhikkus: i.e., based on rains ordination, > they have equal rank. > > What this means is that the intimidating and demeaning requirements > of the original Bhikkuni order are abandoned and a more democratic > system has been introduced, with all the training potential of the > Bhikku Vinaya: i.e. they develop the same moral and skillful basis > for developing Samadhi whilst falling into the same dilemmas and > paradoxes as a Bhikku practicing the full Vinaya. > 17709 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 7:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Hi James, The problem is the definiton of happines. The problem with societal norms of joy and happines is a way different from the perspective of Buddhism. The joy in Buddhism is different. To me it is an unending, continuous bliss that does not depend on anything to be in bliss. A boundless happiness. Buddhists should be happy and optimistic pple bc they know the impermance of all things and not attached it. But how many pple could do it, honestly speaking I definitely cannot. Happines that is not condition by impermenance is the highest peace. Nibbana is always misrepresented. Nibbana is an end to the samasara world. End to temporal joy. It is an end to conditional happiness, and in my perspective the start of unconditional happiness. The problem is that the road to unending happiness is the begining of discarding conditional behaviour, which project a person like a vulcan. Only through such a vuclan attitude seeing things with objectivitiy and mindfullness of ourselves and gaining wisdom then conditional behaviour is able to be discarded. And during such a transition, many pple mistaken it as unhuman bc they dont understand human conditional behaviour does not bring us true joy and infact conditional behaviour reinforces our misery. Hence the first thing, what a Buddhist accomplish to the road of nibbana is to discard wrong views. Easy to say but hard to do. Just imagine Buddha did it for countless live, that does not mean we should be discourage as one day you will also be one. At the meantime, relax and enjoy your life do what we can and not what we cannot. :) Each one of us has their own accumulations. I personally never force myself to do anything I dont like, hence I will definitely take a much longer time than u to reach nibbana, if I ever reach it at all with such a lazy attitude. Cheers and kind regards KC --- "James " wrote: > Christine and All, > > Thank you. You give a lot of facts, and quotes…but not much that I > can grasp onto as a position. But this discussion reminds me again > of why I am a Buddhist. You know, I always thought of Buddhism as > a happy and joyful way of approaching life. A way of saying, "Yes, > we are all suffering…and it is all quite unnecessary. It is possible to find true happiness in the here and now and the hereafter. And it if from your own efforts that such will be done." > > But since being a member of this group I have confronted such > depressing positions as Nibbana as complete nothingness and void, > the Buddha was practically a Vulcan and had no trace of humanity > whatsoever, that inanimate objects (like rocks) have the intrinsic > characteristic of suffering along with being hard and cold, and > that joking, smiling, laughing, and happiness are all against Buddhism. > I > am not sure if this is a Buddhist group or a Silvia Plath fan club > . I keep writing to kids to be happy, be optimistic, and > know > that everything is for a reason and that reason is good….but from > the > thinking of the vocal majority of this group I might as well tell > them all to cut their wrists on the spot. There is nothing worth > living for and there is nothing to attain. All is emptiness and > emptiness is all…And `Have a Good, Mettiful Day' ;-) > > Rubbish and Nonsense!! So much has been lost and those who think > they know don't really know anything. They only hear the empty > echoes in their lonely heads as they lament to themselves. I just > wanted to get this off my chest. I am sure the doomsayers will > have > much to say in response. Fine. But please, I want to urge > everyone, > don't think that all is forsaken! There is hope and there is > happiness…all is not dukkha. Dukkha is a dream, Happiness is > reality. Just take a Prozac and call me in the morning. > > Metta, James 17710 From: Sarah Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 10:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A mine of gems Dear Christine, --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Peter, > > On a number of lists (including this one) and over a period of time, > I have found the topic of the Bhikkuni Sangha, and especially the > issue of its Restoration in terms of the original, to be > uncomfortable to many posters. ..... Did I miss something on DSG in this regard? I thought most the discussion was between ourselves;-) ..... >Discussion is always adversarial. > People tend to have definite views separated by impassable barriers. > One side asks for investigation with loving-kindness, goodwill and > compassion as to the possibility, the other side points to its > impossibility according to scripture. ..... Are you quite sure all the “loving-kindness, good will and compassion” is only on one side???;-)Do we have to think in terms of 'sides' at all? ..... >One side goes ahead in some > countries, and begins a process, the other side says, sadly, it will > always be invalid. Having experienced the implacability of those of > the 'God said ...'persuasion within the Christian context of the > same issue, I have simply vacated the field. It remains a deep > sorrow. ..... I’m not sure it’s at all useful to compare the Buddhist Teachings with Christianity in this regard. On a personal level I don’t have any particular problem with different views or with members of the Sangha who don’t follow certain rules. It is to be expected and is certainly not my responsibility. If you ask me however, whether this is ‘valid’ or whether it will hasten the downfall of the Teachings or whether it should be considered as an act of metta and consideration for their supporters to ‘pick and choose’ which rules to follow, I would feel bound to refer to what we read in the texts which have been laid our with the greatest loving-kindness and compassion. ..... > So, It was not a case of 'failed to' but rather 'chose not to' in the > interest of shining a broad light on this inspiring man and not > narrowing the focus to what he is already revered for by countless > men and women through the centuries. ..... I also find Ananda’s example inspiring and appreciated the fine comments you wrote. He was certainly very highly regarded and appreciated by women, particularly nuns, especially on account of his championship of their cause. However, as you know, the Buddha is supposed to have said that as a result the Sasana’s length would be halved and of course Ananda was rebuked for this at the First Council. I think that we all have to consider for ourselves what are acts of kindness, compassion and consideration for giving access to the Teachings. This applies to those around us and also for future generations who might otherwise not have this access. I am sure we are all acting in good faith in this regard, however blinkered our stances may seem to those with different views (as James found with our interpretations of the Kesi sutta;-)). Perhaps we can all just appreciate others’ good intentions. I hope this issue won’t always be a ‘deep sorrow’ for you, Chris. metta, Sarah ===== 17711 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:46pm Subject: Bhikkhunis Hi Sarah, and all, You are correct - any discussion of this matter on this list, particularly between you and I, has been respectfully conducted. The rest is probably my subjective interpretation. Implacability, though, has been evinced by people taking the 'the scriptures say it's impossible to reinstate' line. e.g. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15646 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15653 Of great interest to me is this article which states: 'There is permission in the Vinaya Chullavagga for monks to ordain nuns." and, "the Bhikkhuni Sasana has been revived in Sri Lanka According to full Theravada ceremonial." http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/nunorder.htm "As a sequel to the public interest created on this question Ven. M. Vipulasara, Principal, Parama Dhamma Chetiya Pirivena and President Mahabodhi Society came forward with the assistance of the World Sangha Council and Sakyadhita International Organisation of Buddhist Women and held an ordination ceremony on 8.12.96 at Saranath Temple, India. This was a grand and historic ceremony - a red letter day in the annals of Theravada Buddhism. At this ceremony 11 selected Sinhalese DSM nuns were ordained fully as Bhikkhunis by a team of Theravada monks in concert with a quorum of Korean Nuns. Thus for the first time after 980 odd years the Theravada Bhikkhuni Order was revived in India. For the first time since the disappearance, the Bhikkhuni Order was restored at Saranath India on 8.12.96. The Sinhalese Nuns who received their Bhikkhuni Ordination there came back to Sri Lanka after one year and two months at the invitation of the Bhikkhuni Sasanodaya Society, Dambulla. On Medin Poya Day (12/3/98) they ordained 23 selected Sinhalese DSM Nuns into the Bhikkhuni Sangha. This ordination was confirmed and ratified by a quorum of the Theravada Sangha as required in the Vinaya. Ven. Inamaluwe was the director of the function and the master of ceremonies. He was assisted by Ven. Mapalagama Vipulasara, Galkadawela Punnasara, Pandit Tallalle Dhammananda Anu Nayakam, Ven. Prof. K. Vajira and Porwagama Soma and a few others. Thus for the first time since the Anuradhapura days the Bhikkhuni Sasana has been revived in Sri Lanka According to full Theravada ceremonial." metta, Christine --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Christine, > > --- "christine_forsyth " > wrote: > Dear Peter, > > > > On a number of lists (including this one) and over a period of time, > > I have found the topic of the Bhikkuni Sangha, and especially the > > issue of its Restoration in terms of the original, to be > > uncomfortable to many posters. 17712 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 2:20am Subject: My letter to Kom Dear Kom, I am Janice Chung and I am 11 years old.You might have heard from me in other letters. However, I shall introduce myself again. I speak Chinese(Mandarin and some Cantonese,but I am not really good at it) and English as my first languages. I was born in Hong Kong and I study in Chinese International School. I know Jan as she is in my English class at school. I would like to ask some questions about you. By the way, where do you live and where do you come from? Just to make sure, are you a buddhist? Well I also have a few questions about Buddhism. Is the Buddha your religious teacher or your close friend? Is the kamma something very meaningful to you? I think that is about it for this letter! I hope to hear from you soon! Janice Chung 17713 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 2:26am Subject: To xxxxx from Janice Dear James, It's me again, Janice! I hope I am not getting too boring for you, as I have been writing to you all the time. Let's change change the subject, by the way thank you for all three poems once again, as well as the two questions about the word the word ' Metta and approximately how may Gods, demons, Ghosts are in the Buddhism religion. I feel sorry for your sister's death at the age of 23. (Sorry to mention that and I think she passed away too young) Why did she pass away? However, we should keep smiling everyday! In Kom's letter, what does Kamma mean? Just to make sure are you a Buddhism? I would be most happy if you could send me more poems! (Are you running out of poems to give me? ) Metta, Janice Chung 17714 From: Date: Fri Dec 13, 2002 9:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, Rob - I'm going to try my hand at a limited reply now. In a message dated 12/12/02 7:40:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I think that I am starting to understand where my confusion is > coming from. > > Allow me to define two different views; an "ethical view" and > a "scientific view". I see these two views as quite distinct and > perhaps even unrelated. For example, in the past century there has > been major scientific progress, but it could be said this has not > translated into ethical progress. > > I see Buddhism as working in the domain of the "ethical view". I see > the ethical view as purely internal and as such, I strongly agree > with your phenomenological approach. Last night I read that the > proximate cause of rupa is "consciousness (vinnana)", according to > Abhidhammatthasangahadipanipali (that's a mouthful!). Saying that > consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise clearly > supports a phenomenological perspective. > > Rupa only has relevance in the ethical view when it touches > consciousness. Again, ethical view is purely internal. But what > about that "stuff" out there that doesn't touch consciousness (i.e. > the "sound" from the tree that falls in the forest with none to hear > it)? I believe that according to Buddhism, this is not rupa because > there is no consciousness. It is "out there", it is external. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I think that whatever things ordinarily appear as "out there" or are so hypothesized, ranging from trees, to atoms, to quarks, constitute, from the Buddhist perspective, a world of concepts, and not of actualities, or, at least, not directly knowable as actualities. That world of concepts is the world in which we seem to exist and through which we wend our way moment by moment and day by day. The "scientists" work with the conceptual objects of everyday people and with their own more subtle abstractions to create predictive theories that aid us in wending our way through this world of apparent reality, and they do so quite successfully. Our concepts are constructed from the elements of the directly discerned preconceptual material, and they provide a kind of a shorthand mental packaging of interrelated groups of these elements. We couldn't function in this world of our making without conceptual theories, both informal and formal. There are the two views that you call ethical and scientific. They *are* related, though not, I think, in a simple way. The terminology of 'Scientific vs Ethical', has the alternates of 'Objective vs Psychological', 'Realist vs Phenomenalist', and 'External vs Internal'. I find it amusing, however, that the so-called scientific or objective or realist or external perspective is, in fact, the conceptual perspective, whereas the other perspective is the paramatthic one. ---------------------------------------------------------- > > The "stuff" that is "out there" (the external stuff that doesn't > touch consciousness) is not part of the ethical view. The ethical > view does not make any statements about its existence or non- > existence; it is simply not on the radar screen. Using strict > definitions, I can't call it "rupa", so I will call it "apur" (rupa > spelled backwards; I checked in my 1778 page Pali-English dictionary > and apur is not already taken as a word :-) ). -------------------------------------------------- Howard: The "stuff" that is "out there" may or may not exist, and it's existence or lack thereof is, in principle, not directly knowable but only inferable based on presumption. What is directly known are the paramattha dhammas, and we also know, but indirectly, the mind-constructed material we *project* as constituting an "external world". ------------------------------------------------ > > Apur is part of the scientific view. Scientists can write volumes > about their analysis of apur and their models for apur. That is > fine. The scientific view does not enter into the ethical realm. > Last weekend, I attended a two day long Buddhist seminar that > touched on the issues of ethics of cloning and euthanasia. Boy, are > there challenges when science and ethics try to meet! > > As a Buddhist, I look at rupa from a purely phenomenological > perspective. As a man of science, I look at apur from a purely non- > phenomenological perspective. This does not create a dichotomy for > me. What creates problems is when I try to mix views. If I try to > extend the concept of rupa into the domain of science, I look like > an Aristotelian (centuries out of date). Trying to take a scientific > view on ethical issues is equally futile. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Dhammic knowledge of the world of concepts, especially knowledge of the danger in grasping onto "things" in that world, of the impermanence of "things" in that world, and of the emptiness and impersonality of things in that world is an essential foundation, but directly seeing the tilakkhana in the "internal world" of paramattha dhammas, at the level of Dhammic insight, is what is ultimately liberating. I think we may be in agreement here. ----------------------------------------------------- > > Howard, I expect that you agree with most of what I am saying so > far. > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: We are at least very close. ------------------------------------------------------- Now let's look at "kamma". It is a critical part of the > > Buddhist ethical view. It says in a Sutta somewhere, "All beings are > owners of their own kamma."; this emphasizes the "internal" nature > of kamma. But what about the kamma of another being? Because it is > not touching us at the moment, this "outside kamma", which I will > call "ammak" ("ammak" is not in the big dictionary either). --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: You make the presumption here of a "hard separation" between sentient beings. But I do not. Different psychophysical streams interact, and the kamma of one stream effects the other stream. And this is reflected in their "external worlds". Those "external worlds" are harmoniously overlapping and interacting. ----------------------------------------------------------- > > I have a hard time placing ammak in the scientific realm, but as it > is external, it is not part of the ethical view. I would even go so > far as to say that ammak is not part of Buddhism! ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Kamma is intention and intentional action. I'm really not clear on what the "external" analogue of that is intended to be except for a conceptual correlate of some sort. I don't find the notion of 'ammak' to be a clear one. ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Let's return to A hitting B. From the perspective of A, B is a > condition and B's ammak is not relevant. From a phenomenological > perspective, conditions exist but ammak does not. Similarly, from > the perspective of B, A is a condition and A's ammak is not relevant. > > When the Buddha said, "Nibbana is the end of the world", he was > speaking from an internal, phenomenological perspective, not from a > scientific perspective. > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: When the Buddha spoke of "the world" in this manner, he was referring to all things, I think, as perceived by nonarahants, and they cease with the advent of nibbana. ---------------------------------------------------- > > To summarize this long post, I am getting confused because I sense > that you are moving a bit too freely between the ethical view and > the scientific view. > -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I hope not. It is an error to conflate the two, but also an error to presume their unrelatedness. --------------------------------------------------------- > > I could go on for a while longer, but this message is getting long > and I want to get your feedback on what I have written so far. > > Metta (and "Attem") > Rob M :-) > ================================ With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17715 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 2:37am Subject: To Joanne Dear Joanne: Hello! I'm Kiana! Of course I remember you! And i am really glad to receive a letter from you! Yes ,you're right everybody wants peaceful life,but if everything is wonderful,you won't get any sadness , but in the other hand , you won't grow , because you don't get any experience , then how do you grow? So life is always unfair , that might be good; give us a chance to grow. By looking all these Buddhism, I've really learnt something about Buddhism , did you? Just need to say bye take care ! Love , Kiana. __________________________________________________ 17716 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 2:42am Subject: Good >>> Book!!! Dear everyone: Last week, Mrs Abbott lent me a book called It is a very meaningful book.It is retold by Noor Inayat Khan. There're twenty tales .That book is easy to understand but each of the tales is full of meaning and educational and you can think about your mistakes from reading that book. I like the "The noble horse" the most of that book.Becuase the horse died for protecting the country, but now the people didn't know how to protect their country, they even tried to destroy!! I think they need to take a look of this book and think about it. Finally I have to thank Mrs. Abbott to lend me this>>> Good Book !!! Love , Kiana. 17718 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 2:48am Subject: Hello! From Sandy Dear James, Merry Christmas! I've read one of your letters from you to Janet. I'm so sorry to hear from you, that your sister just died. Do Buddhists believe that there would be spirit after death? Hope to hear from you! Sandy 17719 From: Sarah Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 4:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhunis Hi Christine, Thanks for sharing the articles you come across on this and other 'issues'. metta, Sarah ===== 17720 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 6:08am Subject: Holding self dear Dear all, I would like share the following: If you hold yourself dear then don't fetter yourself with evil, for happiness isn't easily gained by one who commits a wrong-doing. Samyutta Nikaya III, 4 Metta, Victor 17721 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 7:23am Subject: The Perfections, Patience, Ch 7, no. 1 The Perfections, by Acharn Sujin, Patience, Ch 7, no. 1 The Commentary to the ³Basket of Conduct² defines the perfection of patience as follows: Patience has the characteristic of acceptance; its function is to endure the desirable and undesirable; its manifestation is tolerance or non-opposition; seeing things as they really are is its proximate cause. The perfection of patience, khanti påramí, has a wide meaning. Patience is to be developed not merely towards an undesirable object, but also towards a desirable object. We should have patience towards a desirable object so that lobha does not arise, so that there is no attachment and delight in visible object and the other sense objects that appear. Khanti or patience is kusala, it is a sobhana (beautiful) dhamma which does not arise with akusala citta, with the citta rooted in attachment, but which arises with sobhana citta. However, people can also have a great deal of endurance in the akusala way, and this is endurance with lobha, when they want to obtain something. Someone may be able to endure everything in order to obtain what he desires, no matter whether he has to stay awake until late at night or all night. However, can one endure this in order to develop kusala? Endurance with the development of kusala is the perfection of patience, khanti påramí. With the perfection of patience one can stand heat or cold. This means, that on account of hot or cold weather akusala citta does not arise, that there is no disturbance or annoyance. We should be aware of the characteristic of the citta arising at such a moment, we should know whether it is kusala or akusala. Is there like or dislike of the weather? If we like it there is lobha, attachment, and if we dislike it there is dosa, aversion, and in both cases the perfection of patience does not arise. The perfection of patience is endurance with true calm at such moments, no attachment nor aversion. When visible object appears, seeing-consciousness experiences it, and it can be known that there is no being, no person no self. If we have no patience to be aware of the characteristic of the reality appearing at this moment, we cannot reach the further shore, that is, nibbåna. If we do not have endurance with regard to lobha and dosa, defilements cannot be eliminated. If we lack patience we cannot reach the further shore, nibbåna, we cannot penetrate the four noble Truths. Learning about the ten perfections will help us to investigate whether we accumulate the perfections which are still deficient, and if we see their value and significance there are conditions for them to grow and develop. We should be patient while we investigate and consider realities thoroughly, so that we acquire right understanding of them and practise in the right way. Without right understanding there are no conditions for the arising of right mindfulness which is aware of the characteristics of realities that appear. Khanti is endurance and restraint with regard to akusala citta which arises. 17722 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 7:23am Subject: Abhidhamma James, dear dhamma friend, There is nothing you have to apologize for. I know that you are kindhearted, and nothing is insulting that you write. I often have to laugh. I also notice that you make thorough studies of texts. We have different viewpoints but that does not matter, how could we all agree. Thank you Sarah for forwarding letters to me, and answering and also Robert K. for answering. Yes, my Email was last night still closed off, I returned only yesterday. I understand that it brings frustration if people do not answer, I know that feeling too, but that does not mean anything. Lack of time. I have a few projects running, and it is difficult to answer all letters. op 11-12-2002 08:52 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: >> James wrote: >>> ps. If one more person tries to push off Nina's book on me, I am >>> going to scream! :-) Just kidding... >>> I have >>> addressed questions to her in this group and she has blatantly >>> ignored them while addressing others. >> .... Sarah: LOL, this really does sound just like my students... Nina: Now your questions: James: In `ADL', each chapter gives the vocabulary, analysis, >> and exposition in regards to the Abhidhamma ontology and the ancient >> commentaries on such and then concludes with how Abhidhamma ontology >> relates to the teachings of the Buddha with the comparison to >> various sutta quotes and subsequent analysis. I reached the >> conclusion that this final part of each chapter was demonstration of >> how the Abhidhamma thus applies to daily life, as stated in the >> title. I don't see this connection as proof that the Abhidhamma >> applies to daily life or even should be applied to daily life in >> such a literal manner >> The point I want to make, and the question I have for you, is that >> perhaps the Abhidhamma is being approached with a methodology >> contrary to its intended purpose. Perhaps the Abhidhamma is not >> supposed to be taken literally, but symbolically. But, the way it is being approached now, as >> classifications of ultimate reality, I see it as lying motionless >> and limited. Do you have any thoughts on this matter? Do you know >> of sources that approach the Abhidhamma Pitaka as symbolism rather >> than a description of ultimate reality? Nina: I do not know Hesse's book. This symbolism may make things complicated, let us talk directly about life. Your points are very relevant and I know this is a point of view shared by others. I also read other posts by you, comparing different texts and wondering which ones are the Buddha's word or not. I noticed you make thorough studies of texts. I know, people have doubts, they also question the Path of Discrimination, Patisambhiddhamagga. They question the value of the Commentaries. I saw it on the Pali Yahoo list. We discussed this while in Bgk. What came out was the following: without sati and panna (sati-sampajanna) arising now which is aware of and understand the dhamma appearing now through one of the six doors, all the texts of the Tipitaka cannot be understood at all. The understanding will just be on the level of theory, but there will not be the profound understanding of realities the Buddha taught after he attained enlightenment. I very much feel my shortcomings, since I get so involved in Pali texts, I forget the real goal. Yes, Chrisitine was surprised I also asked questions. That is the way to learn. I said that when coming to Bgk, each time I realize how little I really understand. Jon remarked that this should be encouraging, it shows that there is a little more understanding. A board meeting of the Foundation of the Dhamma Study and Support was dedicated to the point you brought up. I shall write more on this later on, I find it very important. This was one of the points that I found very beneficial and helpful for myself, such a reminder. An example are the four caritas, characters: A. Sujin said: how can you know what character you have if you have not developed satipatthana. That is the answer. Here is what Num wrote: N:Yes, I am the same, I get lost. But good to know when we get lost, again, this is Abhidhamma. Larry was wondering about the four satipatthanas: Acharn Supee said: this is a matter of the order of teaching, desana. Not: this first, than that. Just as in the case of sila, samadhi and panna; only a matter of the order of teaching: desana. Not: this first, than that. I enjoyed reading the posts on Bgk and Keng Kacang from all friends and to me also it was a very special experience. Later on the discussions in Thai were also most helpful. I listened to the radio programs from six in the morning on and copied some of them. Time was still too short. Now James, here is an example of the crybabies Christine heard and Jon's comment, completely Abhidhamma in daily life, no symbolism: >Jon: when there is the sound of babies crying, the reality of that moment > is just sound. Ideas about 'why me', unskilful parenting, lack of > sleep, etc, are aspects of thinking conditioned by that sound and > one's inherent tendencies. At the precise moment that the sound is > experienced at the sense-door, there is no such story in the sound or > in the consciousness that experiences it. > > In this instance it is probably safe to assume that the object (sound > of baby crying) is intrinsically unpleasant. Nevertheless, much of > the dosa arising is still likely to be conditioned by mana (in my own > experience, at any rate). > > In other words, the problem is much more likely to be our accumulated > tendencies than the object.> N: This is Abhidhamma, but I can substitute the word life for Abhidhamma: Dosa and mana, conceit: should they not be known when they arise, and they arise so often in daily life. I feel the three parts of the Tipitaka are one, pointing to the same goal: right understanding, by means of which defilements are eradicated. As Sarah recently quoted from the Path of Discrimination: the all has to be understood: what all, the eye, objects, seeing, feeling, defilements arising because of seeing. The same is time and again stated in the suttas. A. Sujin stressed: in the whole Tipitaka there are two kinds of situations: being mindful and being forgetful. Look at the suttas: there is rupa which is so dear, piya rupa, and if one is forgetful, defilements arise. If there is right understanding and awareness, no defilements at that moment. I hope you do not feel out of sorts now. The Dhamma should not make you feel worried, but happy. I want to talk about life again: Lodewijk and I felt out of sorts when arriving, with a jetlag, but that was not all. In our absence one of the helpers of my father (almost 102 years) had falsely accused Lodewijk for meddling with his day and night schedule, seemingly imposing his own ideas (the contrary was true). My father who is mentally not so well, became furious and we had to hear a flood of angry words when visiting him after we just arrived. Lodewijk said to me that he remembered vipaka when hearing, and also A. Sujin's words: he had asked in Keng Kajan whether there are limits to metta, and she had answered: there are no limits to metta. Lodewijk said that he kept on thinking about and remembering these words. He stayed calm and now we see that a negative experience can become very positive. My father also calmed down somewhat. For him the most important lesson was that there are no limits to metta. Actually, there is no one in the world, no one in our thinking. There is hearing of sound, but hearing and sound are gone immediately, the stories we dwell on condition our ideas of an angry person who scolds us and who seems to last. If we only live in the world of concepts and do not know the realities which condition our thinking of people, situations, we are in for great trouble and distress. Nina. P.S. If you want to react (but no obligation -:), it is better to delay this, my mail may not yet be put back. I had to give my password, but it did not help. 17723 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 7:28am Subject: No Email Dear Sarah, I said to Kom that I am back, but something happened, maybe he is away. No Email at all now. But I sent out some. I want to learn now how to click it on, but cannot. Nina. 17724 From: James Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 10:25am Subject: Re: To xxxxx from Janice --- Star Kid wrote: > Dear James, > > It's me again, Janice! > > I hope I am not getting too boring for you, as I have > been writing to you all the time. Let's change change > the subject, by the way thank you for all three > poems once again, as well as the two questions about > the word the word ' Metta and approximately how may > Gods, demons, Ghosts are in the Buddhism religion. > > I feel sorry for your sister's death at the age of 23. > (Sorry to mention that and I think she passed away > too young) Why did she pass away? However, we should > keep smiling everyday! > > In Kom's letter, what does Kamma mean? Just to make > sure are you a Buddhism? > > I would be most happy if you could send me more poems! > (Are you running out of poems to give me? ) > > Metta, > Janice Chung Hi Star Kid Janice! No, I am not getting tired of you! Don't be silly. You could write to me 100 and one letters…and I would still like to have one more! Friends, especially ones who ask such intelligent questions, are hard to find. You know Janice, you always bring up very important issues in your letters. I want to combine everything you write about into one response from me. You bring up: my dead sister, smiling, kamma, and my Buddhism. Yes, my sister did die young. She died from a brain hemorrhage. That is when one of the veins that supplies blood to the brain explodes open, blood spills into the brain, and the brain dies. There isn't any pain involved and the person will just die suddenly. My sister died in her sleep. Prior to this, she suffered a lot of headaches, really strong ones called migraines, so her death was actually a good thing for her. The doctors had done all that they could for her. It was time for her to die. However, she did have a daughter, my niece, who is a little angel (and sometimes demon), who lives on with her memory. Okay, keeping this in mind, let me explain kamma. `Kamma', also called `Karma', is a word that means that for everything that happens in life, something preceded it to cause it to happen and something will follow it because it happened. Those things that occur before and after are the karma. Let me give you a few examples: When your teacher teaches you well (karma), you do well on the tests and homework, and you get a good grade (karma). When there is good food to eat (karma), you eat the good food, and you grow up strong and healthy (karma). Now these are examples of good things. Most people, for some unexplainable reason, usually like to think about karma in negative terms. Here are some negative examples: When there are a lot of expensive things in a store (karma), someone will steal those things, and that person will go to jail (karma). When there isn't any food available (karma), people don't have anything to eat, and they die of starvation (karma). Karma is neither good or bad, karma is just the consequences of actions. People are the ones who determine if it is good or bad. Which brings me to your next topic. Was my sister's death because of good or bad karma? Some people would quickly say, "Oh, bad karma. If anyone dies young that is always bad." But when you know the details you could say, "Oh, good karma. She was suffering a lot of pain that finally ended." But on the one hand she left a daughter without a mother; on the other hand, that daughter may grow up to be a good mother because she appreciates what she didn't have, etc., etc., etc. Are you understanding Janice? Karma is impossible to figure out. There are so many different factors that it boggles the mind to try to keep track. Which brings me to your next topic. So, what are we to do? You have given the answer already: SMILE! Our actions in life should be determined, as the Buddha taught, by how beneficial they are to others and us. If the actions make everyone smile, they are good; if they make everyone unable to smile, they are bad. It is just that simple….and not so simple sometimes. Life can become very confusing; that is why we all need a direction in our life. Which brings me to your last topic. Yes Janice, I am a Buddhist. And I am not the type of Buddhist who is one every once in a while, like going to church just on Sunday, I am a Buddhist 24 Hrs a day, everyday of the week. The questions of life, my place in it, and the happiness of everyone is constantly on my mind. My sister's death doesn't really upset me; losing a job doesn't really upset me; people thinking the wrong thing about me doesn't really upset me…but those who take Buddhism for granted, approach it in the wrong way, use it to put down others, use it to justify a wrong view of life, etc….that REALLY upsets me. I don't smile then…I frown, get upset, and have been known to rant-and- rave. But that is just me. Some say I shouldn't care about other's happiness, but I don't think that is possible. If I stopped caring about the happiness of others, I would stop caring about my own happiness. And that isn't going to happen. The Buddha cared about all of us; I won't do less in my life. Mentioning happiness let me give you a few more poems to make you smile. Write again anytime you like. I hope you are being a good girl and getting ready for Christmas. Love, James December 26 by Kenn Nesbitt A BB gun. A model plane. A basketball. A 'lectric train. A bicycle. A cowboy hat. A comic book. A baseball bat. A deck of cards. A science kit. A racing car. A catcher's mitt. So that's my list of everything Santa Claus forgot to bring. ******* My Prayer by Bruce Lansky I pray my father finds his keys. I pray my sister doesn't tease. I pray that baby has no rash. But most of all, I pray for cash. ******* Birthday Wishes by Bruce Lansky I wish for peace. I wish for knowledge. I wish my (brother/sister) would leave for college. ******* Freddie by Phil Bolsta I don't like doing homework. I know that it will bore me. But now I am much happier 'Cause Freddie does it for me! He greets me at the door each day When I come home from school. He just can't wait to read my books-- I think that's pretty cool. I give him all my homework, Like history and math. And when he's done I give him A nice warm bubble bath! My grades are so much better now, Which makes my parents glad. Freddie is the smartest dog That I have ever had! 17725 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 10:57am Subject: RE: [dsg] My letter to Kom Dear Janice, > -----Original Message----- > From: Star Kid [mailto:starkidsclub@y...] > > Dear Kom, > > I am Janice Chung and I am 11 years old.You might have > ... Thanks for writing and re-introducing yourself again. It's very kind of you. > By the > way, where do you live and where do you come from? > Just to make sure, are you a buddhist? I was born in Bangkok, Thailand, but I have lived in a few other cities in the U.S. I am a Buddhist to the extent that I see the benefits and the values of the teachings of the Buddha, and I follow some of the teachings sometimes (not all the time). I found the Buddha's teachings to be true and meaningful in my daily life, which is why I am a Buddhist. > Well I also have a few questions about Buddhism. Is > the Buddha your religious teacher or your close > friend? Is the kamma something very meaningful to you? The Buddha is both a religious teacher, and a good friend like no others. He is a good friend, because he teaches me about truths, about lives, about why things are the way they are, about how to behave that is beneficial, about how to behave that is harmful, and about kamma. Kamma, as James has explained to you, is the same word as Karma (just spelled differently). Karma is your (and my) actions (or really, the intention of the actions) toward other people in our daily life. When you are angry and say bad things to other people, that is a bad karma. When you see other people in need of help, and you help them out, that's a good karma. The Buddha teaches that good karma will bring good results (result of karma), and bad karma will bring bad results. You might notice that you and other people experience different things in your life. When you are hearing a pleasant sound (like somebody praising you), somebody else maybe hearing an unpleasant sound (like somebody scolding them). The Buddha teaches that pleasant results, such as hearing pleasant sound, must come from good karma, and unpleasant results, such as hearing unpleasant sounds, must come from bad karma. This is how karma is very relevant and meaningful to me. > I think that is about it for this letter! > I hope to hear from you soon! > It's very nice of you to write. I think asking questions to learn about useful things that we don't know is definitely a good kamma. I hope you write again soon. kom 17726 From: Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 11:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Rob (& Howard), In my opinion kamma must reach from javana, through vipaka and subsequent remembering of accumulations to the next javana and must necessarily include the object of vipaka. Since that object is often rupa then the intention of kamma must coordinate with the physical universe in order to resolve the kamma. If I walk outside and get hit in the head by a meteor it is because some javana citta in my past arranged for a meeting between my head continuum and the meteor. How this could happen is something only the Buddha would know. As to the reality of rupa, even if you think rupa is only immaginary, probably you would still accept that an eye cannot see without consciousness. That is the nama rupa distinction. Actually, I think there are three kinds of rupa: rupa the physical phenomenon, rupa that is translated by sensory nerves into a consciousness-like phenomenon which is experienced by as many as 17 cittas in a row in citta process, and rupa that is the experience of rupa. This might entail that there are two kinds of consciousness: one the regular consciousness that experiences objects and the other that specifically translates physical rupa into 'mental' rupa at the senses. Agreed? Larry 17727 From: Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 6:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, Larry (and Rob) - In a message dated 12/14/02 2:13:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Rob (& Howard), > > In my opinion kamma must reach from javana, through vipaka and > subsequent remembering of accumulations to the next javana and must > necessarily include the object of vipaka. Since that object is often > rupa then the intention of kamma must coordinate with the physical > universe in order to resolve the kamma. If I walk outside and get hit in > the head by a meteor it is because some javana citta in my past arranged > for a meeting between my head continuum and the meteor. How this could > happen is something only the Buddha would know. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree that whatever the nature of "external objects" may be, they are all ultimately kamma-created, and, for that matter, the same is true of all conditioned dhammas, both pa~n~natti an paramattha dhammas, and both namas and rupas, though the kamma need not be entirely one's own. (Actually, as I see it, the effect is always directly involving the paramattha dhammas, and the mind then creates a corresponding "world change".) When A hits B, some of B's past kamma may be bearing fruit, but also A's kamma is an immediate event of B's world; so A's volitional action is changing A's world. ------------------------------------------------------- > > As to the reality of rupa, even if you think rupa is only immaginary, > probably you would still accept that an eye cannot see without > consciousness. That is the nama rupa distinction. > --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: They are certainly distinct. BTW, phenomenalism wouldn't consider rupas per se as imaginary, but it would consider "external objects" as having unknowable ontological status, and would not presume their existence. ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Actually, I think there are three kinds of rupa: rupa the physical > phenomenon, rupa that is translated by sensory nerves into a > consciousness-like phenomenon which is experienced by as many as 17 > cittas in a row in citta process, and rupa that is the experience of > rupa. This might entail that there are two kinds of consciousness: one > the regular consciousness that experiences objects and the other that > specifically translates physical rupa into 'mental' rupa at the senses. > Agreed? > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: I would not consider the last of these as rupa. ------------------------------------------------ > > Larry > > ========================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17728 From: Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 1:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Howard, What is rupa, in your view? If the rupa category doesn't include consciousness of rupa, how can you have a position on what it is or isn't? Maybe we need two more qualifications: consciousness as subject and consciousness as object. We could say rupa is in all likelihood really out there and it is also a consciousness object-only, never a subject. It seems to be the subjectivity of consciousness that the nama rupa distinction is pointing at, among other things. Does the principle of kamma control the rupa out there and/or consciousness? To say we don't understand kamma is one position and to say we can't directly experience rupa (in the sense that consciousness [experience] can't *be* rupa) is another position. What I am asking about is the logic of the kamma doctrine as we have it. Is it a correct interpretation to say kamma function controls the rupa of the universe? Larry 17729 From: Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 8:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi again, Larry - In a message dated 12/14/02 2:46:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > >Actually, I think there are three kinds of rupa: rupa the physical > >phenomenon, rupa that is translated by sensory nerves into a > >consciousness-like phenomenon which is experienced by as many as 17 > >cittas in a row in citta process, and rupa that is the experience of > >rupa. This might entail that there are two kinds of consciousness: one > >the regular consciousness that experiences objects and the other that > >specifically translates physical rupa into 'mental' rupa at the senses. > >Agreed? > > > ----------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I would not consider the last of these as rupa. > ------------------------------------------------ > ========================== I just re-read the foregoing, and I think I misunderstood you. I take back what I said there. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17730 From: Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 9:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/14/02 4:11:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > What is rupa, in your view? If the rupa category doesn't include > consciousness of rupa, how can you have a position on what it is or > isn't? -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Consciousness of rupa is not rupa - it is discernment. I take rupa to be whatever can be object of the so-called physical-sense consciousnesses: visual, auditory, olfactory, tactile, and gustatory. Whatever can be object *only* of mental discernment is nama and not rupa. ----------------------------------------------------- Maybe we need two more qualifications: consciousness as subject> > and consciousness as object. > -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Consciousness as object is still nama, and not rupa. --------------------------------------------------------- We could say rupa is in all likelihood> > really out there and it is also a consciousness object-only, never a > subject. > --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I would not agree with that. As far as I see it, the only rupas that are taken as mind objects have been previously taken as sense-consciousness objects. If there were any rupas that are grasped by mind alone, and not by the physical senses, they would be, as I see it, mind-constructed pa~n~natti. Any true objects "out there", and not mental constructs, and also not discernable by the five physical senses, are not directly knowable but only inferable. Philosophically, a phenomenalist dismisses them, but, as a worldling, seems to deal with them all the time. ------------------------------------------------------------- It seems to be the subjectivity of consciousness that the nama> > rupa distinction is pointing at, among other things. > > Does the principle of kamma control the rupa out there and/or > consciousness? > --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: The question is unanswerable for me, because of its presupposition. --------------------------------------------------------------- > > To say we don't understand kamma is one position and to say we can't > directly experience rupa (in the sense that consciousness [experience] > can't *be* rupa) is another position. > ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Huh? I wouldn't take either position. (I do admit that we cannot *fully* grasp kamma, but we can understand it a bit. As for the second, we *do* directly experience rupa in the sense that a rupa-discernment event occurs, one pole/aspect of which is the subjective pole, and the other of which is the objective pole. When we mentally isolate (and not just distinguish) one from the other, mentally splitting them and losing the interdependency, is when we tend to reify self and object.) ----------------------------------------------------------------- What I am asking about is the> > logic of the kamma doctrine as we have it. Is it a correct > interpretation to say kamma function controls the rupa of the universe? ----------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. (Well, I guess I have to add "as I see it"!! ;-) ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Larry > > ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17731 From: Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 2:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View aHA! Then the old vedic priests were right. Rites and rituals (intentions) do make a difference. -------------------- part 2: Are you saying there is a direct experience of rupa but we can't verify its accuracy with panna? As I understand it, direct experience isn't enough. If panna isn't present the experience is mistaken. Can panna verify the blueness of blue or only anicca, dukkha, anatta? Larry 17732 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 3:01pm Subject: Mana (conceit) Dear Group, I was thinking today about what Mana (conceit) means in Buddhist terms in daily life. My pre-Dhamma understanding was influenced by Christianity, and I knew mana as Vanity. "Vanity of Vanities, saith the Preacher, all is vanity." (Ecclesiastes 1:2) The Hebrew word for vanity in this context simply means "breath" or "vapor." The writer of Ecclesiastes lists pleasure-seeking, the trappings of materialism, the seeking of fame and power, and becoming a learned philosopher as all this world had to offer and yet, concluded, it was all vain, the grasping at wind. So, to me, the Christian definition involves sensuality and selfish acquisitiveness (physical and mental) designed to increase an individual's standing in the world. The first jolt I had about the Buddhist take on Mana was when I went for Dhamma discussions with friends in Bangkok a year ago. Feeling overwhelmed by a gathering of people with years of Dhamma knowledge, practice experience and understanding, and anxious about the microphones for taping of the conversation, I tended to do what is seen as 'humility' in my circles - make deprecating remarks about my own lack of knowledge and admiring remarks about that of others. A friend, much to my mortification at the time, told me that this was just conceit. Another friend wrote that I was probably an 'under- estimator', which at least sounds better than being told I have omana 'inferiority-conceit :-) Referring to the three kinds of Mana, Nyanatiloka gives this meaning: The (equality-) conceit (mána), the inferiority-conceit (omána) and the superiority-conceit (atimána): this threefold conceit should be overcome. For, after overcoming this threefold conceit, the monk, through the full penetration of conceit, is said to have put an end suffering" (A. VI, 49). "Those ascetics and brahman priests who, relying on this impermanent, miserable and transitory nature of corporeality, feelings, perceptions, mental formations and consciousness, fancy: 'Better am I', or 'Equal am I', or 'Worse am I', all these imagine thus through not understanding reality" (S. XXII, 49). The definition in the CMA II.7 "Conceit (mana): Conceit has the characteristic of haughtiness. Its function is self-exaltation. It is manifested as vainglory. (n. Ketukamyata, lit. a desire to fly the banner - to advertise oneself). Its proximate cause is greed dissociated from views. (n. because conceit arises only in greed- rooted cittas dissociated from views.) It should be regarded as madness." This is a difficult definition for me to understand because it makes it seem as if conceit should be easily recognisable and that the boundaries are quite narrow and easily discerned. I think my 'underestimator' or 'inferiority-conceit' could be included within "vainglory - a desire to fly the banner to advertise oneself" i.e. It is seeing oneself as important in some way. All the time I'm is protesting how much better someone else is at something than I, or how lacking I am in certain knowledge - isn't that waving the banner about myself, keeping others attention on me while I speak, write etc.? Just so with most arguing on e-lists about how wrong other people's beliefs, method of practice, level of understanding is, or how incorrect their alleged manners and behaviour seems to us ... isn't this just 'flying the banner' of atimana (superiority conceit) and attracting attention to oneself by articulating 'righteous anger' at others? (Just for you, Victor, your favourite quote :-)) Sarah in post 11868 writes: "This is mine, this am I, this is my self" as often quoted. "This is mine" refers to craving, taking objects as belonging to self. "This am I" refers to mana, conceit and "This is my self" refers to the personality belief, sakkaya ditthi, identified with the 5 khandhas. So if "This am I" refers to mana, conceit, then anything that points to, underlines, articulates, indicates, or identifies oneself as better, worse or the same as another is Mana - conceit. I think that this would also include unlikely types of thinking, and actions not just speech. It is 'having a self view', it is not understanding anatta. It is not understanding that there is no self to be important, to be protective of or to promote. e.g. I was in a hurry to get out of the Supermarket, had only four items to pay for, so went to the priority check-out (under eight items). Just before I got there, a large man with a full trolley rudely pushed in front and the Operator didn't quibble about rules, just began processing his groceries. Well!!! I spent the next ten minutes creating stories about how hard done by I was, how rude the man was, how ill trained and cowardly the staff were, what was the point of having special aisles for fewer purchases and quicker exit etc. etc. etc ... I think the basis for all my uncomfortable emotions was Conceit. It is said that Conceit is only eradicated when one becomes an Arahat, it is one of the Fetters so-called because they fetter aggregates [in this life] to aggregates [of the next], or kamma to its fruit, or beings to suffering. For as long as the ones exist there is no cessation of the others. Vis. XXII.48f I was wondering if anyone has other references for Conceit, and if anyone can think of other examples in everyday life that show conceit in action? Does it join with other factors that disguise it? - I ask this because most people, even those well versed in Dhamma, don't seem to realise when mana is a large part of their speech or actions. metta, Christine 17733 From: Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 3:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mana (conceit) Dear Christine, I think one thing you have wrong is that pointing out other's faults isn't conceit. It's generosity. Larry 17734 From: Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 10:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, Larry - I'm really not sure - are you writing this to me? You didn't quote anything, and I'm not clear on what you are referencing. I will try to respond semi-intelligently. In a message dated 12/14/02 5:59:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > aHA! > > Then the old vedic priests were right. Rites and rituals (intentions) do > make a difference. > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Intention must lead to appropriate action, I would think, for there to be an appropriate effect. And if the action is irrelevant, so will the effect be. There must be a coherent chain of relevant conditionality. ----------------------------------------------- > -------------------- > part 2: > > Are you saying there is a direct experience of rupa but we can't verify > its accuracy with panna? > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: No. How do you infer that from what I wrote? ------------------------------------------------------ > > As I understand it, direct experience isn't enough. If panna isn't > present the experience is mistaken. Can panna verify the blueness of > blue or only anicca, dukkha, anatta? > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I think the latter. There is mundane wisdom, correct knowledge obtained from experience, but liberating wisdom (pa~n~na) is, I believe, something else. -------------------------------------------------------- > > Larry > > ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17735 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 3:24pm Subject: Letting our notions fall away (Re: If volition is conditioned)/ David Hello David, I've been thinking about your post over the last couple of days. I see what you mean by 'letting our notions fall away'. I wonder if we could both be right? :-) As I understand it, the arising of panna depends on conditions... hearing the true Dhamma, reflecting on this, and association with wise friends. Could my seeking answers fit within the 'hearing and reflecting on the Dhamma'? Perhaps with an emphasis initially on the 'hearing' part. And could your letting concepts fall away fit within the 'hearing and reflecting on the Dhamma' ... perhaps with an emphasis initially on the reflecting part? And, of course, after considering your post over the last couple of day, the benefit of association with wise friends goes without saying. thanks and metta, Christine --- "chase8383 " wrote: > Hi Christine > > Christine: "I tried to imagine not seeking answers but found I would need to become a different person ... I could agree they were a hindrance if by 'answers' you meant merely the proliferation of thought. But I tend to see 'looking for answers' as 'looking for truth' (in the Dhamma)." > > Well, let me ask you. Is it what you learn that's important, or is it what falls away? Is it the addition, or is it the subtraction that counts? > > If we get involved in something new, something we have a preconceived notion about. In understanding it, our notions of it have to fall away. So are we looking for "answers", or are we just allowing our concepts to fall away so we can perceive the truth of it? > > That's what I meant. > > Peace, David 17736 From: Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 3:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Howard, Sorry I lost you. Let's try again. Larry: What I am asking about is the logic of the kamma doctrine as we have it. Is it a correct interpretation to say kamma function controls the rupa of the universe? Howard: Yes. (Well, I guess I have to add "as I see it"!! ;-) L: aHA! So the old vedic priests were right. Rites an rituals (intentions) do make a difference. H: Consciousness of rupa is not rupa - it is discernment. I take rupa to be whatever can be object of the so-called physical-sense consciousnesses: visual, auditory, olfactory, tactile, and gustatory. L: Are you saying there is a direct experience of rupa but we can't verify its accuracy with panna? Larry 17737 From: Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 10:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mana (conceit) Hi, Christine - In a message dated 12/14/02 6:03:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > Dear Group, > > I was thinking today about what Mana (conceit) means in Buddhist > terms in daily life. > My pre-Dhamma understanding was influenced by Christianity, and I > knew mana as Vanity. "Vanity of Vanities, saith the Preacher, all is > vanity." (Ecclesiastes 1:2) The Hebrew word for vanity in this > context simply means "breath" or "vapor." The writer of Ecclesiastes > lists pleasure-seeking, the trappings of materialism, the seeking of > fame and power, and becoming a learned philosopher as all this world > had to offer and yet, concluded, it was all vain, the grasping at > wind. So, to me, the Christian definition involves sensuality and > selfish acquisitiveness (physical and mental) designed to increase an > individual's standing in the world. > ============================== I'm quoting just the beginning of your post, Christine, because that is what I'd like to reply to. A friend of ours is a Chassidic Jew who is a Distinguished Professor at CUNY Graduate Center and a brilliant man - his wife, also a dear friend, is Chair of my department at Queens College. His area is Computer Science, but he also has taught comparative religion for years and he knows and respects a great deal of Buddhism. At a recent Sabbath dinner at his house, he was reading aloud from Ecclesiastes to the assembled guests, and commenting on it, making several comparisons with Buddhism. I also think that it comes quite close in several respects to the Dhamma. It is interesting that, as you point out, the Hebrew word that is standardly translated here as 'vanity' literally means 'breath' or 'vapor', each of which points to something quite insubstantial, ephemeral, and ungraspable. One may be reminded of the part of the Phena Sutta (taken from ATI) which reads as follows: > 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. It strikes me that instead of 'vanity' being taken as translation, 'emptiness' might be a better choice, including its senses of insubstantiality, impermanence, ungraspability, and unsatisfactoriness. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17738 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 4:16pm Subject: Contemplating Aging ([dsg] Re: Take Care of Yourself) Hi Howard, (and all), I was going to say "you young whippersnapper" but I'm not quite sure what one is. :-) You can tell from her remarks that Nina's dad at 102 yrs of age and still a loved and vital presence within the family. Your comments about your health and the fascination at considering your own aging process, started me musing about my own. This happens quite regularly especially this last year - I think because unavoidable reminders of aging - having to get reading glasses, and the first grey hairs - were such a shock. I too look back at myself in earlier years and wonder who that person was, full of passionate causes, so sure she was right, valuing only intellect and ethics, agitating for justice and equality, no excuses accepted, believing the world could be set to rights by good will, self-sacrifice and reason ... Can one feel compassion for a younger 'self'? :-) Because the 'stories' of the world go on and on, at home the family and love stories of joy and grief, the getting and spending, in the political arena the rhetoric, the brinkmanship and demonstrations and, at work the meetings, the plans and the grievances, and very few things change permanently - happiness and suffering cycle around - samsara rolls on. I am reminded of how little humanity changes by this quote which may ring true for those in bureaucratic organisations and businesses: "We trained hard .. but every time we were beginning to form up into teams we would be re-organised. I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by re-organising .. and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing inefficiency and demoralisation". (Petronius A.D. 66 The old saying is still true 'The more things change, the more things stay the same'. But the body doesn't stay the same, and the changes cannot be ignored. They can be ameliorated but are ultimately irreversible and relentless. Maybe the contemplation of the physical changes is a blessing in disguise. i.e. It prevents one ignoring the idea of eventual death, 'my' death, any longer. That gets a lot of things in perspective don't you think? e.g. what's important (hearing and reflecting on the Dhamma, talking with admirable friends) and what's not (who wins, who loses, who's 'important', who's not), and when will I ever really understand anatta? metta, Christine --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, James - > > In a message dated 12/13/02 8:50:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, > buddhatrue@y... writes: > > > > > Dear Howard, > > > > Oh, it is good that it isn't so serious. Oops...I was going on your > > picture. I didn't know how old you are. The beard adds age. > > > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > In April I'll be 63. Not *real* old, yet not a kid either! Yes, the > beard is aging, but I think I look better with it than without it. > Interestingly (to me ;-), I think I am mentally and attitudinally > younger right now than I've ever been in this lifetime! > The aging process is fascinating, I find. It provides a conventional > insight into anicca. (All of a sudden you look in a mirror and wonder "Where > the hell did that old guy come from, and where did 'Howard' go!" And you look > back in your mind at events and characters in earlier acts of this play we > call "our life", and they seem to have been played out in another lifetime > entirely. Fascinating. 17740 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 5:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mana (conceit) Hi Larry, and all, Aughh! Larry .. I spent a lot of time thinking about this, and thought I had it all sorted out. :-) But you can't get away with just a one-liner, mate. Give me something with a bit more substance. Some clarification, a few sutta citations, or a few quotes to back up your remark. I've never thought of generosity in terms of telling others what is wrong with them. I don't think I could be trusted to be let off the leash of Right Speech. And I'm often wrong (deluded) about others faults. How would pointing out others's faults fit with the Precepts? Couldn't it be akusala kamma patha via speech .. more so if you're wrong? And is that an ominous phrase "ONE thing you have wrong'? What else? ... Be brutally honest or should I say 'brutally generous', I can take it (I think). :-) But your remarks made me look a little further and I remembered a discussion in the past on dsg that mentions criticism of ourselves and how we should regard it as being pointed to treasure. I'm not sure it applies to criticising others. But it had good points on Mana. Could the Mighty Custodian of the Useful Posts consider a topic on Mana please? Just imagine if I could have clicked on that, I wouldn't have had to do all the considering and reflecting ... ahh! For the 'Pointing us to Treasure' thread' see a great post by Sarah at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/13626 As with everything, timing is of the essence - I wish I had remembered to look for these posts before I sent mine, but such is life. :-( metta, Christine --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Dear Christine, > > I think one thing you have wrong is that pointing out other's faults > isn't conceit. It's generosity. > > Larry ADVERTISEMENT 17741 From: peterdac4298 Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 5:20pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhunis Hi Christine, Sarah, and all In my previous post on this thread I used the expression "intimidating and demeaning" in brief reference to the original, historic Bhikkhuni Sangha, and how this was absent from the more democratic Amaravati style DSM Sangha of today. I feel I aught to expand this so as to avoid any misunderstanding. As most of us are aware, at the time of the Buddha, when Ananda thrice requested the admittance of women to the Sangha, the Buddha replied in what could be seen by todays standards as rather a derogatory, if not paranoid manner. He spoke about the Sasana lasting only half the time it originally would have. And also insisted on eight restrictions ('capital points', ~Naa.namoli) to be imposed on the nuns as a condition for their admittance. One of which was that a nun of advanced seniority would be junior to a monk newly admitted that very day. Another spoke of Bhikkhunis not being allowed to find fault with Bhikkhus nor admonish them at all. A Bhikkhuni must never address discourses to Bhikkhus, but Bhikkhus may address discourses to Bhikkhunis. In the matter of grave offences a Bhikkhuni must do penance before both Sanghas. Additionally to these eight capital points, a Bhikkhuni must be given the admission by both Sanghas (and is why the lineage could not be restored once broken: hence the need to find an unbroken branch elsewhere). The Buddha gave his reasons for insisting on these eight conditions of acceptance. He unflatteringly likened women in the Sangha to a rice field being infected by various kinds of fungus or mildew. A clan with too many women and too few men is vulnerable to robbers and bandits is likened to the Sangha with women admitted. "...As a man might construct in advance an embankment so that the waters of a great reservoir should not cause a flood, so I too have made known in advance these eight cardinal points..." (~Naa.namoli) Now this can't be explained as some kind of slip of the tongue, or even playing to contemporary sensibilities. These are powerful and systematic statements. What are we to make of them? The Buddha, having willingly recognised their equal ability to fully penetrate and realize the Dhamma, is more than creating an historic precedent by granting women the admission. This is virtual revolution by the standards of that time. But he goes to great lengths to ensure that there is no mistaking his view on female admission. It's always possible the Buddha, being a mere mortal, had some kind of a blind spot and got this bit wrong! Either way, the Amaravati DSM's evade this whole issue, and seem quite happy having equal rank with Bhikkhus even though it is only within the Amaravati Sangha. They enjoy the holy life, exhibit a mature understanding of the Dhamma and are much sought after for teaching engagements. Cheers Peter --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Sarah, and all, > > You are correct - any discussion of this matter on this list, > particularly between you and I, has been respectfully conducted. > The rest is probably my subjective interpretation. Implacability, > though, has been evinced by people taking the 'the scriptures say > it's impossible to reinstate' line. e.g. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15646 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15653 > > Of great interest to me is this article which states: 'There is > permission in the Vinaya Chullavagga for monks to ordain nuns." > and, "the Bhikkhuni Sasana has been revived in Sri Lanka According > to full Theravada ceremonial." > http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/nunorder.htm > > metta, > > Christine > > > --- Sarah wrote: > > Dear Christine, > > > > --- "christine_forsyth " > > wrote: > Dear Peter, > > > > > > On a number of lists (including this one) and over a period of > time, > > > I have found the topic of the Bhikkuni Sangha, and especially > the > > > issue of its Restoration in terms of the original, to be > > > uncomfortable to many posters. 17742 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 6:04pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhunis Hi Peter, Your post is a crucially important one to me. I guess I've been operating under false ideas of what underpinned Buddhism and the Buddha's view of women. I guess I assumed he was trying not to create alarm in a chauvinist society, so as to get the Sangha firmly established. I guess I thought the Buddha really saw no difference in the value of males and females, but was constrained by the mores of a conservative culture. I agree that these words "can't be explained as some kind of slip of the tongue, or even playing to contemporary sensibilities. These are powerful and systematic statements." First though, I'll try to find the original suttas that you allude to. Gratitude, Christine --- "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi Christine, Sarah, and all > As most of us are aware, at the time of the Buddha, when Ananda > thrice requested the admittance of women to the Sangha, the Buddha > replied in what could be seen by todays standards as rather a > derogatory, if not paranoid manner. > > He spoke about the Sasana lasting only half the time it originally > would have. And also insisted on eight restrictions ('capital > points', ~Naa.namoli) to be imposed on the nuns as a condition for > their admittance. One of which was that a nun of advanced seniority > would be junior to a monk newly admitted that very day. Another > spoke of Bhikkhunis not being allowed to find fault with Bhikkhus > nor admonish them at all. A Bhikkhuni must never address discourses > to Bhikkhus, but Bhikkhus may address discourses to Bhikkhunis. In > the matter of grave offences a Bhikkhuni must do penance before both > Sanghas. Additionally to these eight capital points, a Bhikkhuni > must be given the admission by both Sanghas (and is why the lineage > could not be restored once broken: hence the need to find an > unbroken branch elsewhere). > > The Buddha gave his reasons for insisting on these eight conditions > of acceptance. He unflatteringly likened women in the Sangha to a > rice field being infected by various kinds of fungus or mildew. A > clan with too many women and too few men is vulnerable to robbers > and bandits is likened to the Sangha with women admitted. "...As a > man might construct in advance an embankment so that the waters of a > great reservoir should not cause a flood, so I too have made known > in advance these eight cardinal points..." (~Naa.namoli) > > Now this can't be explained as some kind of slip of the tongue, or > even playing to contemporary sensibilities. These are powerful and > systematic statements. What are we to make of them? The Buddha, > having willingly recognised their equal ability to fully penetrate > and realize the Dhamma, is more than creating an historic precedent > by granting women the admission. This is virtual revolution by the > standards of that time. But he goes to great lengths to ensure that > there is no mistaking his view on female admission. It's always > possible the Buddha, being a mere mortal, had some kind of a blind > spot and got this bit wrong! > > Either way, the Amaravati DSM's evade this whole issue, and seem > quite happy having equal rank with Bhikkhus even though it is only > within the Amaravati Sangha. They enjoy the holy life, exhibit a > mature understanding of the Dhamma and are much sought after for > teaching engagements. > > Cheers > Peter 17743 From: Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 6:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mana (conceit) Hi Christine, I looked but couldn't find any scriptural support for what I had in mind by my comment that criticism is generosity, not conceit. I agree that conceit often accompanies and motivates criticism and the criticism is often received with conceit. However, I have found that criticism is an opportunity to re-examine my beliefs and look at them in a different way, even if I disagree, and especially if I am bothered by it. To me, being bothered is a wonderful sign that I am holding onto something that could be let go of, usually just by noticing it. Even if I think I am right as rain, the impulse to secure truth is a mistake. Right understanding is impermanent and not self. Plus there is always the remote possibility that I am wrong. Larry 17744 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 7:22pm Subject: Re: Mana (conceit) Hi Christine, Here are two discourses that might be relevant to your post on conceit. Anguttara Nikaya IV.199 Tanha Sutta Craving http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-199.html Anguttara Nikaya IV.200 Pema Sutta Affection http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-200.html Metta, Victor --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, > > I was thinking today about what Mana (conceit) means in Buddhist > terms in daily life. > My pre-Dhamma understanding was influenced by Christianity, and I > knew mana as Vanity. "Vanity of Vanities, saith the Preacher, all is > vanity." (Ecclesiastes 1:2) The Hebrew word for vanity in this > context simply means "breath" or "vapor." The writer of Ecclesiastes > lists pleasure-seeking, the trappings of materialism, the seeking of > fame and power, and becoming a learned philosopher as all this world > had to offer and yet, concluded, it was all vain, the grasping at > wind. So, to me, the Christian definition involves sensuality and > selfish acquisitiveness (physical and mental) designed to increase an > individual's standing in the world. > > The first jolt I had about the Buddhist take on Mana was when I went > for Dhamma discussions with friends in Bangkok a year ago. Feeling > overwhelmed by a gathering of people with years of Dhamma knowledge, > practice experience and understanding, and anxious about the > microphones for taping of the conversation, I tended to do what is > seen as 'humility' in my circles - make deprecating remarks about my > own lack of knowledge and admiring remarks about that of others. A > friend, much to my mortification at the time, told me that this was > just conceit. Another friend wrote that I was probably an 'under- > estimator', which at least sounds better than being told I have > omana 'inferiority-conceit :-) > Referring to the three kinds of Mana, Nyanatiloka gives this meaning: > The (equality-) conceit (mána), the inferiority-conceit (omána) and > the superiority-conceit (atimána): this threefold conceit should be > overcome. For, after overcoming this threefold conceit, the monk, > through the full penetration of conceit, is said to have put an end > suffering" (A. VI, 49). > "Those ascetics and brahman priests who, relying on this impermanent, > miserable and transitory nature of corporeality, feelings, > perceptions, mental formations and consciousness, fancy: 'Better am > I', or 'Equal am I', or 'Worse am I', all these imagine thus through > not understanding reality" (S. XXII, 49). > > The definition in the CMA II.7 "Conceit (mana): Conceit has the > characteristic of haughtiness. Its function is self-exaltation. It > is manifested as vainglory. (n. Ketukamyata, lit. a desire to fly the > banner - to advertise oneself). Its proximate cause is greed > dissociated from views. (n. because conceit arises only in greed- > rooted cittas dissociated from views.) It should be regarded as > madness." > > This is a difficult definition for me to understand because it makes > it seem as if conceit should be easily recognisable and that the > boundaries are quite narrow and easily discerned. > I think my 'underestimator' or 'inferiority-conceit' could be > included within "vainglory - a desire to fly the banner to advertise > oneself" i.e. It is seeing oneself as important in some way. All the > time I'm is protesting how much better someone else is at something > than I, or how lacking I am in certain knowledge - isn't that waving > the banner about myself, keeping others attention on me while I > speak, write etc.? > Just so with most arguing on e-lists about how wrong other people's > beliefs, method of practice, level of understanding is, or how > incorrect their alleged manners and behaviour seems to us ... isn't > this just 'flying the banner' of atimana (superiority conceit) and > attracting attention to oneself by articulating 'righteous anger' at > others? > > (Just for you, Victor, your favourite quote :-)) > Sarah in post 11868 writes: > "This is mine, this am I, this is my self" as often quoted. "This is > mine" > refers to craving, taking objects as belonging to self. "This am I" > refers to mana, conceit and "This is my self" refers to the > personality > belief, sakkaya ditthi, identified with the 5 khandhas. > > So if "This am I" refers to mana, conceit, then anything that points > to, underlines, articulates, indicates, or identifies oneself as > better, worse or the same as another is Mana - conceit. I think that > this would also include unlikely types of thinking, and actions not > just speech. It is 'having a self view', it is not understanding > anatta. It is not understanding that there is no self to be > important, to be protective of or to promote. > e.g. I was in a hurry to get out of the Supermarket, had only four > items to pay for, so went to the priority check-out (under eight > items). Just before I got there, a large man with a full trolley > rudely pushed in front and the Operator didn't quibble about rules, > just began processing his groceries. Well!!! I spent the next ten > minutes creating stories about how hard done by I was, how rude the > man was, how ill trained and cowardly the staff were, what was the > point of having special aisles for fewer purchases and quicker exit > etc. etc. etc ... I think the basis for all my uncomfortable emotions > was Conceit. > > It is said that Conceit is only eradicated when one becomes an > Arahat, it is one of the Fetters so-called because they fetter > aggregates [in this life] to aggregates [of the next], or kamma to > its fruit, or beings to suffering. For as long as the ones exist > there is no cessation of the others. Vis. XXII.48f > > I was wondering if anyone has other references for Conceit, and if > anyone can think of other examples in everyday life that show conceit > in action? Does it join with other factors that disguise it? - I ask > this because most people, even those well versed in Dhamma, don't > seem to realise when mana is a large part of their speech or actions. > > metta, > Christine 17745 From: Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 2:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi again, Larry - In a message dated 12/14/02 7:09:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > Sorry I lost you. Let's try again. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. I'll try to be clearer. -------------------------------------------- > > Larry: What I am asking about is the > logic of the kamma doctrine as we have it. Is it a correct > interpretation to say kamma function controls the rupa of the universe? > Howard: Yes. (Well, I guess I have to add "as I see it"!! ;-) > > L: aHA! So the old vedic priests were right. Rites an rituals > (intentions) do make a difference. > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'll try to clarify my last reply. Conventional world events are conditioned in the usual conventional ways. (We can wish to fly, but that won't do it unless we board an airplane or some such vehicle.) Generally, belief in the efficacy of mere intention is a belief in magic. Mere intention is generally not an adequate condition for most effects. Of course intention can have a desired effect psychologically, on oneself, due to belief in the efficacy of intention, and it could also effect others in the same way provided that they are also telepathic. Rites and rituals, however, are actions intentionally carried out, but not intention themselves. They also can have certain anticipated effects due to the belief of the performer of the rites and rituals or of another intended "recipient" of benefits of those rites and rituals. But generally, intention alone won't hack it. For example, we can intend to attain jhanas, to develop wisdom, and to achieve enlightenment until we are blue in the face, but without taking the proper steps (volitionally, of course), the results will not be achieved. ----------------------------------------------------------- > > H: Consciousness of rupa is not rupa - it is discernment. I take rupa to > be whatever can be object of the so-called physical-sense > consciousnesses: visual, auditory, olfactory, tactile, and gustatory. > > L: Are you saying there is a direct experience of rupa but we can't > verify its accuracy with panna? > --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: My answer remains the same: no, I'm not saying that. I don't understand how you infer that from what I have said. --------------------------------------------------------- > > Larry > ============================ With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17746 From: Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 2:33pm Subject: Re: Contemplating Aging ([dsg] Re: Take Care of Yourself) Hi, Christine - Thanks for the great post! I particularly like your emphasis near the end. Yes, recollection of aging, and illness, and most of all, death, is a kind of blessing for us. The Buddha pointed this out, but like all that he taught, we have to come to see the truth of it directly, for ourselves. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/14/02 7:17:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > Hi Howard, (and all), > > I was going to say "you young whippersnapper" but I'm not quite sure > what one is. :-) > You can tell from her remarks that Nina's dad at 102 yrs of age and > still a loved and vital presence within the family. > > Your comments about your health and the fascination at considering > your own aging process, started me musing about my own. This happens > quite regularly especially this last year - I think because > unavoidable reminders of aging - having to get reading glasses, and > the first grey hairs - were such a shock. I too look back at myself > in earlier years and wonder who that person was, full of passionate > causes, so sure she was right, valuing only intellect and ethics, > agitating for justice and equality, no excuses accepted, believing > the world could be set to rights by good will, self-sacrifice and > reason ... Can one feel compassion for a younger 'self'? :-) Because > the 'stories' of the world go on and on, at home the family and love > stories of joy and grief, the getting and spending, in the political > arena the rhetoric, the brinkmanship and demonstrations and, at work > the meetings, the plans and the grievances, and very few things > change permanently - happiness and suffering cycle around - samsara > rolls on. > I am reminded of how little humanity changes by this quote which may > ring true for those in bureaucratic organisations and businesses: > "We trained hard .. but every time we were beginning to form up into > teams we would be re-organised. I was to learn later in life that we > tend to meet any new situation by re-organising .. and a wonderful > method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while > producing inefficiency and demoralisation". > (Petronius A.D. 66 > The old saying is still true 'The more things change, the more things > stay the same'. > > But the body doesn't stay the same, and the changes cannot be > ignored. They can be ameliorated but are ultimately irreversible and > relentless. Maybe the contemplation of the physical changes is a > blessing in disguise. i.e. It prevents one ignoring the idea of > eventual death, 'my' death, any longer. That gets a lot of things in > perspective don't you think? e.g. what's important (hearing and > reflecting on the Dhamma, talking with admirable friends) and what's > not (who wins, who loses, who's 'important', who's not), and when > will I ever really understand anatta? > > metta, > Christine > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17747 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 7:59pm Subject: Contemplating Aging ([dsg] Re: Take Care of Yourself) Hi Christine, You can understand the teaching of anatta now. It is a simple teaching, not a complicated one. The teaching itself is not difficult to understand. However, sometime it is hard to accept something that is simple. Metta, Victor > not (who wins, who loses, who's 'important', who's not), and when > will I ever really understand anatta? > > metta, > Christine 17748 From: Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 8:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Howard, Now I'm totally confused. Since we are discussing two different issues I'll just label them 1 & 2: 1: When I asked if you thought kamma function controls the rupa of the universe you said yes. Your response below doesn't seem to reference that "yes". As an example of kamma function controlling the rupa of the universe, if a meteor hit me in the head that would be due to kamma. Or, our meeting is due to kamma. What did you mean when you agreed that kamma function controls the rupa of the universe? 2: Is there such a phenomenon as sense consciousness? Does sense consciousness have an object? Is consciousness of that object accurate? Larry ---------------------------------- Howard wrote: Conventional world events are conditioned in the usual conventional ways. (We can wish to fly, but that won't do it unless we board an airplane or some such vehicle.) Generally, belief in the efficacy of mere intention is a belief in magic. Mere intention is generally not an adequate condition for most effects. Of course intention can have a desired effect psychologically, on oneself, due to belief in the efficacy of intention, and it could also effect others in the same way provided that they are also telepathic. Rites and rituals, however, are actions intentionally carried out, but not intention themselves. They also can have certain anticipated effects due to the belief of the performer of the rites and rituals or of another intended "recipient" of benefits of those rites and rituals. But generally, intention alone won't hack it. For example, we can intend to attain jhanas, to develop wisdom, and to achieve enlightenment until we are blue in the face, but without taking the proper steps (volitionally, of course), the results will not be achieved. 17749 From: ven.yanatharo.bikkhu Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 8:50pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis Dear Peter, thank you for explaining to all the members this rules. If I was a woman, under no circunstances I will humiliate myself to be treaty that way. Many times I have to shut and bite my tonge when I see in the temples where I go ( this afternoon for example) the Sri Lanka monk is in SriLanka so at 5 pm I am conducting by myself the entire ceremony, allthe men will kneel in the front and the women at the back. It looks like the 21st century has not reach Buddhism. Ven. Yanatharo -----Mensaje original----- De: peterdac4298 [mailto:peterdac4298@y...] Enviado el: Domingo, Diciembre 15, 2002 12:21 p.m. Asunto: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis Hi Christine, Sarah, and all In my previous post on this thread I used the expression "intimidating and demeaning" in brief reference to the original, historic Bhikkhuni Sangha, and how this was absent from the more democratic Amaravati style DSM Sangha of today. I feel I aught to expand this so as to avoid any misunderstanding. As most of us are aware, at the time of the Buddha, when Ananda thrice requested the admittance of women to the Sangha, the Buddha replied in what could be seen by todays standards as rather a derogatory, if not paranoid manner. He spoke about the Sasana lasting only half the time it originally would have. And also insisted on eight restrictions ('capital points', ~Naa.namoli) to be imposed on the nuns as a condition for their admittance. One of which was that a nun of advanced seniority would be junior to a monk newly admitted that very day. Another spoke of Bhikkhunis not being allowed to find fault with Bhikkhus nor admonish them at all. A Bhikkhuni must never address discourses to Bhikkhus, but Bhikkhus may address discourses to Bhikkhunis. In the matter of grave offences a Bhikkhuni must do penance before both Sanghas. Additionally to these eight capital points, a Bhikkhuni must be given the admission by both Sanghas (and is why the lineage could not be restored once broken: hence the need to find an unbroken branch elsewhere). The Buddha gave his reasons for insisting on these eight conditions of acceptance. He unflatteringly likened women in the Sangha to a rice field being infected by various kinds of fungus or mildew. A clan with too many women and too few men is vulnerable to robbers and bandits is likened to the Sangha with women admitted. "...As a man might construct in advance an embankment so that the waters of a great reservoir should not cause a flood, so I too have made known in advance these eight cardinal points..." (~Naa.namoli) Now this can't be explained as some kind of slip of the tongue, or even playing to contemporary sensibilities. These are powerful and systematic statements. What are we to make of them? The Buddha, having willingly recognised their equal ability to fully penetrate and realize the Dhamma, is more than creating an historic precedent by granting women the admission. This is virtual revolution by the standards of that time. But he goes to great lengths to ensure that there is no mistaking his view on female admission. It's always possible the Buddha, being a mere mortal, had some kind of a blind spot and got this bit wrong! Either way, the Amaravati DSM's evade this whole issue, and seem quite happy having equal rank with Bhikkhus even though it is only within the Amaravati Sangha. They enjoy the holy life, exhibit a mature understanding of the Dhamma and are much sought after for teaching engagements. Cheers Peter --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Sarah, and all, > > You are correct - any discussion of this matter on this list, > particularly between you and I, has been respectfully conducted. > The rest is probably my subjective interpretation. Implacability, > though, has been evinced by people taking the 'the scriptures say > it's impossible to reinstate' line. e.g. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15646 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15653 > > Of great interest to me is this article which states: 'There is > permission in the Vinaya Chullavagga for monks to ordain nuns." > and, "the Bhikkhuni Sasana has been revived in Sri Lanka According > to full Theravada ceremonial." > http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/nunorder.htm > > metta, > > Christine > > > --- Sarah wrote: > > Dear Christine, > > > > --- "christine_forsyth " > > wrote: > Dear Peter, > > > > > > On a number of lists (including this one) and over a period of > time, > > > I have found the topic of the Bhikkuni Sangha, and especially > the > > > issue of its Restoration in terms of the original, to be > > > uncomfortable to many posters. 17750 From: James Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 10:42pm Subject: Re: Mana (conceit) Hi Christine, Good topic. One I was thinking about today due to a line in the letter from Nina to me about accumulations. I agree with the Abhidhamma in regards to its application of accumulations and how accumulations will affect insight. However, I believe that many Buddhists, even a few on this list, see this fact in the wrong light. They see accumulations as demonstrating that one person is more important than another person. In other words, `I appreciate the Abhidhamma because I have more accumulations than you do. If you had as many accumulations, and high accumulations, you would appreciate it like I do.' (Note: This doesn't apply to Nina…I won't mention names.) This thinking really makes me smile. The more accumulations a person has, and the greater in quality those accumulations, the more he/she will realize how unimportant he/she is as an individual. Adolf Hitler just `knew' he was the most `important' person in the world; while the Lord Buddha `knew' he was the least `important' person of everyone. I strive to be as unimportant as possible. That is the main reason I don't like to see my name in the subject headings of posts in this group or other groups. Having my name displayed so prominently makes me too `important'. I am not important; the dhamma is what's important. Metta, James 17751 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 10:55pm Subject: Contemplating Aging ([dsg] Re: Take Care of Yourself) Hi Victor, I think I understand anatta intellectually. I'm happy with the everchanging process idea. It's the personal identity bit that keeps intruding. I seem to remember, though, that you didn't agree entirely with Nyanatiloka's definition. When I say I don't understand anatta - I mean I still feel that this 'me' is all I know, it pervades my whole awareness. It IS my awareness of being. Unless I am reading about anatta or bringing its definition to mind, I don't feel any different now to how I have felt all my life, before I heard about the Anatta. I feel no different to when I thought my consciousness was a Soul. I am 'that'. I was reading a recent post by Prof. Richard Hayes elsewhere entitled 'Yes Virginnia,there is a soul'. After a discussion around what is the meaning of the word 'soul', he ends with a view that he feels is both good Buddhism and good Jungianism. 'The soul is not of a fixed nature but rather is always a work in progress. It is never complete, never perfected. Also, to say that the soul is not the self is to say that the soul is not autonomous, that it is conditioned, that it is empty.' This is not so different to Nyanatiloka's definition, no? metta, Christine (Thanks for the Tanha and Pema suttas re Mana - I've read them and I'll think them over.) --- "yu_zhonghao " wrote: > Hi Christine, > > You can understand the teaching of anatta now. It is a simple > teaching, not a complicated one. > > The teaching itself is not difficult to understand. However, > sometime it is hard to accept something that is simple. > > Metta, > Victor > > > > not (who wins, who loses, who's 'important', who's not), and when > > will I ever really understand anatta? > > > > metta, > > Christine 17752 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 11:29pm Subject: Re: Mana (conceit)) Hi James,and All, Thanks for your post. I am interested in finding out more about accumulations. My understanding is that there is no point in being conceited about one's accumulations - they just are. There is no-one who should feel conceited about having an interest in and ability to understand abhidhamma, anymore than one should feel conceited about having brown eyes. They came with the package. Regarding accumulations, I thought kusala and akusala mind moments accumulated, and made certain tendencies and behavioural traits stronger more likely to resurface. I don't quite understand how skills accumulate or where to find the scriptural support for this. Can anyone help out with more info on accumulations? James, on the recent topic of suffering/happiness, I was reading an article, thought of you, and wondered if you might like to read it. It's by Thanissaro Bhikkhu and is called "Life isn't just Suffering". http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/lifeisnt.html with metta, Christine --- "James " wrote: > Hi Christine, > > Good topic. One I was thinking about today due to a line in the > letter from Nina to me about accumulations. I agree with the > Abhidhamma in regards to its application of accumulations and how > accumulations will affect insight. However, I believe that many > Buddhists, even a few on this list, see this fact in the wrong > light. They see accumulations as demonstrating that one person is > more important than another person. In other words, `I appreciate > the Abhidhamma because I have more accumulations than you do. If > you had as many accumulations, and high accumulations, you would > appreciate it like I do.' 17753 From: nidive Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 11:47pm Subject: Why does a sotapanna has only at most 7 remaining rebirths? Why is it that a sotapanna has only at most 7 remaining rebirths? Does this mean that even if he doesn't practice the Dhamma in the 7 remaining lifetimes, he will still become an arahat eventually at the 7th rebirth? Does this mean that once a person becomes a sotapanna, there is really "no point" in practising further to achieve arahatship in fewer lifetimes (because arahatship is guaranteed at the 7th rebirth anyway) ? Is there any explanation why this is so (at most 7 more rebirths)? 17754 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 11:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Forgiveness Chris --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: ... > Jon, > Thanks for this reminder "As regards wrong done by others to > oneself, the Buddha explained on many occasions the need to > understand that people act the way they do because of their > accumulated nature, that one is reaping the results of one's own > previous deeds...'. > Also please see my remarks above to Howard regarding the Kakacupana > Sutta. I hope I'm not wrong. > Having the expectation from the Buddha that his followers not feel > aversion when under horrific physical torture would be 'setting the > hurdle too high' for me and for most beings, I think. > ----------------------------------- Yes, I agree with this. The Kakacupama Sutta (M.21) is not setting an ideal by which we should try to act, but rather is saying, to put it in words that Nina has just used, that there is no limit to metta, that is, that there is never an occasion on which metta would not be an appropriate mind-state when another being is the object of consciousness, as far as the teaching is concerned. Even not to feel aversion when people are doing nothing 'wrong' at all would be too high a hurdle for us ;-)). Jon PS Thanks for all the interesting posts from the Cooran weekend. 17755 From: jonoabb Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 0:11am Subject: Re: Fear of Rupas Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - ... > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > That's quite possibly so. Do you have a sutta (ot other) reference for > that? (I do think there is a temporal, predecessor relation implied, but not > necessarily that of immediate predecessor. The relationship among vi~n~nana, > namarupa, and salayatana, however, might be more of a logical- dependency > realtion than a temporal one. I'm not very sure about that. > ----------------------------------------------------- The paticca-samuppada (dependent origination) is a vast and complex subject. I do not pretend to understand it, other than at a very superficial level. I prefer to take the view that it will become apparent as necessary as and when (if ever) understanding is developed (that's a cop-out on my part, I know;-)). However, there's a useful introduction in Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary (too lengthy to post in full here), with Abhidhamma and Sutta references, at the link below. I would be happy to discuss further if you find anything of interest there. http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic3_p2.htm. > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I don't see that as an alternative view. It is my position as well. We > open our eyes and what appears is visual object. As it is, there is no lamp > or table or anything else. These "things" arise later and are > mind-constructed. > --------------------------------------------- Another of our rare moments of agreement, Howard ;-)). The visible object that is experienced at moments of seeing is 'real' in a sense that the later, mind-constructed objects can never be. It has a characteristic that is independent of the "things" that are so constructed from it. It is different in nature and characteristic from the consciousness by means of which it is experienced. To my understanding of the teachings, visible object is one of the dhammas the direct experience of which leads to the development of insight. I would contrast this with, say, an understanding of the process by which bare experiences through the sense-doors are 'transformed' into the mind constructs that create the world as we conventionally perceive it, an understanding that must necessarily remain a mostly intellectual one, since it all happens much too fast ever to be fully experienced directly, even by enlightened beings (other than a Buddha and the great disciples). Useful (indeed, very useful) information, but not a necessary prerequisite to the direct experience of dhammas appearing now. Jon 17756 From: James Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 0:15am Subject: Re: Why does a sotapanna has only at most 7 remaining rebirths? --- "nidive " wrote: > Why is it that a sotapanna has only at most 7 remaining rebirths? > > Does this mean that even if he doesn't practice the Dhamma in the 7 > remaining lifetimes, he will still become an arahat eventually at > the 7th rebirth? > > Does this mean that once a person becomes a sotapanna, there is > really "no point" in practising further to achieve arahatship in > fewer lifetimes (because arahatship is guaranteed at the 7th rebirth > anyway) ? > > Is there any explanation why this is so (at most 7 more rebirths)? NEO, I am not sure about the number 7 rebirths for a Sotapanna or even where you get that information; but the number isn't important really. You ask, "Does this mean that even if he doesn't practice the Dhamma in the 7 remaining lifetimes, he will still become an arahat eventually at the 7th rebirth?" This question is moot because it would be impossible for such a person not to practice the Dhamma for those remaining births. Just as I wrote to Christine about accumulations, and her response, when certain tendencies build up, and certain insights are reached, there is no going back and no way to stop the eventual progression. I speak from personal experience. I am not sure if I am a Sotapanna, and, as Rhett Butler said, "Frankly, Scarlett, I don't give a damn." But I do know that I was born with an insatiable appetite to know the meaning of life from a very young age. While other children read `Hardy Boys', I read books on religions and Haiku Zen poetry. This was not something that I chose or could control. And believe me, I tried many times to forget the whole thing and be like the people around me, but it never worked. I always gravitated back to the larger questions of life and Buddhism. Probably most everyone in this group is the same way… including you. Once you taste that Forbidden Apple of Dhamma, there is no going back. Metta, James 17757 From: nidive Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 1:09am Subject: Re: Why does a sotapanna has only at most 7 remaining rebirths? Dear James > I am not sure about the number 7 rebirths for a Sotapanna or even > where you get that information; but the number isn't important > really. Samyutta Nikaya XIII.1 Nakhasikha Sutta The Tip of the Fingernail Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. For free distribution only. I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi at Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Then the Blessed One, picking up a little bit of dust with the tip of his fingernail, said to the monks, "What do you think, monks? Which is greater: the little bit of dust I have picked up with the tip of my fingernail, or the great earth?" "The great earth is far greater, lord. The little bit of dust the Blessed One has picked up with the tip of his fingernail is next to nothing. It's not a hundredth, a thousandth, a one hundred- thousandth -- this little bit of dust the Blessed One has picked up with the tip of his fingernail -- when compared with the great earth." "In the same way, monks, for a disciple of the noble ones who is consummate in view, an individual who has broken through [to stream- entry], the suffering & stress that is totally ended & extinguished is far greater. That which remains in the state of having at most seven remaining lifetimes is next to nothing: it's not a hundredth, a thousandth, a one hundred-thousandth, when compared with the previous mass of suffering. That's how great the benefit is of breaking through to the Dhamma, monks. That's how great the benefit is of obtaining the Dhamma eye." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn13-001.html > You ask, "Does this mean that even if he doesn't practice > the Dhamma in the 7 remaining lifetimes, he will still become an > arahat eventually at the 7th rebirth?" This question is moot > because it would be impossible for such a person not to practice > the Dhamma for those remaining births. Just as I wrote to > Christine about accumulations, and her response, when certain > tendencies build up, and certain insights are reached, there is > no going back and no way to stop the eventual progression. Somehow I agree with you. But I am interested in how the Abhidhamma explains why it's at most 7 rebirths. > I speak from personal experience. I am not sure if I am a > Sotapanna, and, as Rhett Butler said, "Frankly, Scarlett, I don't > give a damn." But I do know that I was born with an insatiable > appetite to know the meaning of life from a very young age. While > other children read `Hardy Boys', I read books on religions and > Haiku Zen poetry. This was not something that I chose or could > control. And believe me, I tried many times to forget the whole > thing and be like the people around me, but it never worked. I > always gravitated back to the larger questions of life and > Buddhism. Probably most everyone in this group is the same way… > including you. Once you taste that Forbidden Apple of Dhamma, > there is no going back. My appetite to know the meaning of life came when I was a teenager. The path from Christianity to Theravada Buddhism was long and arduous and painful and sad, but it's very worthwhile. NEO Swee Boon 17758 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 1:29am Subject: Re: Why does a sotapanna has only at most 7 remaining rebirths? Hi Swee Boon, I have always wondered about that wording too, particularly the words 'at most' which indicate the number of lives could be a lot less. Nyanatiloka's dictionary throws some light on the matter. There are three kinds of sotapanna, as seen below. I think the characteristic qualities of a Stream Winner, the sotápannassa angáni, mean that they would, by accumulations, be compelled by an interest in the Dhamma, the Sangha, and the Buddha to continue forward on the Path. No choice, no control. :-) metta, Christine http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm sotápanna: the 'Stream-winner', is the lowest of the 8 noble disciples (s. ariya-puggala). Three kinds are to be distinguished: the one 'with 7 rebirths at the utmost' (sattakkhattu-parama), the one 'passing from one noble family to another' (kolankola), the one 'germinating only once more' (eka-bíjí). As it is said (e.g. Pug. 37-39; A. III, 87): (1) "If a man, after the disappearance of the 3 fetters (personality- belief, skeptical doubt, attachment to rules and ritual; s. samyojana), has entered the stream (to Nibbána), he is no more subject to rebirth in lower worlds, is firmly established, destined to full enlightenment. After having passed amongst the heavenly and human beings only seven times more through the round of rebirths, he puts an end to suffering. Such a man is called 'one with 7 births at the utmost' (sattakkhattu-parama). (2) "If a man, after the disappearance of the 3 fetters.... is destined to full enlightenment, he, after having passed among noble families two or three times through the round of rebirths, puts an end to suffering. Such a man is called 'one passing from one noble family to another' (kolankola). (3) "If a man, after the disappearance of the 3 fetters.... is destined to full enlightenment, he, after having only once more returned to human existence, puts an end to suffering. Such a man is called 'one germinating only once more' (eka-bíjí). See Sotápatti- Samyutta (S. LV). sotápannassa angáni: the 'characteristic qualities of a Stream- winner' are 4: unshakable faith towards the Enlightened One, unshakable faith towards the Doctrine, unshakable faith towards the Order, and perfect morality. Explained in S. LV, I, D. 33, in S. XLVII, 8 and in Netti-ppakarana these 4 qualities are called sotápattiyanga (q.v.). sotápattiyanga: the 4 (preliminary) 'conditions to Stream-entry' are: companionship with good persons, hearing the Good Law, wise reflection, living in conformity with the Law (S. LV, 5; D. 33). Cf. sotápannassa angáni. --- "nidive " wrote: > Dear James > > > I am not sure about the number 7 rebirths for a Sotapanna or even > > where you get that information; but the number isn't important > > really. > > Samyutta Nikaya XIII.1 > Nakhasikha Sutta > > NEO Swee Boon 17759 From: nidive Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 1:59am Subject: Psychic Experiences Dear Everybody, I don't know whether this is off-topic or not. But since the Buddha talked about abhinna powers, I would like to discuss about my own 'psychic experiences' which I could still remember. I had my first psychic experience at age 15/16. At that time, I had bought a book on psychic trainings. It taught how one could know about something through the 'third-eye'. After some practice, I had my first psychic experience. I focused the 'third-eye' on the 4-D lottery outcome for that weekend. And guess what? 4 digits appeared in my 'third-eye' vision. Did that number appear in the lottery outcome? Yes, it did. But it appeared only for the next weekend as the first prize but it was not in sequence. This happened not only once, but a few times, including hearing a generic voice (by focusing on the clairaudience reception area) telling me about a 4-D number that came up the same weekend. It was pretty scary hearing such a generic voice. But it only occurred once. As I grew up, these ability died down. Sometimes, just before going to sleep, I have this kind of experience. I would hear some sort of funny conversations going on, with different kind of voices. Often I couldn't understand what is being said, but I just could hear people talking, even though my physical surroundings is as quiet as a mouse. These mind voices can be very interesting and I know I am not talking to myself. They are voices that are not mine. Another experience was while riding in a friend's car. All of a sudden, I just had this premonition/pre-knowledge that we are going to get into some accident. And sure enough, we got into an accident not long afterwards. I felt befuddled by the experience. And my last vivid experience was about one/two weeks before the Sep 11 tragedy last year. I was taking a light afternoon nap when I had this sudden vision of an airline plane slamming into the middle of a tall building. Immediately I woke up. I thought I was dreaming about some movie I had saw. But I could not recollect any movie that I had seen that had such an image. After some time, I forgot about it. Several days later, I watched the very tragedy live on television. Also, when I was young, I had this habit of watching and noticing the clouds pass by the window while I lay down on my bed. It is kind of a meditation in that the whole mind is fixated on the movement of the clouds. Somehow, this appears to be practising some form of concentration although I am not sure. Sometimes, when I am walking around the house and thinking deeply about some aspects of the Dhamma, I would experience momentary 'goose-bumps' all over the body. It is like having electricity running through the body. It last only for a few seconds each time. But I also recall that when I was a Christian, I experience this kind of 'goose-bumps' when I think deeply about some aspects of the Holy Trinity. I don't know if any of you had such experiences or not. I know people seldom discuss such things because it is uncommon. But since this is Theravada Buddhism, I find it alright to talk about them. If I had talked such things to a Christian, they would think that I am the Devil. Or that I am crazy. But I know I am not crazy. These are my real experiences. NEO Swee Boon 17760 From: Sarah Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 2:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mana (conceit) Hi Christine, I appreciated your post on mana very much......the supermarket checkout scenario (or queues for check in at Brisbane airport;-)) are familiar scenarios......in fact I could probably add a book of scenarios in a day ;-(. Nina gave some simple little examples in the India series at Sarnath, I recall but I am a bit rushed to find now. It can be just little things like the way someone dresses, susceptibility to the sun or sickness, how someone walks ..... it sneaks in all the time. I find it particularly helpful to reflect on how it it prevents metta from arising, esp. as we've been discussing metta so much. when there is conceit, there is concern for oneself, no kindness or consideration for others. In K.Sujin's book on "Metta' (I don't think it's on the net ) , in the first paragraph in ch 1, she discusses how when there is metta: "At such moments the citta is gentle, there is no conceit, mana, which is the condition for asserting oneself, for showing one's own importance and for disparaging others." Just a little later, she says "Conceit is a defilement which is an impediment to metta. When there is metta we think of the well-being of someone else, whereas when there is conceit we find ourselves important..." It is followed by the Atthasalini quote about "Flaunting a Flag". --- "christine_forsyth " < >topic > on Mana please? Just imagine if I could have clicked on that, I > wouldn't have had to do all the considering and reflecting ... ahh! .... Perhaps that would have been too easy and we've have missed out on all your very helpful considering and reflecting;-) You mentioned timing.....maybe now you might like to look in U.P. under conceit: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts ***** Conceit (mana) 4072, 4405, 7594, 11570, 11650, 11866, 12931, 13626, 13674 Conceit vs wrong view of self 11868 ***** Thanks again for all your contributions, Sarah ====== 17761 From: Star Kid Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 2:26am Subject: About Trees Dear Janet Chui, I really think that your right that we need fresh air and because if we cut all the trees down they might not be able to reproduce seeds. Is Philip a good brother? Yes,I do speak French and what do you think about Buddhism? From Charles (C.B.) 17762 From: Star Kid Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 2:28am Subject: About Alex Dear Robert, Does Alex know about Nintendo game cube, Nintendo, X-box, play station or playststion 2? Please tell me about kamma. From Charles (C.B.) 17763 From: Star Kid Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 2:30am Subject: A letter to..... Dear James, Thank you for teaching me about Buddhism. It reminds me about I did something wrong in school, at home...... By the way, what are simple questions? Please write to me soon. With love, Janet. 17764 From: Star Kid Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 2:34am Subject: Letter to xxxxx Dear James, I'm Kimmy, I have read through the letter from you to Janet (17595). I think Janet should listen to your advice and I am really sorry about the death of your sister. My situation is similar to Janet's. I have 2 elder brothers. They always played tricks on me when I was young. I hated their tricks very much. However, since one of them had gor married and the other one is studying in university, they don't have anytime to play with me. The worst is I like and miss their tricks and want to play with them very much now!! I hope Janet will also understand the importance of her brother. I am glad your letter leads me too think a lot about life and Buddhism. Kimmy 17765 From: Star Kid Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 2:40am Subject: Thank you > xxxxx!!! Dear James : Hello James. I am Kiana.Thank you very much for your reply, and your answer about "Life & Death". I know that is a deep question and answer for different person, but really thanks for your opinion. Actually, I could understand your letter . You are really good at explain. Your short story about the Christmas present is really nice. You are also right, everyone will have different choice, like different person will have different advanture and different choice. Finally I want to ask a question about 'life & Death" Is there any person is reborn? Thank you > James Love, Kiana. 17766 From: chase8383 Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 3:37am Subject: Letting our notions fall away (Re: If volition is conditioned)/ David Hello the Aussie Christine: "I wonder if we could both be right? :-) As I understand it, the arising of panna depends on conditions... hearing the true Dhamma, reflecting on this, and association with wise friends. Could my seeking answers fit within the 'hearing and reflecting on the Dhamma'? Perhaps with an emphasis initially on the 'hearing' part. And could your letting concepts fall away fit within the 'hearing and reflecting on the Dhamma' ... perhaps with an emphasis initially on the reflecting part?" I would say that that is true. It's kind of like a beginner, going to their first teaching and, hearing all this talk about no-self, they think, hey what got me here? Self did. "And, of course, after considering your post over the last couple of day, the benefit of association with wise friends goes without saying." Which is, of course, how I benefited. Leave the seeing in the seeing, the hearing the hearing, David 17767 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 4:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mana (conceit) Chris --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, ... <> I have noticed that for me there is an almost constant appraising of other people whom I encounter in the day – their ideas, speech or actions, their appearance, the reasons they do what they do, the way they behave towards me or others. This is sometimes readily apparent, at other times less so, but it is usually there bubbling away at some level or other. I believe this is an aspect of conceit -- I am judging (i.e., comparing) others by my own standards and values (i.e., to myself). Other aspects of conceit, or indications of its lurking presence, would perhaps include the aversion that arises when someone doesn't understand what I'm trying to say, is slow to respond, or for whatever reason 'gets on my nerves'. I suppose in these cases there is also at work a good dose of attachment to the way I would like things to be, but that attachment itself seems to be closely tied up with my idea of myself as compared to others. In fact, I would be inclined to think that whenever there is aversion that is not conditioned by an immediately experienced unpleasant object, there is a good chance that conceit is involved. An example of this might be the aversion that arises when I realise I am running late for an appointment. At root the concern may well be to do with how I am perceived in the eyes of others (unless it is simply a case of aversion at having made extra work for myself). Jon 17768 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 4:27am Subject: Re: About Alex --- Star Kid wrote: > Dear Robert, > > Does Alex know about Nintendo game cube, Nintendo, > X-box, play station or playststion 2? ________ Hi C.B. Yes, Alex is an authority on Playstation 1 and 2, and also has Nintendo. He asked me to buy Game Cube as well but I said no. Do you think I should? _________ > > Please tell me about kamma. __________ Well kamma is deep and hard to understand. It all depends on the mindstate. If the mind state is good then the action(kamma) is good. Sometimes it is hard to know whether the mindstate is good or not. I give you an example: I give a box of chocolates to my Thai language teacher . Is this good kamma? It depends. If I give hoping that she will give me extra marks or treat me better it is not really giving; it is more like a business deal. But if I give because I think of her enjoyment not wanting anything in return it is genuine giving and very good kamma. BTW it doesn't matter whether someone is Buddhist or not with regard to kamma. If they do good (even they don't know anything about kamma) then the result will be good. But the more we know about kamma the more we are encouraged to do good and the more we understand what 'good' really means. Best wishes RobertK > 17769 From: Date: Sat Dec 14, 2002 11:38pm Subject: Re: Contemplating Aging ([dsg] Re: Take Care of Yourself) Hi, Victor (and Christine) - In a message dated 12/14/02 11:00:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > Hi Christine, > > You can understand the teaching of anatta now. It is a simple > teaching, not a complicated one. > > The teaching itself is not difficult to understand. However, > sometime it is hard to accept something that is simple. > > Metta, > Victor > > =========================== Respectfully, I disagree. Seeing macroscopic change, and most importantly aging, illness, and death is a crucial part of the practice, but, by itself, is not the coup de grace. Seeing directly, by investigation, the radical impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, insubstantiality & impersonality of elements of experience at the microscopic level with the mind firm in powerful and unshakable concentration, mindfulness, and equanimity, with hindrances all in abeyance, is what finally does it. And this level of insight is usually difficult to reach and is difficult to grasp conceptually without the actual experience. The Buddha used dependent origination as a primary teaching tool for the tilakkhana, and when a follower told him he thought that that teaching was easily understandable, the Buddha admonished him saying that, no, it is a teaching that seems deep and is deep. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17770 From: Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 0:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/14/02 11:14:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > Now I'm totally confused. Since we are discussing two different issues > I'll just label them 1 &2: > > 1: When I asked if you thought kamma function controls the rupa of the > universe you said yes. Your response below doesn't seem to reference > that "yes". As an example of kamma function controlling the rupa of the > universe, if a meteor hit me in the head that would be due to kamma. Or, > our meeting is due to kamma. What did you mean when you agreed that > kamma function controls the rupa of the universe? > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: To me, rupa is a type of content of consciousness. It is not the knowing aspect, but the known aspect, and it is either visual, auditory, olfactory, gustatory, or tactile. All other apparent rupa, the so-called "external objects" such as trees, cars, people, and meteors, are, as usually perceived, mere pa~n~natti, imaginary projections into a physical world of our own making, and whose actual nature is that of internal, mental constructs built by sankharic, fomational operations on more elementary elements of experience. When you speak of being hit by a meteor, this is, to me, a "story", an occurrence in the constructed, projected world which is a kind of macroscopic shorthand for an extraordinarily complex series of internal experiential events. It is this "extraordinarily complex series of internal experiential events" which arises due to kamma. The kamma having the *single* greatest effect in one mindstream is the previous kamma of that very same mindstream, but the flow of experiences within one mindstream is not a funtion only of its own kamma, but, in varying degrees, and in a stupifyingly complex manner, the actions of other namarupic streams. To paraphrase William James, Joe, in his world, extends his hand to shake hands with John in Joe's world, and John, in John's world, puts out his hand to grasp Joe's in John's world. It's a bit like Indra's net, to steal a notion from Mahayana, where there exists a vast network of mirrors each reflected in all the others, creating an infinite interactive net of multiple levels of images (and images of images). I hope you get my view on this now, for I don't really know how to clarify it further. ------------------------------------------------------- > > 2: Is there such a phenomenon as sense consciousness? ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, do we see, hear, smell, taste, and touch? Then, yes. ----------------------------------------------------- Does sense> > consciousness have an object? > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. A sight, sound, odor, taste, or texture (or temperature). ---------------------------------------------------- Is consciousness of that object accurate?> > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Could you please explain precisely what you mean by that question, and what you think the answer is? That would help me. ---------------------------------------------------- Larry> > ========================= With metta, Howard > > Howard wrote: > Conventional world events are conditioned in the usual conventional > ways. (We can wish to fly, but that won't do it unless we board an > airplane or some such vehicle.) Generally, belief in the efficacy of > mere intention is a belief in magic. Mere intention is generally not an > adequate condition for most effects. > Of course intention can have a > desired effect psychologically, on oneself, due to belief in the > efficacy of intention, and it could also effect others in the same way > provided that they are also telepathic. Rites and rituals, however, are > actions intentionally carried out, but not intention themselves. They > also can have certain anticipated effects due to the belief of the > performer of the rites and rituals or of another intended "recipient" of > benefits of those rites and rituals. But generally, intention alone > won't hack it. For example, we can intend to attain jhanas, to develop > wisdom, and to achieve enlightenment until we are blue in the face, but > without taking the proper steps (volitionally, of course), the results > will not be achieved. > > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17771 From: Dion Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 5:25am Subject: Maybe a little message to help things along Do the majority of people in this dhamma study group practice the dhamma in their everyday life, or is this just intellectual ego-stroking to measure up against other people? When I read these postings, especially about Abhidhamma being relevent, irrelevent in every day life - I cannot help but think that perhaps "you" are missing something - a piece of insight, maybe. Hmmm. As far as that Nina person is concerned, her book isn't worth much of a read. I thumbed trough it at my university library. I'm not trying to offend. The Abhidhamma is not that difficult to read. My opinion: we should read as close to the original "source" as possible, but for the non- Pali scholars (me) trying to gt as close as possible might be the edition edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi (BPS/BPE). Works by "people" trying to explain something - too much is lost. The Pali Text Society had wonderful editions of the tripitika - we should read those also. Maybe people should work on trying to get these editions more readily available to the reading public, so that revisionism will not be so obvious. Our Lord Buddha mentioned a thing or two about misrepresenting his teachings, so we shouldn't do that. What frustrates me is when a writer tries to use nine different Pali terms in a sentence, but is a non-Buddhist... again - revisionism and delusions. If people want to qoute from the jewish scriptures - there has to be another room available for that....send those comments there, instead of here. Please keep this room free of non-teachings. For those trying to claim "he is just a ________", I'm also, fairly versed in the Qu'ran....but this is not the forum to discuss this. Stick to the Dhamma, please! Maybe I shouldn't have written this. Maybe I have good intentions - hoping to see an improvement in the dialogues. Let's not talk about new toys. We can practice the Abhidhamma in real, everyday life - without the confusion of Pali terms. Shall I explain? I shall like this: If I have to explain, then chances are "you" don't have enough "diligence" in your practice, you are not resolute or ardent in your efforts - its about practice, and that seems to be what most people lack, and are looking for the shortcut method to obtain liberation, etc... practice what you are reading in your "scriptures", not just talking about them. Nothing changes if you don't practice what you preach. By the way, I left the the Thammayut Theravada Monkhood, only to complete my "university" training. I need to know more about laylife and the wrong-teachings people try to pass off to each other. When people come to the Wat, they are very respectful and often fake, seeking gratification of some sort... The same type if people are rude to you after you take off the robes of the "priest". They run you down on the sidewalks, etc... They float around the market place with no direct intention on where they intend to walk, often stopping for no reason, right in front of you. This is not what you see in the Wat. The Abhidhamma is very effective in lay life, because you can use real situations that are constantly developing, and use your trained mind to avert, or elimate...even seek the root of ignorances, etc...of all that is around you. When people say that it is irrelevant, I can only think of how ignorant they are, selling books, gaining profits... I'm only 29 - about 7 years into this game of defending the dhamma from capitalistic exploiters. Practice, practice is what we must do - read about it in your suttas, or where ever you recieve your dhamma instruction. Its more than just breathing meditations....practice, practice... Just trying to help, -Dion 17772 From: peterdac4298 Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 6:46am Subject: Re: Bhikkhunis Hi Christine --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Peter, > > Your post is a crucially important one to me. I guess I've been > operating under false ideas of what underpinned Buddhism and the > Buddha's view of women. I guess I assumed he was trying not to create > alarm in a chauvinist society, so as to get the Sangha firmly > established. This may well have been the case, it has long been my own view too. He had compassion for all beings and structured training to suit each individual. At that time, and for centuries after, probably up until the industrial revolution or even the first world war, women en-mass never had an opportunity to experience the world out side their immediate home environs as men did. Alowing them into the Sangha, at that time, could have been as disastrous for them as it could have been for the institution itself. > I guess I thought the Buddha really saw no difference in > the value of males and females, but was constrained by the mores of a > conservative culture. He unhesitatingly and immediately agreed that they had an equal ability to penetrate the doctrine: maybe he wasn't so sure about their ability to adapt to the conditions of the homeless life. The Buddha was taking a very long term view. If there is one thing that can kill off a monastic community, it is lay gossip. It is probably the richest source of gossip there is, and in the absence of any competing media (not even written), was sure to have been richly elaborated and embellished: you sure don't want any of that establishing itself into the folklore of a new religious movement. The integrity of the Sangha in the eyes of the supporting communities was of paramount importance to the Buddha, not just so that most yogis could eat most days, but perhaps, more importantly, for the lay folk's practice to be open to the Dhamma too. The Tibetan monastery Samye Ling, that started up in Scotland during the sixties, suffered for years due to an incident where there was some careless nude bathing in a nearby river. Sixties style hippies saw nothing wrong with such a thing, but in spite of an immediate ban, it put up the backs of the local council and community for decades. Perhaps the Buddha anticipated something like this, and thus placed his eight cardinal points first. Perhaps "paranoia" (used in my previous post) was too strong a word, but if a Self Enlightened Being is to have any hypersensitivity at all it must surely be towards protecting his new community of disciples from malicious gossip: there latter being several instances of this, some against himself, in spite of all this. > I agree that these words "can't be explained > as some kind of slip of the tongue, or even playing to contemporary > sensibilities. These are powerful and systematic statements." > First though, I'll try to find the original Suttas that you allude to. According to "The Life of the Buddha", ~Naa.namoli:- Vinaya Pitaka Cullavagga 10:1 ; Anguttara Nikaaya 8:51. Also a reading of many of the stories behind the rules from the Bhikkhu and Bhikkhuni Vinaya may throw some useful light on the subject too. Also bear in mind that while Bhikkhunis could never criticize a Bhikkhu, there was plenty of scope for lay women to do so. > > Gratitude, > Christine Cheers Peter > > --- "peterdac4298 > " wrote: > > Hi Christine, Sarah, and all > > As most of us are aware, at the time of the Buddha, when Ananda > > thrice requested the admittance of women to the Sangha, the Buddha > > replied in what could be seen by todays standards as rather a > > derogatory, if not paranoid manner. > > > > He spoke about the Sasana lasting only half the time it originally > > would have. And also insisted on eight restrictions ('capital > > points', ~Naa.namoli) to be imposed on the nuns as a condition for > > their admittance. > > Cheers > > Peter 17773 From: ajahn_paul Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 6:47am Subject: I'd got my first Pali Dictionary Hi all, Just want to share with all of u that i'd got my first Pali dictionary. this is the only one i can find in Hong Kong, its a Pali- English-Chinese-Sanskrit, well, its not a good one, but its the only one with Chinese! (There is another 2, one is Pali-English, the other one is English-Pali, i think those r good! ^^) I'd tried to look for a Pali-Chinese Dictionary on internet,,,, yes, i'd found one, but not enough for me. In Southern Buddhism, im just one of the satrkids! hehehehe btw, i think its a good start! ^^ 17774 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 7:13am Subject: Contemplating Aging ([dsg] Re: Take Care of Yourself) Hi Christine, What is that everchanging process idea? Where did you get that idea from? Allow me to quote (again) from Samyutta Nikaya XXII.59, Anatta- lakkhana Sutta. The Buddha's instruction is stated as following: "Thus, monks, any body whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: every body is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.' "Any feeling whatsoever... "Any perception whatsoever... "Any fabrications whatsoever... "Any consciousness whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: every consciousness is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.' "Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with the body, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is depleted, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'" There is nothing wrong with being aware of yourself. Note that in the last paragraph of the quote, the Buddha's teaching on each and every aggregate being not self is not meant to deny self-awareness. You wrote that: I am reading about anatta or bringing its definition to mind, I don't feel any different now to how I have felt all my life, before I heard about the Anatta. I feel no different to when I thought my consciousness was a Soul. I am 'that'. This is how I see it, and I might be wrong: You feel no different because you have not been following the Buddha's instruction. Whatever 'that' is, be it conscsiousness or awareness, 'that' is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.' Regarding what Prof. Richard Hayes wrote, I think you might find the article "Romancing the Buddha" by Thanissaro Bhikkhu in the Winter 2002 issue of Tricycle interesting. Here is the link to the excerpt http://www.tricycle.com/currentissue/thanissaro_bhikkhu.html Metta, Victor (I hope you find Tanha and Pema suttas relevant) --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Victor, > > I think I understand anatta intellectually. I'm happy with the > everchanging process idea. It's the personal identity bit that keeps > intruding. I seem to remember, though, that you didn't agree > entirely with Nyanatiloka's definition. When I say I don't > understand anatta - I mean I still feel that this 'me' is all I know, > it pervades my whole awareness. It IS my awareness of being. Unless > I am reading about anatta or bringing its definition to mind, I don't > feel any different now to how I have felt all my life, before I heard > about the Anatta. I feel no different to when I thought my > consciousness was a Soul. I am 'that'. > > I was reading a recent post by Prof. Richard Hayes elsewhere > entitled 'Yes Virginnia,there is a soul'. After a discussion around > what is the meaning of the word 'soul', he ends with a view that he > feels is both good Buddhism and good Jungianism. 'The soul is not of > a fixed nature but rather is always a work in progress. It is never > complete, never perfected. Also, to say that the soul is not the > self is to say that the soul is not autonomous, that it is > conditioned, that it is empty.' This is not so different to > Nyanatiloka's definition, no? > > metta, > Christine > (Thanks for the Tanha and Pema suttas re Mana - I've read them and > I'll think them over.) 17775 From: nidive Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 7:41am Subject: Re: Maybe a little message to help things along Hi Everybody, > Do the majority of people in this dhamma study group practice the > dhamma in their everyday life, or is this just intellectual > ego-stroking to measure up against other people? Maybe we should start a Dhamma Practice Group (DPG) to discuss about experiences encountered during our practices? NEO Swee Boon 17776 From: James Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 8:24am Subject: To Sandy and Kiana Hi Star Kids Sandy and Kiana! Sandy, you ask me, "Do Buddhists believe that there would be spirit after death?" and Kiana, you ask me, "Is there any person is reborn?" Both of these questions are similar so I going to write a letter to the both of you to answer. I hope you both don't mind. Thank you both for your questions and letters. It is good to hear from you again. Buddhists view the process of life and death as one of `rebirth' and not `reincarnation'. If you can understand the difference between these two things, you will understand a lot about Buddhism. Most religions in the world believe that we all have a soul, or spirit, that is unique to each of us, will go to heaven or hell, or will be reincarnated into different bodies when we die. Buddhists don't believe this (or aren't supposed to anyway). Buddhists believe that the body is the only thing there is, there is no soul inside, and that when the body dies it is simply transformed into another body; and this is called rebirth. Kind of like when you go to sleep it seems that you don't exist anymore, but you still do, and when you wake up you aren't really a different person, but you are still a little different. Life and death are very similar. Most people think that death is some sort of magical, weird, and unusual experience, but it really isn't. It is just like going to sleep and then waking up again…just a bit more dramatic. There is no reason to be afraid of death anymore than there is reason to be afraid of going to sleep. And neither one can be avoided. We all have to go to sleep eventually and we all have to die eventually. So, is that the end of that? Do we all just live and die, live and die, and live and die again, forever? Buddhists don't believe so (or aren't supposed to anyway). Buddhists believe that there is an end to this life and death process, and it is called Nibbana (or Nirvana). To understand this whole process, this process of life/death/nibbana, let me use a comparison. I am sure that at some point in your lives, you two have been in a revolving door. That is the type of door you will sometimes find at hotels or office buildings that doesn't open straight out, but goes round and round in a tube. It has different sections and you have to get inside one of the sections, push forward, and that will make the door turn. Then when you get to the inside of the building, you step out of the door. It is kinda fun and kinda scary, and it is a good comparison for the process I am describing. Imagine that you are in one of these revolving doors, just pushing forward, which carries you forward because you can't go back, and you go round and round. The harder you push, the faster the door goes. You could be stuck in that door forever! Going round and round in that door is like the process of life and death; in Buddhism it is called `The Wheel of Samsara'. But the Buddhist realizes that it is just a door, not the final destination. And that with each turn of the door, there is the opportunity to get out of it and go into Nibbana. But it takes many turns of the door, some time to get un-dizzy from the entire turning, and then you learn that there is an opening and you plan to take it. It is kinda scary because being in the revolving door of life and death has been so fun and familiar, but the Buddhist realizes that he/she isn't getting anywhere! So he/she will eventually step out of that revolving door and won't be reborn again. What is on the other side of that door? I don't know right now, I am still turning in the door. But I hope to find out someday. Metta, James 17777 From: peterdac4298 Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 8:54am Subject: Re: Maybe a little message to help things along Hi Dion Perhaps a few concrete examples would be of interest to the group, maybe include a few back-ground details, circumstances or even stories. Having been a Bhikkhu myself for some five rains many years ago, I know I'd find it interesting. No group is perfect and it is always possible to criticize: the cleaver part is to contribute. Cheers Peter --- "Dion " wrote: > Do the majority of people in this dhamma study group practice the > dhamma in their everyday life, or is this just intellectual ego- stroking to > measure up against other people? When I read these postings, > especially about Abhidhamma being relevent, irrelevent in every day > life - I cannot help but think that perhaps "you" are missing something - > a piece of insight, maybe. Hmmm. > > > I'm only 29 - > about 7 years into this game of defending the dhamma from capitalistic > exploiters. Practice, practice is what we must do - read about it in your > suttas, or where ever you recieve your dhamma instruction. Its more > than just breathing meditations....practice, practice... > > Just trying to help, > -Dion 17778 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 8:59am Subject: May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Howard, Sorry for being off-line for the past day and a half. After being on the road for five days a week for the past few weeks, my wife insisted that I do some Christmas shopping with her for the day and a half that I was home. I am now in an airport getting ready to take an overnight flight to Beijing. I will return home next Friday night. I'm going to take a stab at simplifying the similarities and differences between our views and then ask some questions. I will structure the post along the lines of the paramattha dhammas. Rupa ==== Rob and Howard are both phenomenologists. The only rupas on our radar screens are those that touch our mind. We make no statements about the rupas that do not touch our minds. Citta / Cetasika ================ I group these together as I consider them to be inseparable. Rob is a phenomenologist. The citta / cetasika of another person are not on my radar screen because they do not touch my mind. Conditions touch my mind and those conditions may have been caused by another person's citta / cetasika, but that doesn't count because it is indirect. Howard is a non-phenomenologist. You have said that kammic streams interact and influence each other. The Buddha said that volition is kamma and when reading analysis of Dependent Origination, it is clear that kamma is treated as the cetasika cetana. When you say that kammic streams interact, you are therefore saying that different people's cetasikas interact (at least the cetana cetasika) and because the cetana cetasika is inseperable from citta, this implies a collective consciousness. In contemporary terms, "The Force" from Star Wars (I chose Obi Wan, because he is the character whom you most closely resemble :-), as for me, I look more like Yoda). Nibbana ======= Rob is a phenomenologist. I see Nibbana as a purely personal experience. This topic has not come up. Howard, do you see Nibbana as pure personal or does it have a "collective" element? Howard, I am probably putting words in your mouth. Please correct me if I am wrong. If I am correct, could you give me some direct or indirect support for your view from the Tipitaka? Gotta run! Plane is boarding. Metta, Rob M :-) 17779 From: ajahn_paul Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 9:03am Subject: Re: May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Dear Rob, is that funny that u still celebrating x'mas but u r already a buddhist? ^_~ --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Howard, > > Sorry for being off-line for the past day and a half. After being on > the road for five days a week for the past few weeks, my wife > insisted that I do some Christmas shopping with her for the day and > a half that I was home. I am now in an airport getting ready to take > an overnight flight to Beijing. I will return home next Friday night. > 17780 From: chase8383 Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 9:08am Subject: Re: Maybe a little message to help things along Hi swee boon "Maybe we should start a Dhamma Practice Group (DPG) to discuss about experiences encountered during our practices?" I would like to think that's what most, who are here to practice the Dharma, are discussing. But as the Dalai Lama says, "If there is something here of interest to you, fine. If not, that's fine to." 17781 From: Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 5:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi, Rob - I'll need time to properly respond to this. My first thought is that, indeed, I do take a phenomenalist position, quite similar, in fact, to the Radical Empiricism of William James. But, hey, if that's not so, well that's okay. Just one little point here, if there is no interaction among namarupic streams, then we are not even communicating! Please look at my recent posts to Larry in this regard. Perhaps that will clarify my position. I will get back to you on this. (Nibbana is something I'd rather skip talking about. It is too remote from my experience for me to comment on in any useful way.) With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/15/02 12:00:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > Sorry for being off-line for the past day and a half. After being on > the road for five days a week for the past few weeks, my wife > insisted that I do some Christmas shopping with her for the day and > a half that I was home. I am now in an airport getting ready to take > an overnight flight to Beijing. I will return home next Friday night. > > I'm going to take a stab at simplifying the similarities and > differences between our views and then ask some questions. I will > structure the post along the lines of the paramattha dhammas. > > Rupa > ==== > Rob and Howard are both phenomenologists. The only rupas on our > radar screens are those that touch our mind. We make no statements > about the rupas that do not touch our minds. > > Citta / Cetasika > ================ > I group these together as I consider them to be inseparable. > > Rob is a phenomenologist. The citta / cetasika of another person are > not on my radar screen because they do not touch my mind. Conditions > touch my mind and those conditions may have been caused by another > person's citta / cetasika, but that doesn't count because it is > indirect. > > Howard is a non-phenomenologist. You have said that kammic streams > interact and influence each other. The Buddha said that volition is > kamma and when reading analysis of Dependent Origination, it is > clear that kamma is treated as the cetasika cetana. When you say > that kammic streams interact, you are therefore saying that > different people's cetasikas interact (at least the cetana cetasika) > and because the cetana cetasika is inseperable from citta, this > implies a collective consciousness. In contemporary terms, "The > Force" from Star Wars (I chose Obi Wan, because he is the character > whom you most closely resemble :-), as for me, I look more like > Yoda). > > Nibbana > ======= > Rob is a phenomenologist. I see Nibbana as a purely personal > experience. > > This topic has not come up. Howard, do you see Nibbana as pure > personal or does it have a "collective" element? > > > Howard, I am probably putting words in your mouth. Please correct me > if I am wrong. If I am correct, could you give me some direct or > indirect support for your view from the Tipitaka? > > Gotta run! Plane is boarding. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17782 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 10:50am Subject: RE: [dsg] Maybe a little message to help things along Dear Dion, Welcome to DSG. I am glad to hear about your interests in the Buddha's teachings. > -----Original Message----- > From: Dion > > Do the majority of people in this dhamma study > group practice the > dhamma in their everyday life, or is this just > intellectual ego-stroking to > measure up against other people? For the mind to be wholesome (kusala), it must have one of the 10 possible groups of objects as its object, starting from giving, abstention from wrong deeds, etc. Two of the objects include: 1) Listening to the dhamma 2) Explaining the dhamma to other people. Do you consider these activities to be fruitless? > As far as that Nina person is concerned, her book > isn't worth much of a > read. I thumbed trough it at my university > library. I'm not trying to > offend. I am not sure if you know. She's one of the participants of this group. She might eventually see this. > The Abhidhamma is not that difficult to > read. The Buddha's teachings are both profound and subtle. Dhamma is hard to know because even right now, when dhammas are appearing, we hardly know what it truly is. Visible object is appearing right now, but do we see directly (not just thinking) that it is just a rupa, that it is conditioned, that it doesn't last, that it is not self? All these things that the Buddha teaches, in the Vinaya, Sutta, and Abhidhamma is appearing now. Do we know for ourselves its characteristics as the Buddha has taught? For most people (which is why we are non-ariyans, and not an ariyan), the answer is no. I think many people in this group read/post the messages because it is a chance to discuss what one hears in order to verify one's understandings, or at least get different perspectives on what one has heard. Also, it is good to hear reminders about how the Buddha's teachings are relevant in our daily life. > My opinion: we > should read as close to the original "source" as > possible, but for the non- > Pali scholars (me) trying to gt as close as > possible might be the edition > edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi (BPS/BPE). I agree that reading close to the source has a better chance of it being close to what the Buddha teaches. > Works by > "people" trying to explain > something - too much is lost. On the other hand, people with the right understandings may be able to explain points that we wouldn't get for ourselves. Even in the Buddha's time, laypeople explains the dhamma to both laypeople and monks (even if most, if not all, of them are ariyans). > Our Lord > Buddha mentioned a thing or two about > misrepresenting his teachings, > so we shouldn't do that. I agree that we should do our best not to misrepresent the Buddha's teachings in anyway. > We can practice the Abhidhamma in real, everyday > life - without the > confusion of Pali terms. Shall I explain? I > shall like this: If I have to > explain, then chances are "you" don't have enough > "diligence" in your > practice, you are not resolute or ardent in your > efforts - its about > practice, and that seems to be what most people > lack, and are looking > for the shortcut method to obtain liberation, > etc... practice what you > are reading in your "scriptures", not just > talking about them. Nothing > changes if you don't practice what you preach. I think most people agree that without knowing directly for oneself the dhammas that the Buddha has taught, understanding intellectually the Buddha's teachings wouldn't help much. On the other hands, some people think having heard the Buddha's teachings, and resolving the difficult passages what one has heard, is a pre-requisite to the right practice. > you see in the Wat. The > Abhidhamma is very effective in lay life, because > you can use real > situations that are constantly developing, and I very much agree that the teachings of Abhidhamma is about daily life. I think many of us need all the help we can get in order to understand the dhammas, that would bring one to the right practice (the Buddha talked about the wrong practice too, and misunderstanding the teachings would bring one to the wrong practice). I think it would be useful to many people if you would share what you understand about the teachings and the practice, that is, if you are inclined to. Respectfully, kom 17783 From: Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 0:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Howard, Thanks for your reply. I think I now see where I was misunderstanding you. I thought you were saying there was no way to verify the reality of rupa, but, instead, you are saying rupa exists as a reality, separate from nama but usually "made sense of" by concepts. Correct? I have no problem with that. Actually I don't even have a problem with the questionable reality of rupa. I just couldn't follow your argument. So, where do we go from here? Abandon concepts, keep silent, and just be real or try to make sense out of "it"? If we try to make sense of it we have to make up stories and talk about good deeds and bad deeds, good fortune and bad fortune and why these happen. Don't we? If so, my contention is that all the rupa in anyone's life, including stuff that isn't either ultimately experienced or conceptually known, arose because of kammic intention. Is this what the Buddha taught? Isn't all rupa only kamma result? If you say only the touch of hardness on my head is kamma result, not the meteor flying through space, then I would say the hardness _is_ the meteor. Oddly enough, this thread has led me to the conclusion that rites and rituals are good. Rites and rituals are formalized intentions and intentions produce kammic results. In the practice of the Brahma Vihara all beings are pervaded with metta, for example. That is a formal intention that would benefit not only oneself, but also "all beings", to a limited extent, because the intention establishes a kammic connection. It must be that the reason rites and rituals are abandoned is because they don't lead directly to the cessation of the hindrances, taints, etc. Actually, I don't think there is such a thing as private values. When we sit in a certain way in the perceived imitation of the Buddha, even without explicitly thinking so, we are pervading all beings with this value because we think, at least subconsciously, we are being exemplary. Larry 17784 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 0:27pm Subject: Letting our notions fall away (Re: If volition is conditioned)/ David Hi David, Thanks for your post. A perennial thread in one form or another in this group is Anatta (no self) and its concomitants - Conditions, No-control, No Choice/Free- will. I would be interested if at any time you care to join in on any of these topics, or any other. We may not necessarily have the same take on everything, coming from different backgrounds, but I find your way of expressing things refeshing and it makes me think. I remember your great post on how you came to buddhism (dsg. no. 17442). Coming to the Dhamma out of suffering, gives one more sticking power I think (and you seem to have found the Dhamma long before you found Buddhism, as I remember) - we know what the alternative is, because dukkha caused us to look for the answers in other places, but we were lucky enough to stumble on our true home. You're 'a yank' I assume, David - from the Eastcoast, Westcoast or the Heartland? metta, Christine --- "chase8383 " wrote: > Hello the Aussie > > Christine: "I wonder if we could both be right? :-) > As I understand it, the arising of panna depends on conditions... > hearing the true Dhamma, reflecting on this, and association with wise friends. Could my seeking answers fit within the 'hearing and reflecting on the Dhamma'? Perhaps with an emphasis initially on the 'hearing' part. And could your letting concepts fall away fit within the 'hearing and reflecting on the Dhamma' ... perhaps with an emphasis initially on the reflecting part?" > > I would say that that is true. It's kind of like a beginner, going to their first teaching and, hearing all this talk about no-self, they think, hey what got me here? Self did. > > > "And, of course, after considering your post over the last couple of day, the benefit of association with wise friends goes without saying." > > Which is, of course, how I benefited. > > Leave the seeing in the seeing, the hearing the hearing, David 17785 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 1:41pm Subject: Contemplating Aging ([dsg] Re: Take Care of Yourself) Hi Howard, What is it that you disagree? Metta, Victor --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Victor (and Christine) - > > In a message dated 12/14/02 11:00:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, > yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > > > > Hi Christine, > > > > You can understand the teaching of anatta now. It is a simple > > teaching, not a complicated one. > > > > The teaching itself is not difficult to understand. However, > > sometime it is hard to accept something that is simple. > > > > Metta, > > Victor > > > > > =========================== > Respectfully, I disagree. Seeing macroscopic change, and most > importantly aging, illness, and death is a crucial part of the practice, but, > by itself, is not the coup de grace. Seeing directly, by investigation, the > radical impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, insubstantiality & impersonality of > elements of experience at the microscopic level with the mind firm in > powerful and unshakable concentration, mindfulness, and equanimity, with > hindrances all in abeyance, is what finally does it. And this level of > insight is usually difficult to reach and is difficult to grasp conceptually > without the actual experience. The Buddha used dependent origination as a > primary teaching tool for the tilakkhana, and when a follower told him he > thought that that teaching was easily understandable, the Buddha admonished > him saying that, no, it is a teaching that seems deep and is deep. > > With metta, > Howard 17786 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 3:43pm Subject: Contemplating Aging ([dsg] Re: Take Care of Yourself) Hi Victor, and All, Victor: 'What is that everchanging process idea? Where did you get that idea from?' C: Basically, I got it from the Nyanatiloka's dictionary in particular, and the Majjhima Nikaya in general. Have I misunderstood in some way, I would welcome anyone's clarification? I found Nyanatiloka's dictionary meaning of dhatus, ayatanas and khandas helpful, and his meaning for anatta also, which is posted below: anattá: 'not-self', non-ego, egolessness, impersonality, is the last of the three characteristics of existence (ti-lakkhana, q.v.) The anattá doctrine teaches that neither within the bodily and mental phenomena of existence, nor outside of them, can be found anything that in the ultimate sense could be regarded as a self-existing real ego-entity, soul or any other abiding substance. This is the central doctrine of Buddhism, without understanding which a real knowledge of Buddhism is altogether impossible. It is the only really specific Buddhist doctrine, with which the entire Structure of the Buddhist teaching stands or falls. All the remaining Buddhist doctrines may, more or less, be found in other philosophic systems and religions, but the anattá-doctrine has been clearly and unreservedly taught only by the Buddha, wherefore the Buddha is known as the anattá-vádi, or 'Teacher of Impersonality'. Whosoever has not penetrated this impersonality of all existence, and does not comprehend that in reality there exists only this continually self-consuming process of arising and passing bodily and mental phenomena, and that there is no separate ego-entity within or without this process, he will not be able to understand Buddhism, i.e. the teaching of the 4 Noble Truths (sacca, q.v.), in the right light. He will think that it is his ego, his personality, that experiences suffering, his personality that performs good and evil actions and will be reborn according to these actions, his personality that will enter into Nibbána, his personality that walks on the Eightfold Path. Thus it is said in Vis.M. XVI: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; Nibbána is, but not the man that enters it; The path is, but no traveler on it is seen." "Whosoever is not clear with regard to the conditionally arisen phenomena, and does not comprehend that all the actions are conditioned through ignorance, etc., he thinks that it is an ego that understands or does not understand, that acts or causes to act, that comes to existence at rebirth .... that has the sense-impression, that feels, desires, becomes attached, continues and at rebirth again enters a new existence" (Vis.M. XVII, 117). The Majjhima Nikaya Suttas are: MN11 Culasinhanada Sutta 'The Shorter Discourse on the Lion's Roar' The Buddha compares his teaching point by point with those of other recluses and brahmins and shows that beneath their apparent similaritiies, they finally diverge on just this one crucial point - the rejection of view of self - which undermines the agreements. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/011-culasihanada-sutta-e1.htm MN22 Alagaddupama Sutta 'The Simile of the Snake' Here the Buddha offers a series of arguments against the view of self culminating in the Buddha's declaration that he does not see any doctrine of self that would not lead to sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/022-alagagaddupama-sutta-e1.htm MN28 Mahahatthipadopama Sutta 'The Greater Discourse on the Simile of the Elephant's Footprint' The Buddha brands six views of self as "the thicket of views, the wilderness of views, the contortion of views, the vacillation of views, the fetter of views." http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/028-mahahatthipadopama-sutta- e1.htm MN35 Culasaccaka Sutta 'The Shorter Discourse to Saccaka' A debate between the Buddha and Saccaka, a wandering ascetic, on the subject of atta, (Self, Soul, Ego). The Buddha pointed out that none of the khandha was atta, each being subject to impermanence, pain and change, and not being amenable to one's control and wishes. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/035-culasaccaka-sutta-e1.htm MN102 Pancattaya Sutta 'The Five and Three' The Buddha undertakes a far-reaching survey of the various propositions put forth about the self, declaring them all to be "conditioned and gross". http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/102-pancattaya-e.htm MN148 Chachakka Sutta 'The Six Sets of Six' The Buddha demonstrates by reductio ad absurdum argument that impermanence implies non-self: when all the factors of being are clearly subject to rise and fall, to identiy anything among them with self is to be left with the untenable thesis that self is subject to rise and fall. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/148-chachakka-e.htm Victor, from your current remarks, (and previous posts on this subject):""There is nothing wrong with being aware of yourself. Note that in the last paragraph of the quote, the Buddha's teaching on each and every aggregate being not self is not meant to deny self-awareness." I still get the impression that you are saying there is 'something' standing behind and separate from the khandas. Am I misunderstanding you? metta, Christine "For sweet taste - honey, For Truth - Abhidhamma! " --- "yu_zhonghao " wrote: > Hi Christine, > > What is that everchanging process idea? Where did you get that idea > from? > > Allow me to quote (again) from Samyutta Nikaya XXII.59, Anatta- > lakkhana Sutta. 17787 From: jonoabb Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 4:03pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi, Steve --- Bodhi2500@a... wrote: ... > Does anyone know what the Abhidhamma states as Nibbana's own > charateristics(sabhava??)? Here is an answer from the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha: CMA Ch VI. Compendium of Matter "#31 Analysis ... Nibbana is onefold according to its intrinsic nature, by reference to a basis (for distinction) ... Guide to #31 Nibbana is a single undifferentiated ultimate reality. It is exclusively supramundane, and has one intrinsic nature (sabhava), which is that of being the unconditioned deathless element totally transcendent to the conditioned world. ..." I haven't come across anything in the Abhidhamma itself. Jon 17788 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 4:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Larry, I see that you and Howard have been continuing this discussion while I was doing Christmas shopping. Rather than barge into that thread, I will respond to your original post. --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Rob (& Howard), > > In my opinion kamma must reach from javana, through vipaka and > subsequent remembering of accumulations to the next javana and must > necessarily include the object of vipaka. ===== You are correct; kamma does come from javana; specifically the cetana cetasika in the javana citta. This is the "seed", the "potential". At any one instant there are a gazilion "seeds" waiting for the right conditions to become vipaka. Once this vipaka has arisen, the arising of the subsequent javana depends on conditions (including current object) and accumulations (i.e. habits / tendencies). I am not sure about your use of the term "remembering"; thinking about accumulations is a completely separate activity, which itself will depend on accumulations to reflection (a habit of analyzing). ===== > Since that object is often > rupa then the intention of kamma must coordinate with the physical > universe in order to resolve the kamma. ===== I'm not realy clear on what you are saying here. If "resolve the kamma" means the arising of vipaka, if "intention of kamma" is the kammic potential created by a past action, if "physical universe" means conditions, then this sentence becomes, "kammic potential coordinates with conditions to allow vipaka to arise". This is a true statement. ===== > If I walk outside and get hit in > the head by a meteor it is because some javana citta in my past arranged > for a meeting between my head continuum and the meteor. How this could > happen is something only the Buddha would know. ===== If you walk outside and get hit in the head by a meteor, it is because conditions were right for an akusala "kammic potential" to ripen into a vipaka. A plant does not grow because the seed arranged for sun, rain and fertile soil to come into existence. The seed and the proper conditions arose at the same time to allow a plant to grow. ===== > > As to the reality of rupa, even if you think rupa is only immaginary, > probably you would still accept that an eye cannot see without > consciousness. That is the nama rupa distinction. ===== Rupa is not imaginary. Rupa is real; it is a paramattha dhamma. The point of the phenomenologists is the definition of "rupa". To me, something qualifies as "rupa" only when it contacts nama. To me, nama and rupa are co-dependent; nama depends on rupa (nama needs a base) and rupa depends on nama (by definition). The "stuff" that doesn't touch nama (i.e. the "sound" falling in the forest with none to hear) is not defined as rupa. This "stuff" is not on my radar screen. I don't make any statements about this "stuff" (existence / non-existence or otherwise) because it does not impact ethics. ===== > Actually, I think there are three kinds of rupa: rupa the physical > phenomenon, rupa that is translated by sensory nerves into a > consciousness-like phenomenon which is experienced by as many as 17 > cittas in a row in citta process, and rupa that is the experience of > rupa. This might entail that there are two kinds of consciousness: one > the regular consciousness that experiences objects and the other that > specifically translates physical rupa into 'mental' rupa at the senses. > Agreed? ===== There is one kind of rupa; physical phenomena which touches nama. I add in the qualification "which touches nama" because I am a phenomenologist. Others in the DSG may prefer a wider definition which includes physical phenomena which do not touch nama. I do not consider physical phenomena which does not touch nama to be a concern of Buddhism because Buddhism is concerned with ethics and physical phenomena which does not touch nama has no bearing on ethics. In the Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta (the famous poison arrow sutta), Malunkyaputta asked the Buddha a lot of abstract questions; the Buddha refused to answer because the questions were outside the scope of His teaching. In this Sutta, the Buddha clearly defined the scope of His teaching, "And what is disclosed by me? 'This is stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This is the origination of stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This is the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by me. And why are they disclosed by me? Because they are connected with the goal, are fundamental to the holy life. They lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding. That's why they are disclosed by me." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn063.html I believe that physical phenomena which does not touch nama is outside the scope of the Buddha's teaching because it does not touch the Four Noble Truths (i.e. it is not concerned with ethics). Does my post help, or does it confuse the issue further? Metta, Rob M :-) 17789 From: Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 11:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/15/02 3:28:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Thanks for your reply. I think I now see where I was misunderstanding > you. I thought you were saying there was no way to verify the reality of > rupa, but, instead, you are saying rupa exists as a reality, separate > from nama but usually "made sense of" by concepts. Correct? > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Basically yes. The conceptual level of understanding is a useful one, a needed one, but not the deepest one. The deepest level of understanding is the level of insight. ------------------------------------------------ > > I have no problem with that. Actually I don't even have a problem with > the questionable reality of rupa. I just couldn't follow your argument. > > So, where do we go from here? Abandon concepts, keep silent, and just be > real or try to make sense out of "it"? > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Concepts cannot, pragmatically, be abandoned. But their nature should be clearly seen and understood, else they will be delusive. ------------------------------------------------ > > If we try to make sense of it we have to make up stories and talk about > good deeds and bad deeds, good fortune and bad fortune and why these > happen. Don't we? If so, my contention is that all the rupa in anyone's > life, including stuff that isn't either ultimately experienced or > conceptually known, arose because of kammic intention. Is this what the > Buddha taught? Isn't all rupa only kamma result? ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I believe so. It is all kamma vipaka, but not necessarily the vipaka of the kamma of a single person. The "world" is a shared, jointly created, intersubjective one, as I see it. If the positions (a) "There exists a separate, objective, mind-independent, external world of matter" (a position that I consider substantialist, and unacceptable) and (b) "There is an interaction of namarupic streams conceptually projecting a shared world" (the position I do adopt) are both false, then solipsism would be the only philosophical choice remaining. If I believed in solipsism, however, I would certainly not be spending so much time in discussions on DSG! ;-) ---------------------------------------------- > > If you say only the touch of hardness on my head is kamma result, not > the meteor flying through space, then I would say the hardness _is_ the > meteor. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: The "meteor" as external object is but a useful fiction. The meteor as concept is mind-constructed, is the basis for the projected "external-object meteor", and is a kammic result, and, thus, in a sense, the "external-object meteor" is a kammic result as well. -------------------------------------------------- > > Oddly enough, this thread has led me to the conclusion that rites and > rituals are good. Rites and rituals are formalized intentions and > intentions produce kammic results. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Rites and rituals may be carried out with intention or perfunctorily. In either case, there will be consequences. The consequences may be good or bad, and they may be intended or unintended. A rite or ritual involving applying a match to a candle wick will have the consequence of lighting the candle, and that, together with the beliefs of the participants, may lead to feelings of inspiration or awe or, if the candle is black, perhaps to terror. Actions have consequences. So what? Some actions are useful for certain purposes, and others are not. Particulary important to understand, I think, is that mere intention (or wishing) not implemented by *appropriate* actions, will not lead to intended consequences. ----------------------------------------------------- In the practice of the Brahma Vihara> > all beings are pervaded with metta, for example. That is a formal > intention that would benefit not only oneself, but also "all beings", to > a limited extent, because the intention establishes a kammic connection. > --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Possibly so. That does seem to be true. The primary effect, though, as I see it, is to the mind filled with metta, itself. --------------------------------------------------------- > It must be that the reason rites and rituals are abandoned is because > they don't lead directly to the cessation of the hindrances, taints, > etc. > > Actually, I don't think there is such a thing as private values. When we > sit in a certain way in the perceived imitation of the Buddha, even > without explicitly thinking so, we are pervading all beings with this > value because we think, at least subconsciously, we are being exemplary. > -------------------------------------------- Howard: Heh, heh, heh! ;-)) You're a crypto-Mahayanist, Larry - just like me! ;-) --------------------------------------------- > > Larry > > ======================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17790 From: Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 0:10pm Subject: Re: Contemplating Aging ([dsg] Re: Take Care of Yourself) Hi, Victor - In a message dated 12/15/02 4:43:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > What is it that you disagree? > > Metta, > Victor > ======================== I thought I made it rather clear, Victor. I do not believe that the teaching of anatta is a simple one or is easy to understand. In fact, the Buddha made it clear that his teaching goes against the stream of common understanding, that it is deep, and that it is not easy to understand. In particular, I disagreed that becoming aware of the suffering associated with aging, illness, and death is remotely enough to see the reality of anatta and attain the goal. If it were, the world would be filled with arahants. With metta, Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi, Victor (and Christine) - > > > >In a message dated 12/14/02 11:00:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, > >yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > > >> > >>Hi Christine, > >> > >>You can understand the teaching of anatta now. It is a simple > >>teaching, not a complicated one. > >> > >>The teaching itself is not difficult to understand. However, > >>sometime it is hard to accept something that is simple. > >> > >>Metta, > >>Victor > >> > >> > >=========================== > > Respectfully, I disagree. Seeing macroscopic change, and > most > >importantly aging, illness, and death is a crucial part of the > practice, but, > >by itself, is not the coup de grace. Seeing directly, by > investigation, the > >radical impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, insubstantiality & > impersonality of > >elements of experience at the microscopic level with the mind firm > in > >powerful and unshakable concentration, mindfulness, and equanimity, > with > >hindrances all in abeyance, is what finally does it. And this level > of > >insight is usually difficult to reach and is difficult to grasp > conceptually > >without the actual experience. The Buddha used dependent > origination as a > >primary teaching tool for the tilakkhana, and when a follower told > him he > >thought that that teaching was easily understandable, the Buddha > admonished > >him saying that, no, it is a teaching that seems deep and is deep. > > > >With metta, > >Howard > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17791 From: Ven. Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 1:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Maybe a little message to help things along Contextual reply below: ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 8:25 AM Subject: [dsg] Maybe a little message to help things along > Do the majority of people in this dhamma study group practice the > dhamma in their everyday life, or is this just intellectual ego-stroking to > measure up against other people? This is a fair question, however, what is the source of that question? It reads well until one continues reading. How is it that one can garner so much from mere emails? > When I read these postings, > especially about Abhidhamma being relevent, irrelevent in every day > life - I cannot help but think that perhaps "you" are missing something - > a piece of insight, maybe. Hmmm. > And what are you missing? This is a fair question, too, and there is no hidden agenda here or any attempt to make an ad hominem attack. > As far as that Nina person is concerned, her book isn't worth much of a > read. I thumbed trough it at my university library. I'm not trying to > offend. Things started to come across as possibly offensive before the above. If Nina's book is not worth much a read, what can you offer from another source/resource, or perhaps you have something to teach here? Honestly, so far there is not much to gain here from what you have written. > The Abhidhamma is not that difficult to read. This is a sharp area for disagreement. I do not agree with your statement above at all. Perhaps the words are easy to read but the depth and height of the material, i.e., Abhidhamma is very difficult. I read your statement wondering where you can express such a notion. > My opinion: Suppose you were asked to not deal in "opinion", and suppose you were told that the Dhamma (Buddhadhamma) does not deal in opinion, speculation, the hypothetical, and the like. Could you deal in relative, as well as absolute truth? Suppose further that one's opinion may, in fact, be quite tainted, and the meaning here is simply that one's opinion is "wrong view". In the same manner, suppose the opinion you give is based on this: "Ditthibhinivesa" : Firm belief induced by error. Perhaps something helpful here is to realize that many putthjana (worldlings) suffer owing to ignorance (avijja) --- which can be explained in three short references: 1.. Sanna-vipallasa: hallucination of perception; 2.. Citta-vipallasa: hallucination of thought; 3.. Ditthi-vipallasa: hallucination of views. And, "hallucination" is by no means the wrong word to use here at all! Now, add "fantasy" to that. (tanha-mannana, mana-mannana, ditthi-mannana). >we should read as close to the original "source" as possible, but for the non- > Pali scholars (me) trying to gt as close as possible might be the edition > edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi (BPS/BPE). The "we" in your statement above comes off as dictatorial. Also, I have heard that "should" can be a very tyranical word. > Works by "people" trying to explain > something - too much is lost. While the above is true to a certain extent, there is also a need for explanations. The Dhamma supports investigation of these matters, too. So, what is lost on one hand, has a complimentary position, too: look was is not lost but gained! > The Pali Text Society had wonderful > editions of the tripitika - we should read those also. "We" "should" not do anything. You might need to do just that, but when you live in a very poor country with subsistence dirt farmers who are illiterate but know the Dhamma from practice and experience, would you dictate what "they" should read? > Maybe people > should work on trying to get these editions more readily available to the > reading public, so that revisionism will not be so obvious. Our Lord > Buddha mentioned a thing or two about misrepresenting his teachings, > so we shouldn't do that. > What is before should/should not, in the middle of that, and at the end? Perhaps people need to read less and spend more time in practice. > What frustrates me is when a writer tries to use nine different Pali > terms in a sentence, but is a non-Buddhist... again - revisionism and > delusions. Can you show us specifically what you mean here and render some sources and resources for example? (I was wondering when you would share that you are frustrated!) > If people want to qoute from the jewish scriptures - there > has to be another room available for that....send those comments there, > instead of here. Let people express views. Period. The moderators know well what to do --- but constraining people will not help them on the Path --- remember, "Right View/Right Understanding" comes first. > Please keep this room free of non-teachings. Please define "non-teachings". > For > those trying to claim "he is just a ________", I'm also, fairly versed in > the Qu'ran....but this is not the forum to discuss this. Stick to the > Dhamma, please! > Suppose there are noteworthy things in other scriptures and other doctrines --- and these things lead directly to the Dhamma --- offering a kind of completion for those who want to know, experience, and gain insight and wisdom from a full understand of the Dhamma? Please do keep "freedom" in this room! > Maybe I shouldn't have written this. I have found that waiting to post something is good. It seems that quite often, people post without taking time to see if what they are sending out is the intended message. > Maybe I have good intentions - Yes, I would think that you do! > hoping to see an improvement in the dialogues. Let's not talk about > new toys. > Hope has a partner: despair; belief has a partner: doubt. What about realism? > We can practice the Abhidhamma in real, everyday life - without the > confusion of Pali terms. Shall I explain? I shall like this: If I have to > explain, then chances are "you" don't have enough "diligence" in your > practice, you are not resolute or ardent in your efforts - its about > practice, and that seems to be what most people lack, and are looking > for the shortcut method to obtain liberation, etc... practice what you > are reading in your "scriptures", not just talking about them. Nothing > changes if you don't practice what you preach. > Yes, I agree that practice is where to get the view in line and in order --- but read back your post to yourself. Do not forget that your audience is made up of all kinds of persons. I was uncomfortable with the impression of what I saw as nearly dogmatic on your part and dictatorial. > By the way, I left the the Thammayut Theravada Monkhood, only to > complete my "university" training. I need to know more about laylife > and the wrong-teachings people try to pass off to each other. When > people come to the Wat, they are very respectful and often fake, > seeking gratification of some sort... The same type if people are rude > to you after you take off the robes of the "priest". They run you down > on the sidewalks, etc... They float around the market place with no > direct intention on where they intend to walk, often stopping for no > reason, right in front of you. This is not what you see in the Wat. The > Abhidhamma is very effective in lay life, because you can use real > situations that are constantly developing, and use your trained mind to > avert, or elimate...even seek the root of ignorances, etc...of all that is > around you. When people say that it is irrelevant, I can only think of > how ignorant they are, selling books, gaining profits... I'm only 29 - > about 7 years into this game of defending the dhamma from capitalistic > exploiters. Practice, practice is what we must do - read about it in your > suttas, or where ever you recieve your dhamma instruction. Its more > than just breathing meditations....practice, practice... > Ah... the folly of youth (if I may say so?) --- you are young and I dare say you might need more practice, and well guided practice at that! First of all, defending the Dhamma is not a game. Secondly, it appears you need to be very careful with your words. Thirdly, "capitalistic exploiters"? Be careful that you are not read in terms of merely generalizing. > Just trying to help, Not to offend or be rude, but you must help yourself first. Reading your post, I have wondered how much of your own frustration and angst was/is at the root of the posting, as well as a small reflection of what is going on for you now. In the Buddhasasana, Dhammapiyo Bhante P.S. Pali is quite important owing to the fact that the Englsih language is often without denotative as well as connotative terms to correctly communicate what needs to be rightly understood about the Dhamma. 17792 From: Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 6:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Rob, Let's go through it little by little. Also I hope you don't let this conversation preempt the one you started with Howard. Basically I think I am on a different track from the one you guys are taking. I wrote, "In my opinion kamma must reach from javana, through vipaka and subsequent remembering of accumulations to the next javana and must necessarily include the object of vipaka." What I am proposing is a full circle from javana to javana. Javana intentionality results in a value free result but in order for good intentions to reap good results the vipaka (value free result) must be experienced as good. In order for that to happen, accumulations must arise, cued by the vipaka (if not remembered). These accumulations must then elicit a reaction (in this case favorable) to the vipaka. I am calling this reaction another javana series. So there is a causal javana and a resultant javana all part of the same kammic process. Do you still think this is correct? I came up with this scenario as a way of explaining ethical behavior in terms of citta process. Assuming you don't agree with it, how do you explain ethical behavior (good intentions reap good results) in terms of javana and vipaka? The business about vipaka including the object of the vipaka citta is, for me, a doorway to the universe of physical objects outside the body. A sense organ is a door and something external passes through that door and becomes internal. A chunk of hardness doesn't interrupt the bhavanga stream and sit there while 17 cittas react to it. Rather, some thing that is hard touches the sensitive matter at the sense door. That sensitive matter converts that input into something cittas can interact with. This whatever-it-is is what interrupts the bhavanga and what 17 cittas react to. This is obviously something I made up as a way of explaining what is going on at the sense doors. How do you see it? Larry 17793 From: Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 7:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Howard, I disagree that mind independent matter is necessarily substantialist but agree that shared kamma between individuals does create the "world", and a very complicated one. Do we agree that ethics in the buddhist sense is "do good (kusala) and avoid bad" and the reason for doing good is that good deeds usually but not always cause good results (in other words the law of kamma)? Incidentally, I think volitional mental activity is considered a "deed" in terms of volitional activity of body, speech, and mind. Larry 17794 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 9:04pm Subject: Re: May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Paul, May I give my two cents about your question to RobM? Living in a country that celebrates Christmas both in a religious and a worldly way causes strong emotions to arise when I hear the hymns or a Christian sermon on the radio. Christmas in a non-religious way is so important here that people travel home from all round the world to be with their family - "I'll be home for Christmas". Christmas no longer means what it meant to me, in a religious sense, for most of my life. But, each Christmas now I have to deal with mixed emotions - almost like grief for a lost loved one - for the simple way it used to be when I believed what I was brought up to believe. Being Buddhist doesn't stop them. I often wonder if there is a separate form of memory for emotions. At this time, I am particularly bothered by a yearning for the simple culture-wide beliefs of my pre- Dhamma life. The 'truths' of yesterday that I believed so joyfully, that I taught to my children, are just dear 'myths' to me today. But, I buy the Christmas presents, and join in family gatherings and celebrations. In this country, where the Festival of the birth of the Christ child is both a worldly Celebration and Thanksgiving for Family, as well as a consumer extravaganza, it would cause misunderstanding and hurt among my Christian family and friends (whether nominal or not) if I was to Make a Point of Being Buddhist and withdraw. metta, Christine p.s. That is you in photo 58 isn't it? :-) I can't seem to enlarge it. Will you have to stay a mini-Paul forever? :-) --- "ajahn_paul " wrote: > Dear Rob, > > is that funny that u still celebrating x'mas but u r already a > buddhist? ^_~ > > --- "robmoult " > wrote: > > Hi Howard, > > > > Sorry for being off-line for the past day and a half. After being > on > > the road for five days a week for the past few weeks, my wife > > insisted that I do some Christmas shopping with her for the day and > > a half that I was home. I am now in an airport getting ready to > take > > an overnight flight to Beijing. I will return home next Friday > night. > > 17795 From: Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 4:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/15/02 10:28:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I disagree that mind independent matter is necessarily substantialist > but agree that shared kamma between individuals does create the > "world", and a very complicated one. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Okay, so we agree on the 2nd. As far as the notion of mind-independent matter being substantialist, I think so, because then such matter, taken as a whole, becomes a self-existent entity. (But perhaps thinking that way is due to insidious Nagarjunan influence! ;-)) -------------------------------------------------- Do we agree that ethics in the> > buddhist sense is "do good (kusala) and avoid bad" ------------------------------------------------- Howard: And to purify the mind. ------------------------------------------------ and the reason for> > doing good is that good deeds usually but not always cause good results > (in other words the law of kamma)? > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, hmm. And in particular, from the 8-fold-path perspective, it leads to calm, which makes mindfulness and concentration easier. -------------------------------------------------- Incidentally, I think volitional> > mental activity is considered a "deed" in terms of volitional activity > of body, speech, and mind. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. ------------------------------------------------- > > Larry > ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17796 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 9:47pm Subject: Re: May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Ajahn Paul, I have two sons; eight and twelve. They go to Buddhist Sunday School each week, but they sure love to get presents and decorate the Christmas tree. My wife and I certainly don't treat Christmas as a religious holiday, but we do use this occasion to explain a bit to our kids about Christian beliefs. Metta, Rob M :-) --- "ajahn_paul " wrote: > Dear Rob, > > is that funny that u still celebrating x'mas but u r already a > buddhist? ^_~ > > --- "robmoult " > wrote: > > Hi Howard, > > > > Sorry for being off-line for the past day and a half. After being > on > > the road for five days a week for the past few weeks, my wife > > insisted that I do some Christmas shopping with her for the day and > > a half that I was home. I am now in an airport getting ready to > take > > an overnight flight to Beijing. I will return home next Friday > night. > > 17797 From: Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 5:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi, Rob - Okay, a bit more of a reply. In a message dated 12/15/02 12:00:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > Sorry for being off-line for the past day and a half. After being on > the road for five days a week for the past few weeks, my wife > insisted that I do some Christmas shopping with her for the day and > a half that I was home. I am now in an airport getting ready to take > an overnight flight to Beijing. I will return home next Friday night. > > I'm going to take a stab at simplifying the similarities and > differences between our views and then ask some questions. I will > structure the post along the lines of the paramattha dhammas. > > Rupa > ==== > Rob and Howard are both phenomenologists. The only rupas on our > radar screens are those that touch our mind. We make no statements > about the rupas that do not touch our minds. > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. And moreover, Howard, being a pragmatic phenomenalist considers that unknowable rupas are effectively nonexistent. ------------------------------------------------- > > Citta / Cetasika > ================ > I group these together as I consider them to be inseparable. > > Rob is a phenomenologist. The citta / cetasika of another person are > not on my radar screen because they do not touch my mind. Conditions > touch my mind and those conditions may have been caused by another > person's citta / cetasika, but that doesn't count because it is > indirect. > > Howard is a non-phenomenologist. You have said that kammic streams > interact and influence each other. The Buddha said that volition is > kamma and when reading analysis of Dependent Origination, it is > clear that kamma is treated as the cetasika cetana. When you say > that kammic streams interact, you are therefore saying that > different people's cetasikas interact (at least the cetana cetasika) > and because the cetana cetasika is inseperable from citta, this > implies a collective consciousness. > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: A collective consciousness sounds to me like a single consciousness, almost a Brahman. That is not my idea. My idea is that of a network of dynamically interrelating mindstreams. That such a net is not a single, unitary thing is analogous to the fact that dhammas arising interdependently and being interrelated in many ways (as in the Patthana) within a particular namarupic stream fails to make them into a single thing, but simply makes them not separate, independent entities. Emptiness is neither a nothingness nor a unity nor a separateness, but is an interdependency and an interrelatedness. ------------------------------------------------------------ In contemporary terms, "The > > Force" from Star Wars (I chose Obi Wan, because he is the character > whom you most closely resemble :-), as for me, I look more like > Yoda). > ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Not my picture. ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Nibbana > ======= > Rob is a phenomenologist. I see Nibbana as a purely personal > experience. > > This topic has not come up. Howard, do you see Nibbana as pure > personal or does it have a "collective" element? > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't know anything about nibbana except as heresay. So I having nothing worthwhile to add. However, I will comment that phenomenalism seems to require a highly separative individualism for you. It does not for me, nor did it for William James. That doesn't seem to be the issue from my point of view. As I see it, phenomenalism replaces objectivity by intersubjectivity (to use slightly misleading, non-Buddhist terminology). -------------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard, I am probably putting words in your mouth. Please correct me > if I am wrong. If I am correct, could you give me some direct or > indirect support for your view from the Tipitaka? > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I've done about the best I can in responding to the points you raised. As far as citations are concerned, I'm afraid I have no ready ones and would find it a bit burdensome at the moment to commence a search. -------------------------------------------------------- > > Gotta run! Plane is boarding. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > ========================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17798 From: dragonwriter2 Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 10:21pm Subject: Christine (Women on the Buddhist Path) Hi Christine, Following are two books (contemporary:-) and their descriptions, authored by women about the varied experiences on the path, that may or may not be of interest. Women on the Buddhist Path by Martine Batchelor This is a collection of stories and experiences of "Western" and "Asian" women from a variety of Buddhist "traditions", ranging from a hermit to a disk jockey, and including artists, social workers, psychotherapists, nuns ans professors. What they have in common is a meditation practice that has transformed their lives. This book is an inspiration to "all" women who are seeking to integrate spirituality into their daily lives. Pb 240 pp. Reflections on a Mountain Lake: A Western Nun Talks on Practical Buddhism by Tenzin Palmo "The essential thing is to learn how to develop a practice which you can live with moment to moment in your everyday life." Tenzin Palmo, whose story is known to thousands of readers through Vicki Mackenzie's biography, Cave in the Snow, draws on her years (12ish) of solitary meditation in a Himalayan cave to bring this down to earth approach to the spiritual path. She explains how to develop a regular meditation practice and shows how meditation can help us deal with painful emotions like anger, fear and jealousy. She explores the traditions of great female practitoners and how they are being "maintained" today. Metta, Simon 17799 From: Sarah Date: Sun Dec 15, 2002 10:50pm Subject: A Christmas Ambush for Rob M:-) (Warning to New members: pls expect to be thoroughly confused if you read this post) Hi Rob M, Like you and your wife, I also like to find gifts for our mothers at least, send ‘envelopes’ to nephews and neices and cards and notes to those who particularly appreciate this (fewer each year, thankfully). So it’s a busy time for us with busy work commitments til Xmas Eve. On Xmas Day we usually take a long walk to a very remote beach;-) James would call the rest of this post an ‘ambush’, I’ll call it ‘picking up a few threads as requested’;-) I have quite a few of your posts in front of me which I've been meaning to respond to - pls excuse the point form (in no special order). 1. I really liked the way you explained (17583 to Chris) about your “Ah-ha” moment and also the one (17582 to Chris also) on “Wrong speech in Jest” with its sensible conclusion! ..... 2. An old quibble - Larry referred to a ‘citta process’ and in yr post (17584), you mention that by this you assume he means a ‘thought process’. The Pali term is ‘citta-vithi’ and it refers to both the process of cittas in the sense-door process (seeing consciousness and so on) or those in the mind-door process which follows. Most of these cittas are not concerned with any kind of thinking or thought, so to refer to a ‘thought process’ is far more misleading to me than to leave it as a ‘citta process’ as Larry does. I appreciate it's common, however and you are merely following a common usage as we do with 'perception' for sanna to Suan's dismay. You mention that the description of a ‘thought process’ does not ‘go into the issue of why each citta arises’. However, the Patthana and the detail of the 24 conditions does go into the ‘why’. We don’t have to know all the detail, but it helps to know there are very detailed combinations of conditions which form up each citta (moment of consciousness) now, just as it is. ..... 3. You had a helpful discussion on the vipallasas(perversions)while we were away and I had meant to add a couple of small comments. You referred to citta ‘on the surface’ and sanna ‘just below the surface’ (17262). This may have been borrowed from Ledi Sayadaw. I’m not sure it’s helpful. As you rightly mentioned, citta vipallasa and sanna vipallasa always arise together. They are present with every moment of akusala citta (in one form or other) as I understand. Therefore I don’t think we say ‘the citta manifestation can only be targetted once the sanna manifestation has been uprooted’ or say ‘citta is easier to penetrate than sanna, but you have to penetrate sanna first.....’. These sentences sound like they’re suggesting a self and doing again, i.e. a little ‘free-will’ and choice creeping back;-) Of course, you’ll have your supporters for it here and I appreciate that many of these points were raised by Larry in reference to quotes from Ledi Sayadaw’s “Manual of Insight”. You also refer to type D - taking the asubha (foul) for subha (beautiful) as akusala and kusala. I think this is misleading. Asubha and subha cannot be translated as akusala and kusala (wholesome and unwholesome). (It’s true that each moment of vipallasa of any kind is akusala, however). You also suggest (17253) that as vipallasa are akusala, “it is probably valid to substitute ditthi...for sanna”. I don’t think it is valid. Ditthi (wrong view) only applies to the ditthi vipallasas eradicated by the sotapanna. Maybe I misunderstood you. ..... 4. With regard to your comment about your Class Notes. I think the best thing is to keep raising on DSG anything you wish to discuss or would like anyone to give comments on. Just one point like ‘free-will’ can take many months of discussion and we’ll never all be in agreement. I like the idea of anything one writes being a 'work in progress'. It will always depend on the understanding at the time. As James pointed out, this can even change day to day;-) I’m certainly no expert (and don’t aspire to be) on Abhidhamma details - my main interest lies in clarifying what is ‘right practice’(according to how I see it) for myself and others. The details can be very helpful in this regard. (also , try to engage Kom and Num too who have great back-up resources as well). Anytime you’re in doubt, you can always just quote the Tipitaka as Dion suggests;-) ..... 5. I’m enjoying your discussions with Howard and Larry. One comment (17598): we think there is a ‘being hit’ which allows ‘a vipaka at that moment’ and think of ‘the presence of A’ as ‘one of the conditions’. This is all correct conventionally as I discussed with Swee Boon in the ‘Rain’ post. Of course, as I appreciate you realize, there is no ‘A’ and no ‘being hit’. There is only hardness (the vipaka) experienced and various namas and rupas, along with concepts of ‘a person hitting me’ acting as conditions. (side note to Howard if you’re following here: even if ‘B’ stands for the Buddha, there must be vipaka cittas experiencing hardness and other rupas at the moment of impact and being in the ‘kammic debt’ of another doesn’t make sense to me). ..... 6. I couldn’t follow the ‘gazillions of kammic seeds’ in your post to Larry (17638). Past kammic actions can bring about vipaka, but not wrong view as you suggest. If ‘kammic seeds’ are inoperative, there is no vipaka, but wrong view arises according to accumulations. hmmm I agree with your comments about nibbana being the object of citta and not applied to anything....Larry likes to test the limits of what is acceptable by definition and I’ve really appreciated all your dialogue and responses;-) ..... 7. Talking of which, you did a great job with his qus addressed to both of us and Rob K (17623) I think. I was very relieved to see your answer. I want to say ‘much better than I would have’, but that would be mana (thanks Chris for the prompt;-)). Anyway, if you continue as you are, I’ll continue giving an ‘ambush’ of any points you may like to consider further when I can - a much easier role. Just one point from that post: you mention ‘javana cittas are active. Other cittas are passive’. I’m not sure we can say that any cittas are more or less ‘active’ than others, though I understand what you are driving at. Seeing is vipaka. Does that mean it is ‘passive’? You do clarify that ‘when a javana citta arises, cetana causes the seed of a vipaka to be created’. Well, as they would say in other kinds of education, this isn’t quite the whole story.....not all cetana is kamma patha causing vipaka. I’ve tested yours and others’ patience quite enough. As always, Rob, many, many thanks for all your contributions and assistance with so many topics and points. I’m also learning from your kind and imaginative teaching approach. Hope it’s not too cold in Beijing now and hope the family like the presies;-) I'm sure your wife appreciated the help and it's a good chance to share family time together. Sarah ======= 17800 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 1:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Psychic Experiences Dear Swee Boon, --- "nidive " wrote: > Dear Everybody, > > I don't know whether this is off-topic or not. But since the Buddha > talked about abhinna powers, I would like to discuss about my > own 'psychic experiences' which I could still remember. ..... I think we need to clarify a little what the abhinna powers are so that there is no confusion or mistaking of 'psychic' or other special experiences any of us may be having at this time. In brief, these refer the 6 higher powers or knowledges which can only be attained through the perfection of jhanas. One of them can only be obtained through the realization of Arahatship. There was some discussion before with Wyn on these. The Visuddhimagga X1-X111 gives more details. We're talking about the powers after the attainment of rupa and arupa jhanas - quite impossible in our 'dusty' lives as I understand.(Others will disagree;-)) Many of us, including yourself, are interested in 'practice'. A good place and time to start is now: is there any clear knowledge of the distinction between moments that are kusala (wholesome) and akusala (unwholesome) and of how different objects of samatha, such as metta or death condition calm when there is understanding? Samatha can only begin to develop with clear understanding of the purpose and with knowledge of wholesome states, not by just concentrating and hoping. Thank you for sharing your interesting psychic experiences. I don't attempt to explain them. I don't think anyone would think you were the Devil;-) My mother was brought up in very large, very old, very remote vicarages, often without electricity and was very used to the ghosts which she took for being servants. It was quite common-place and in a very Christian environment;-).I've also had 'psychic' friends with experiences as you describe. I think the most important thing, as we've said before on DSG, is not to cling to such experiences at all. However strange, they are only namas and rupas rising and falling away. Back to practice and the only way to develop insight is by being aware of realities that appear now. Attaching to special episodes or concepts will never help. Concentration without panna is mostly wrong concentration and will take us in the wrong direction. ..... > I don't know if any of you had such experiences or not. I know > people seldom discuss such things because it is uncommon. ..... Another reason may be that it might not be useful. If we all discuss all the weird things that have ever happened to us (however memorable or disturbing), we'd be no closer to knowing the nature of dhammas as the Buddha taught. I hope this doesn't sound too harsh, Swee Boon. Please let us know what you think about the practice. Can your study of Abhidhamma help this practice? Sarah p.s I assume NEO is yr family name and Swee Boon your first names. Pls clarify that this is right as I think there is a little confusion. ===== 17801 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 0:03am Subject: Re: Christine (Women on the Buddhist Path) Hi Simon, I appreciate the info. about the books and I'll keep an eye out for them. I do have Vicki Mackenzie's biography of Tenzin Palmo 'Cave in the Snow', and I have another one of articles written by Buddhist women called 'Being Bodies' ed. by Lenore Friedman and Susan Moon. The back cover says "The relationship between body and mind has always been a topic of speculation and spirited discussion. The authors of the pieces contained in this anthology address the problem from the unique dual perspective of being women and being students of Buddhism." Contributers include a number of well known American Teachers. The Ch. headings are "Body as Suffering" "Body as Nature" "Body as Gender" "Body as Vehicle" "Body as Self". Thanks for your post, because of it I went to look for this book and realised I hadn't finished reading it. :-) metta, Christine --- "dragonwriter2 " wrote: > Hi Christine, > > Following are two books (contemporary:-) and their descriptions, > authored by women about the varied experiences on the path, that may > or may not be of interest. > > Women on the Buddhist Path by Martine Batchelor > This is a collection of stories and experiences of "Western" > and "Asian" women from a variety of Buddhist "traditions", ranging > from a hermit to a disk jockey, and including artists, social > workers, psychotherapists, nuns ans professors. What they have in > common is a meditation practice that has transformed their lives. > This book is an inspiration to "all" women who are seeking to > integrate spirituality into their daily lives. Pb 240 pp. > > Reflections on a Mountain Lake: A Western Nun Talks on Practical > Buddhism by Tenzin Palmo > "The essential thing is to learn how to develop a practice which you > can live with moment to moment in your everyday life." > > Tenzin Palmo, whose story is known to thousands of readers through > Vicki Mackenzie's biography, Cave in the Snow, draws on her years > (12ish) of solitary meditation in a Himalayan cave to bring this > down to earth approach to the spiritual path. She explains how to > develop a regular meditation practice and shows how meditation can > help us deal with painful emotions like anger, fear and jealousy. > She explores the traditions of great female practitoners and how > they are being "maintained" today. > > Metta, > Simon 17802 From: ajahn_paul Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 2:11am Subject: Re: May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Christine, i was just only joking,,,i've got my x'mas tree set up already in my house anyway! heheehe well,,, i dont know how to enlarge the pic, can u help? ^^ --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Paul, > > May I give my two cents about your question to RobM? > Living in a country that celebrates Christmas both in a religious and > a worldly way causes strong emotions to arise when I hear the hymns > or a Christian sermon on the radio. Christmas in a non-religious way > is so important here that people travel home from all round the world > to be with their family - "I'll be home for Christmas". Christmas no > longer means what it meant to me, in a religious sense, for most of > my life. But, each Christmas now I have to deal with mixed emotions - > almost like grief for a lost loved one - for the simple way it used > to be when I believed what I was brought up to believe. Being > Buddhist doesn't stop them. I often wonder if there is a separate > form of memory for emotions. At this time, I am particularly > bothered by a yearning for the simple culture-wide beliefs of my pre- > Dhamma life. The 'truths' of yesterday that I believed so > joyfully, that I taught to my children, are just dear 'myths' to me > today. But, I buy the Christmas presents, and join in family > gatherings and celebrations. In this country, where the Festival of > the birth of the Christ child is both a worldly Celebration and > Thanksgiving for Family, as well as a consumer extravaganza, it would > cause misunderstanding and hurt among my Christian family and friends > (whether nominal or not) if I was to Make a Point of Being Buddhist > and withdraw. > > metta, > Christine > p.s. That is you in photo 58 isn't it? :-) I can't seem to enlarge > it. Will you have to stay a mini-Paul forever? :-) > 17803 From: ajahn_paul Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 2:13am Subject: Re: May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Rob, i know,,, i would like to have a x'mas gift too,,,, where is my book?! ^_~ --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Ajahn Paul, > > I have two sons; eight and twelve. They go to Buddhist Sunday School > each week, but they sure love to get presents and decorate the > Christmas tree. My wife and I certainly don't treat Christmas as a > religious holiday, but we do use this occasion to explain a bit to > our kids about Christian beliefs. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17804 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 2:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Hi James, I smiled and laughed when I read your post (to Christine). I didn’t take a Prozac, but I’m calling you 'in the morning'(your time). Hope it was a general invitation and I don’t sound like a doomsayer either;-) ..... --- "James " wrote: > But this discussion reminds me again > of why I am a Buddhist. You know, I always thought of Buddhism as a > happy and joyful way of approaching life. A way of saying, "Yes, we > are all suffering…and it is all quite unnecessary. It is possible to > find true happiness in the here and now and the hereafter. And it if > from your own efforts that such will be done." .... I pretty much agree with these sentiments. I also agree to an extent with ones that David made to suggest we can ‘think’ too much. “Whatever will be, will be, the future is not ours to see” as the catchy song being played over and over in a nearby cafe belts out. If we find the path discouraging or fearful or have the idea we can think and think our way out of trouble, it’s not ‘right’. Furthermore, as I was writing to Ken H, if we have the idea we should be in another place, doing another job, sitting in a different position (like up a tree for 39 days as I read in the newspaper to save it, Ken), it’s also not ‘right’. We can see that with these ideas, the idea of practice is taking us away from the present moment and making life harder (read: piling up more suffering) rather than lighter. So I’d encourage anyone to be joyful and ‘in good cheer’ (as Azita likes to remind us), to go Xmas shopping or whatever brings happiness or one has inclinations to do. ..... > But since being a member of this group I have confronted such > depressing positions as Nibbana as complete nothingness and void, the > Buddha was practically a Vulcan and had no trace of humanity > whatsoever, that inanimate objects (like rocks) have the intrinsic > characteristic of suffering along with being hard and cold, and that > joking, smiling, laughing, and happiness are all against Buddhism. I > am not sure if this is a Buddhist group or a Silvia Plath fan club > . ..... I’m glad you added the or I might have been worried about you . Ok, I’m not taking your comments seriously. I would like to suggest, however, that there’s a very big difference between a) acknowledging, as we read in all the texts, that the arahants and Buddha were completely without any lobha (and thereby any inclination to laugh or joke) and b) suggesting as a result we shouldn’t laugh and joke. We’re not arahants. We’re just starting out on the Path. If we try to act as we imagine arahants would act, it is unnnatural and again shows wrong understanding of the practice. The practice should be to live as we always have (no obvious changes as Chris pointed out - in my case I've always disliked any kind of shopping and still do), but developing more understanding, more wholesome qualities of all kinds - slowly and without expectation of results. So there’s no need to join the suicidal fan club, James, just because the Buddha didn’t tell jokes or all conditioned phenomena are inherently unsatisfactory. Understanding phenomena a little more as they are is the most inspiring and uplifting way to live. This is what brings little tastes of freedom and ‘lightness’ of experience. No one or thing can ever touch or affect this understanding. It isn’t determined by the outer appearance at all. The teachings are for monks, nuns, laymen and laywomen alike. ..... >I keep writing to kids to be happy, be optimistic, and know > that everything is for a reason and that reason is good….but from the > thinking of the vocal majority of this group I might as well tell > them all to cut their wrists on the spot. There is nothing worth > living for and there is nothing to attain. All is emptiness and > emptiness is all…And `Have a Good, Mettiful Day' ;-) ..... Some days you remind me of our old friend Erik, but at least you add the ;-) Please continue to inspire and help the kids (and a few adults with kids’ hearts;-)) with the beautifully written posts. I particularly appreciated the ones you just wrote on kamma and rebirth with the great revolving door analogy. (Kom and Rob K also wrote really helpful ones on kamma - jsut the right ‘pitch’) (New members pls note: some of these children are as young as 8 yrs old, so they’re allowed a few toys in their posts;-)) ..... > Rubbish and Nonsense!! So much has been lost and those who think > they know don't really know anything. They only hear the empty > echoes in their lonely heads as they lament to themselves. .... Oh, that was a rude awakening. Lamenting to myself.....;-(( ..... >I just > wanted to get this off my chest. I am sure the doomsayers will have > much to say in response. Fine. ..... I think they’ve been noticeable by their absence so far... not everyone on DSG is such a masochist;-) ..... >But please, I want to urge everyone, > don't think that all is forsaken! There is hope and there is > happiness…all is not dukkha. Dukkha is a dream, Happiness is > reality. Just take a Prozac and call me in the morning. .... Ok, I called. I appreciate the encouragement. I disagree that ‘all is not dukkha’. Does that mean there can’t be happy feelings or we should take a Prozac as a solution? I don’t think so. Does it mean we should all be full of wholesome qualities. No, as you suggested at the end of a quote on mana, the development and understanding has to be ‘trained’. James, you also asked in another post how some of us had come to our conclusions about arahants having eradicated lobha and so on. I think out of confidence in the Teachings, we can look to the suttas at least and to the entire Tipitaka for some of us. We don’t ‘know’ these details, but surely they are more reliable than our own specultions? You suggest that in some suttas it says arahants (inc. the Buddha) still have traces of defilements including lobha. I think it is quite erroneous but I’ll look at the suttas if you give me the references. You say that otherwise they would disappear in a cloud of smoke . Well, I’m smiling but quite puzzled as to why you would think this at all. Finally, James, (OK, a little ambush), you found it disconcerting (17100) that phenomena are conditioned, that there is no self to suppress anger and so on. I agree there has to be the proper groundwork and as I just said, it’s no use trying to imitate an arahant or the Buddha. However, ‘standing fast in the flow’, appreciating the value of good deeds and cultivating ‘proper mental states’ can only be done at this moment by sati, panna and their associates. Not by a self, not by 'Sarah' or 'James'. Talking now, considering what is wise and unwise, is an important condition for such practice and development to take place. Many thanks again for your uplifting and inspiring posts. Just let us know anytime we sound too depressing to you;-) Sarah ====== 17806 From: chase8383 Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 3:47am Subject: The Gift of Suffering Morning ( here anyway) All There is a story about a women who came to the Buddha carrying her dead child. She asked the Buddha to bring her child back to life. The Buddha told her that he would talk of that later, but first he wanted her to go into the village below them. Once in the village, she was to go from house to house and get a mustard seed from each house that had not experienced death. She did as the Buddha asked. And as she went from house to house, she collected no mustard seeds. Not one house in the village had not experienced death. All had know the suffering of loss. All had tasted the suffering of impermanence. When she returned to the Buddha, she opened her empty hand. She said all in the village had known death personally. The Buddha said, you see, this is what we share. This suffering is what brings us together. No suffering, no joy. No Mara, no Buddha. No samsara, no nirvana. David 17807 From: nidive Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 6:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Psychic Experiences Hello Sarah, Thank you for responding to my post. NEO is my surname (family name), and Swee Boon is my name. Thank you for clarifying about abhinna powers. I am not claiming that I have abhinna powers. But some strange experiences that I have are very mysterious and unexplainable. I thought Buddhism would be more accommodating of such experiences, in the manner that such experiences are not 'uncommon'. Thank you for sharing that you have family members and friends who also have psychic experiences. It's kind of comforting. I am not attached to such experiences. But I don't discount them either. Maybe I could have been a brahma in my previous life? :) Therefore I have such accumulations? Maybe I could have practised concentration in my previous life? I don't know. But I remembered a dream I had while I was a child: I dreamt that I was a Buddhist monk residing in a majestic (where everything was virtually golden) monastery. I don't think I am going on the wrong path. But I still experience such psychic experiences in my life. It can be as mundane as having fore-knowledge (or intuition) of what might happen later in the day. NEO Swee Boon 17808 From: chase8383 Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 6:39am Subject: Letting our notions fall away (Re: If volition is conditioned)/ David Hello Christine "You're 'a yank' I assume, David - from the Eastcoast, Westcoast or the Heartland?" Eastcoast. New Englander born and breed. I lived in Colorado and Texas for a while, but otherwise pure Eastcoaster. I have never been to Australia. I want to go though. Australia and New Zealand are the two places I most indentify with outside of the states. Be spacious, David 17809 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 2:11am Subject: Dukkha as Flaw (A Pep Talk! ;-) Hi, all - All conditions/formations are flawed. They are imperfect in that they are, none of them, of the nature to satisfy. Some cause outright physical and mental pain to which we react with varying degrees of aversion, and, in some cases, we commit the most terrible and disturbing actions to flee from them. Others are neutral in feeling, from which arises boredom, loss of attention, and confusion. Still others range from mildly to enormously pleasant. Of these, the moderately to enormously pleasant are met with craving that is often compulsive, disturbing, and leads to a slavish attachment that is thwarted by impermanence and lack of full control on our part, and this often leads to the desperate commitment of dreadful acts. And even the mildly pleasant conditions dissapoint in not lasting. Not a pretty picture, is it? But where lies the flaw? Is it that all conditions have evil essence? Certainly not. They are just what they are, some pleasant, some neutral, some unpleasant, as they strike us, depending on changing circumstances. The flaw is in us. The dukkha is in us, in our defiled, confused, reactive nature, a nature, which like all conditions, is, happily, subject to change. Not only is there dukkha - there is also its cause, and, because it is caused and not intrinsic, there is an escape from it, and that escape is the Buddha's path. To escape the prison of dukkha, we must first be able to see fully and clearly the extent of our imprisonment. We need to see that even when the incarceration is mild, it is still a prison cell we occupy. The irony is that the cell door is wide open, but we are too drugged to simply walk out. Another irony is that the very recognition of our dukkhic state, necessary for our release, may throw us into a state of despair. We may then, reactively grasp onto the false and extreme notion that nothing but total annihilation of experience of all sorts is the only remedy, because the realm of conditions is inherently flawed. But this is the opposite error to thinking that lasting happiness is to be found in condtions themselves. Lasting happiness, including the most joyful appreciation of life in all its aspects, comes not from pushing away of conditions, not from running from conditions and annihilating all of them, but from a very specialized annihilation - the annihilation of the three poisons: our spiritual blindness of defiled cognition, our craving, and our aversion. Their cessation marks the realization of nibbana, the end, the absolute end, of dukkha - the complete and pemanent removal of all flaws. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17810 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 8:59am Subject: Contemplating Aging ([dsg] Re: Take Care of Yourself) Hi Christine, How did you get that impression? Metta, Victor > Victor, from your current remarks, (and previous posts on this > subject):""There is nothing wrong with being aware of yourself. Note > that in the last paragraph of the quote, the Buddha's teaching on > each and > every aggregate being not self is not meant to deny self-awareness." > I still get the impression that you are saying there is 'something' > standing behind and separate from the khandas. Am I misunderstanding > you? > > metta, > Christine 17811 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 9:02am Subject: Re: Dukkha as Flaw (A Pep Talk! ;-) Hi Howard, I think you understand the characteristic of dukkha rather well. Metta, Victor --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > > All conditions/formations are flawed. They are imperfect in that they > are, none of them, of the nature to satisfy. Some cause outright physical and > mental pain to which we react with varying degrees of aversion, and, in some > cases, we commit the most terrible and disturbing actions to flee from them. > Others are neutral in feeling, from which arises boredom, loss of attention, > and confusion. Still others range from mildly to enormously pleasant. Of > these, the moderately to enormously pleasant are met with craving that is > often compulsive, disturbing, and leads to a slavish attachment that is > thwarted by impermanence and lack of full control on our part, and this often > leads to the desperate commitment of dreadful acts. And even the mildly > pleasant conditions dissapoint in not lasting. Not a pretty picture, is it? > But where lies the flaw? Is it that all conditions have evil essence? > Certainly not. They are just what they are, some pleasant, some neutral, some > unpleasant, as they strike us, depending on changing circumstances. The flaw > is in us. The dukkha is in us, in our defiled, confused, reactive nature, a > nature, which like all conditions, is, happily, subject to change. Not only > is there dukkha - there is also its cause, and, because it is caused and not > intrinsic, there is an escape from it, and that escape is the Buddha's path. > To escape the prison of dukkha, we must first be able to see fully and > clearly the extent of our imprisonment. We need to see that even when the > incarceration is mild, it is still a prison cell we occupy. The irony is that > the cell door is wide open, but we are too drugged to simply walk out. > Another irony is that the very recognition of our dukkhic state, > necessary for our release, may throw us into a state of despair. We may then, > reactively grasp onto the false and extreme notion that nothing but total > annihilation of experience of all sorts is the only remedy, because the realm > of conditions is inherently flawed. But this is the opposite error to > thinking that lasting happiness is to be found in condtions themselves. > Lasting happiness, including the most joyful appreciation of life in all its > aspects, comes not from pushing away of conditions, not from running from > conditions and annihilating all of them, but from a very specialized > annihilation - the annihilation of the three poisons: our spiritual blindness > of defiled cognition, our craving, and our aversion. Their cessation marks > the realization of nibbana, the end, the absolute end, of dukkha - the > complete and pemanent removal of all flaws. > > With metta, > Howard 17812 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dukkha as Flaw (A Pep Talk! ;-) Hi, Victor - In a message dated 12/16/02 12:04:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I think you understand the characteristic of dukkha rather well. > > Metta, > Victor > > ======================= Thanks, Victor. (Hey, so does that make me "one for three"? ;-)) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17813 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 0:27pm Subject: Re: May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Ajahn Paul, The book was prepared in Penang. I have sent a letter to Penang asking for a copy to be sent to me. No reply yet. I will be following up with a phone call next week. Metta, Rob M :-) --- "ajahn_paul " wrote: > Hi Rob, > > i know,,, i would like to have a x'mas gift too,,,, where is my > book?! ^_~ > > --- "robmoult " > wrote: > > Hi Ajahn Paul, > > > > I have two sons; eight and twelve. They go to Buddhist Sunday > School > > each week, but they sure love to get presents and decorate the > > Christmas tree. My wife and I certainly don't treat Christmas as a > > religious holiday, but we do use this occasion to explain a bit to > > our kids about Christian beliefs. > > > > Metta, > > Rob M :-) 17814 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 2:17pm Subject: Some interesting comments on Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Robert (and All); Sorry for the delay in responding to this post. I've got a lot to say about this. --- "rjkjp1 " wrote: > How do you reconcile "that > consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise " with the > Abhidhammamatthasangaha: > http://www.palikanon.com/abhidham/sangaha/chapter_6.htm > " Material phenomena arise in four ways, viz: 1. Kamma, 2. Mind, 3. > Seasonal Conditions, and 4. Food." > Seasonal conditions is utu. I don't see any conflict. Kamma / citta / utu / oja are what create rupa and consciousness is a necessary condition for rupa to arise. I am going to make an observation here which I think is quite interesting. I will use the citta-process (formerly called the "thought process" until Sarah put me right :-) ) to make a point and then return to the topic of rupa. In my limited reading of the Suttas, the closest the Buddha came to describing the citta-process was in the Madhupindika Sutta (The Ball of Honey) MN18: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn018.html "Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions & categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye." The citta-process (17 cittas in a row) was never laid down by the Buddha in the Suttas. The citta-process is not even in the seven volumes of the Abhidhamma. In other words, the citta-process is not part of the Tipitaka. According to Nyanatiloka (Buddhist Dictionary - Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines - Appendix), "citta-vithi, as well as all terms for the various functions within the processes of consciousness, such as avajjana-citta, sampaticchana, santirana, votthapana, javana, tadarammana, bhavanga, cuti: none of these terms is found in the Sutta Canon. except javana, in Pts.M. Even in the Ahh. Canon (e.g. Patth) only javana and bhavanga are twice or thrice briefly mentioned. The stages, however, must have been more or less known." I have incredible admiration for Acariya Anuruddha. Not only was he able to condense seven thick volumes of the Abhidhamma into fifty pages, but he also added a significant new material (citta-process) not found in the original. I believe that "paramattha dhamma", another critical term in the Abhidhammatthasangaha, is also not found in the Suttas nor in the original seven volumes of the Abhidhamma. Citta-vithi, paramattha may have appeared in commentarial literature prior to Anuruddha, but my point is that they are not in the Tipitaka. Why is this so? In the Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta, the Buddha clearly defined the scope of His teachings: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn063.html "And what is disclosed by me? 'This is stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This is the origination of stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This is the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by me. And why are they disclosed by me? Because they are connected with the goal, are fundamental to the holy life. They lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding. That's why they are disclosed by me. So, Malunkyaputta, remember what is undisclosed by me as undisclosed, and what is disclosed by me as disclosed." The Buddha made it clear; he taught about the four Noble Truths... that which was conducive to the holy life and led one to Nibbana. In other recent posts, I have called this "Ethics" (perhaps not the best name). So why did the Buddha deliver the Madhupindika Sutta? To show how papanca (conceptual proliferation) arises to cloud the mind. In his commentary to the Sutta above, Thanissaro Bhikkhu explains how papanca arises from a lack of understanding anatta. The Buddha did not deliver the Madhupindika Sutta to provide a "scientific" roadmap of the citta process. The objective in delivering the Madhupindika Sutta was clearly in line with the Buddha's stated objectives as laid out in the Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta. My suspicion is that, though the Tipitaka provides a complete ethical system, later thinkers did not find it "scientific" enough and felt the need to add a layer of "pseudo-science" (not unlike papanca) on top of the ethical base found in the Tipitaka. Citta- vithi, paramattha and a host of other ideas were later additions which were not taught by the Buddha because they are not essential to the Four Noble Truths, conducive to the holy life and leading one to Nibbana. One might also say that these mental proliferations act as a distraction, clouding the mind so that it is more difficult to focus on the ethical aspects of the Teaching. Our discussion on rupas falls into this category. The origin of rupas (kamma / citta / utu / oja) and the classification according to characteristic / function / manifestation / proximate cause does not appear in the Tipitaka. I believe that it first arises in Buddhaghosa's Visuddhimagga. In other words, it is part of the pseudo-scientific, pananca-like, commentarial literature. Please don't get me wrong. I am not suggesting that we stop studying the commentarial literature. I suspect that Acariya Anuruddha and Buddhaghosa may have been Arahants and they definitely have much to teach us. I am suggesting that we see the commentarial literature for what it is; use it and learn from it but that we should remember the Buddha's words "Avoid evil, do good, purify the mind" as our guideline as to our focus. Our focus in studying the citta-process should not be so much in the memorizing of the names of the cittas, the cetasikas which appear with each citta, etc. but focusing more on the fact that there is seeing but there is no seer (the citta process is empty). In my Abhidhamma class, I will continue to teach the citta vithi and the list of cetasikas in each citta; but I will constantly remind the students of why we are studying this stuff. This is part of my effort to minimize pananca. I appreciate feedback / comments from all DSG members. Metta, Rob M :-) 17815 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 2:42pm Subject: Re: Some interesting comments on Ethical View vs. Scientific View Rob M, I think it is a well articulated post. Indeed, a lot of discussion on the citta process struck me as pseudo-scientific. Metta, Victor --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Robert (and All); > > Sorry for the delay in responding to this post. I've got a lot to > say about this. > > --- "rjkjp1 " > wrote: > > How do you reconcile "that > > consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise " with > the > > Abhidhammamatthasangaha: > > http://www.palikanon.com/abhidham/sangaha/chapter_6.htm > > " Material phenomena arise in four ways, viz: 1. Kamma, 2. Mind, > 3. > > Seasonal Conditions, and 4. Food." > > Seasonal conditions is utu. > > I don't see any conflict. Kamma / citta / utu / oja are what create > rupa and consciousness is a necessary condition for rupa to arise. > > I am going to make an observation here which I think is quite > interesting. I will use the citta-process (formerly called > the "thought process" until Sarah put me right :-) ) to make a point > and then return to the topic of rupa. > > In my limited reading of the Suttas, the closest the Buddha came to > describing the citta-process was in the Madhupindika Sutta (The Ball > of Honey) MN18: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn018.html > > "Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of > the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there > is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What > one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one > complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions & > categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, > present, & future forms cognizable via the eye." > > The citta-process (17 cittas in a row) was never laid down by the > Buddha in the Suttas. The citta-process is not even in the seven > volumes of the Abhidhamma. In other words, the citta-process is not > part of the Tipitaka. According to Nyanatiloka (Buddhist Dictionary - > Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines - Appendix), "citta-vithi, > as well as all terms for the various functions within the processes > of consciousness, such as avajjana-citta, sampaticchana, santirana, > votthapana, javana, tadarammana, bhavanga, cuti: none of these terms > is found in the Sutta Canon. except javana, in Pts.M. Even in the > Ahh. Canon (e.g. Patth) only javana and bhavanga are twice or thrice > briefly mentioned. The stages, however, must have been more or less > known." > > I have incredible admiration for Acariya Anuruddha. Not only was he > able to condense seven thick volumes of the Abhidhamma into fifty > pages, but he also added a significant new material (citta-process) > not found in the original. I believe that "paramattha dhamma", > another critical term in the Abhidhammatthasangaha, is also not > found in the Suttas nor in the original seven volumes of the > Abhidhamma. Citta-vithi, paramattha may have appeared in > commentarial literature prior to Anuruddha, but my point is that > they are not in the Tipitaka. > > Why is this so? > > In the Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta, the Buddha clearly defined the scope > of His teachings: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn063.html > > "And what is disclosed by me? 'This is stress,' is disclosed by > me. 'This is the origination of stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This > is the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This is the path > of practice leading to the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by me. > And why are they disclosed by me? Because they are connected with > the goal, are fundamental to the holy life. They lead to > disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, > self-awakening, Unbinding. That's why they are disclosed by me. So, > Malunkyaputta, remember what is undisclosed by me as undisclosed, > and what is disclosed by me as disclosed." > > The Buddha made it clear; he taught about the four Noble Truths... > that which was conducive to the holy life and led one to Nibbana. In > other recent posts, I have called this "Ethics" (perhaps not the > best name). So why did the Buddha deliver the Madhupindika Sutta? To > show how papanca (conceptual proliferation) arises to cloud the > mind. In his commentary to the Sutta above, Thanissaro Bhikkhu > explains how papanca arises from a lack of understanding anatta. > > The Buddha did not deliver the Madhupindika Sutta to provide > a "scientific" roadmap of the citta process. The objective in > delivering the Madhupindika Sutta was clearly in line with the > Buddha's stated objectives as laid out in the Cula-Malunkyovada > Sutta. > > My suspicion is that, though the Tipitaka provides a complete > ethical system, later thinkers did not find it "scientific" enough > and felt the need to add a layer of "pseudo-science" (not unlike > papanca) on top of the ethical base found in the Tipitaka. Citta- > vithi, paramattha and a host of other ideas were later additions > which were not taught by the Buddha because they are not essential > to the Four Noble Truths, conducive to the holy life and leading one > to Nibbana. One might also say that these mental proliferations act > as a distraction, clouding the mind so that it is more difficult to > focus on the ethical aspects of the Teaching. > > Our discussion on rupas falls into this category. The origin of > rupas (kamma / citta / utu / oja) and the classification according > to characteristic / function / manifestation / proximate cause does > not appear in the Tipitaka. I believe that it first arises in > Buddhaghosa's Visuddhimagga. In other words, it is part of the > pseudo-scientific, pananca-like, commentarial literature. > > Please don't get me wrong. I am not suggesting that we stop studying > the commentarial literature. I suspect that Acariya Anuruddha and > Buddhaghosa may have been Arahants and they definitely have much to > teach us. I am suggesting that we see the commentarial literature > for what it is; use it and learn from it but that we should remember > the Buddha's words "Avoid evil, do good, purify the mind" as our > guideline as to our focus. > > Our focus in studying the citta-process should not be so much in the > memorizing of the names of the cittas, the cetasikas which appear > with each citta, etc. but focusing more on the fact that there is > seeing but there is no seer (the citta process is empty). In my > Abhidhamma class, I will continue to teach the citta vithi and the > list of cetasikas in each citta; but I will constantly remind the > students of why we are studying this stuff. This is part of my > effort to minimize pananca. > > I appreciate feedback / comments from all DSG members. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17816 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 11:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some interesting comments on Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, Rob - You ask for comments at the end of this post. I have one: I have learned much from it, and I am saving it! With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/16/02 5:20:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Robert (and All); > > Sorry for the delay in responding to this post. I've got a lot to > say about this. > > --- "rjkjp1 " > wrote: > >How do you reconcile "that > >consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise " with > the > >Abhidhammamatthasangaha: > >http://www.palikanon.com/abhidham/sangaha/chapter_6.htm > >" Material phenomena arise in four ways, viz: 1. Kamma, 2. Mind, > 3. > >Seasonal Conditions, and 4. Food." > >Seasonal conditions is utu. > > I don't see any conflict. Kamma / citta / utu / oja are what create > rupa and consciousness is a necessary condition for rupa to arise. > > I am going to make an observation here which I think is quite > interesting. I will use the citta-process (formerly called > the "thought process" until Sarah put me right :-) ) to make a point > and then return to the topic of rupa. > > In my limited reading of the Suttas, the closest the Buddha came to > describing the citta-process was in the Madhupindika Sutta (The Ball > of Honey) MN18: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn018.html > > "Dependent on eye &forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of > the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there > is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What > one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one > complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions & > categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, > present, &future forms cognizable via the eye." > > The citta-process (17 cittas in a row) was never laid down by the > Buddha in the Suttas. The citta-process is not even in the seven > volumes of the Abhidhamma. In other words, the citta-process is not > part of the Tipitaka. According to Nyanatiloka (Buddhist Dictionary - > Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines - Appendix), "citta-vithi, > as well as all terms for the various functions within the processes > of consciousness, such as avajjana-citta, sampaticchana, santirana, > votthapana, javana, tadarammana, bhavanga, cuti: none of these terms > is found in the Sutta Canon. except javana, in Pts.M. Even in the > Ahh. Canon (e.g. Patth) only javana and bhavanga are twice or thrice > briefly mentioned. The stages, however, must have been more or less > known." > > I have incredible admiration for Acariya Anuruddha. Not only was he > able to condense seven thick volumes of the Abhidhamma into fifty > pages, but he also added a significant new material (citta-process) > not found in the original. I believe that "paramattha dhamma", > another critical term in the Abhidhammatthasangaha, is also not > found in the Suttas nor in the original seven volumes of the > Abhidhamma. Citta-vithi, paramattha may have appeared in > commentarial literature prior to Anuruddha, but my point is that > they are not in the Tipitaka. > > Why is this so? > > In the Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta, the Buddha clearly defined the scope > of His teachings: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn063.html > > "And what is disclosed by me? 'This is stress,' is disclosed by > me. 'This is the origination of stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This > is the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This is the path > of practice leading to the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by me. > And why are they disclosed by me? Because they are connected with > the goal, are fundamental to the holy life. They lead to > disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, > self-awakening, Unbinding. That's why they are disclosed by me. So, > Malunkyaputta, remember what is undisclosed by me as undisclosed, > and what is disclosed by me as disclosed." > > The Buddha made it clear; he taught about the four Noble Truths... > that which was conducive to the holy life and led one to Nibbana. In > other recent posts, I have called this "Ethics" (perhaps not the > best name). So why did the Buddha deliver the Madhupindika Sutta? To > show how papanca (conceptual proliferation) arises to cloud the > mind. In his commentary to the Sutta above, Thanissaro Bhikkhu > explains how papanca arises from a lack of understanding anatta. > > The Buddha did not deliver the Madhupindika Sutta to provide > a "scientific" roadmap of the citta process. The objective in > delivering the Madhupindika Sutta was clearly in line with the > Buddha's stated objectives as laid out in the Cula-Malunkyovada > Sutta. > > My suspicion is that, though the Tipitaka provides a complete > ethical system, later thinkers did not find it "scientific" enough > and felt the need to add a layer of "pseudo-science" (not unlike > papanca) on top of the ethical base found in the Tipitaka. Citta- > vithi, paramattha and a host of other ideas were later additions > which were not taught by the Buddha because they are not essential > to the Four Noble Truths, conducive to the holy life and leading one > to Nibbana. One might also say that these mental proliferations act > as a distraction, clouding the mind so that it is more difficult to > focus on the ethical aspects of the Teaching. > > Our discussion on rupas falls into this category. The origin of > rupas (kamma / citta / utu / oja) and the classification according > to characteristic / function / manifestation / proximate cause does > not appear in the Tipitaka. I believe that it first arises in > Buddhaghosa's Visuddhimagga. In other words, it is part of the > pseudo-scientific, pananca-like, commentarial literature. > > Please don't get me wrong. I am not suggesting that we stop studying > the commentarial literature. I suspect that Acariya Anuruddha and > Buddhaghosa may have been Arahants and they definitely have much to > teach us. I am suggesting that we see the commentarial literature > for what it is; use it and learn from it but that we should remember > the Buddha's words "Avoid evil, do good, purify the mind" as our > guideline as to our focus. > > Our focus in studying the citta-process should not be so much in the > memorizing of the names of the cittas, the cetasikas which appear > with each citta, etc. but focusing more on the fact that there is > seeing but there is no seer (the citta process is empty). In my > Abhidhamma class, I will continue to teach the citta vithi and the > list of cetasikas in each citta; but I will constantly remind the > students of why we are studying this stuff. This is part of my > effort to minimize pananca. > > I appreciate feedback / comments from all DSG members. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17817 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 5:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > I hope you don't let this > conversation preempt the one you started with Howard. Basically I think > I am on a different track from the one you guys are taking. I agree that the Rob-Larry discussion, the Rob-Howard discussion and the Howard-Larry discussion are quite distinct. > > I wrote, "In my opinion kamma must reach from javana, through vipaka and > subsequent remembering of accumulations to the next javana and must > necessarily include the object of vipaka." > > What I am proposing is a full circle from javana to javana. Javana > intentionality results in a value free result but in order for good > intentions to reap good results the vipaka (value free result) must be > experienced as good. In order for that to happen, accumulations must > arise, cued by the vipaka (if not remembered). These accumulations must > then elicit a reaction (in this case favorable) to the vipaka. I am > calling this reaction another javana series. So there is a causal javana > and a resultant javana all part of the same kammic process. Do you still > think this is correct? I'm not sure. I just looked down and saw a pencil on the writing desk. Seeing a pencil arose because of conditions and vipaka. The accumulations which arose conditioned by this vipaka were moha-mula (I did not see things as they really are, "visible object", so it cannot have been kusala. I felt no attachment nor any aversion, so it was moha-mula). What kind of past kamma arose into a vipaka to allow me to see the pencil (i.e. kusala / akusla)? Impossible for anybody but a Buddha to know. "Good intentions to reaping good results" is conventional language; in Abhidhamma terms, results are never "good" or "bad". In a previous life, I studied the Dhamma (good intentions, kusala javana cittas creating "seeds" ready to develop into vipaka when conditions are right; again I emphasize that the vipaka would be called "kusala vipaka" simply because it arose from a kusala javana citta, not because of any intrinsic "goodness" in the vipaka). So in this life, among the gazillion seeds awaiting an opportunity to develop, are those "seeds" created by my past life studying of the Dhamma. Those past life kusala javana cittas did two things; created "seeds" (as discussed in the past paragraph) and they also supported an accumulation / tendency / habit of appreciating the Dhamma. This accumulation could have been developing over countless numbers of lifetimes. As a young teenager, I started developing my "own" philosophy. I spent a few years trying to discover what *I* thought. One evening, my girlfriend's father (a Christian minister) asked me about my personal philosophy. I expained in detail what I had spent years thinking about. After listening patiently for two hours, the father said, "What you have explained is Buddhism; different terminology, but essentially Buddhism." I reacted with shock, "I don't believe it! I have never studied anything about Buddhism. I find it hard to believe that independently, I could come up with one of the world's major religions." I went to the library, picked up a book on Buddhism and was shocked with what I read. Exact parallels to my "personal" philosophy. Now I understand what happened. I have a "deep accumulation" to the Dhamma, undoubtedly built up over one or more past lives. With such deep accumulation, I naturally saw situations of my young life in a way that mirrored the Dhamma. It is true that everything that happens to us is the ripening of a seed from a past action into a current vipaka. However, do not underestimate the incredible importance of accumulations or the critical role played by conditions. These three things together steer our lives. I am concerned that your javana -> vipaka -> javana circle oversimplifies the importance of accumulations and the role of conditions. > > I came up with this scenario as a way of explaining ethical behavior in > terms of citta process. Assuming you don't agree with it, how do you > explain ethical behavior (good intentions reap good results) in terms of > javana and vipaka? > How about: 1. Good intentions -> "seed for future vipaka" (not inherently good or bad) 2. Good intentions -> good accumulations 3. Conditions + "seed for future vipaka" -> current situation 4. Current situation + good accumulations -> good intentions 1 and 2 are past, 3 is present and 4 is future. (hey! this might be able to be explained in terms of paticca-samuppada! Let me think about this :-) ) > The business about vipaka including the object of the vipaka citta is, > for me, a doorway to the universe of physical objects outside the body. > A sense organ is a door and something external passes through that door > and becomes internal. A chunk of hardness doesn't interrupt the bhavanga > stream and sit there while 17 cittas react to it. Rather, some thing > that is hard touches the sensitive matter at the sense door. That > sensitive matter converts that input into something cittas can interact > with. This whatever-it-is is what interrupts the bhavanga and what 17 > cittas react to. This is obviously something I made up as a way of > explaining what is going on at the sense doors. How do you see it? I think that we are on the same page here. 1. Rupa arises - this occurs during the past bhavanga citta 2. The presence of rupa establishes a sympatheic vibration in the stream of bhavanga - this occurs during the vibrating bhavanga citta 3. It takes the duration of one more citta to cut off the flow of bhavanga citta - this is the arresting citta 4. The five sense door adverting citta redirects the flow to the appropriate sense door; the object of this citta is the rupa, even though the rupa has not been experienced yet. 5. The sense door consciousness citta contacts the rupa. This is the only citta in the citta-process where the rupa is contacted. All other cittas in the citta-process have heart-base; this is the only citta in the citta-process with some other rupa as a base. 6. The receiving / investigating / determining / javana / registration cittas all perform their function with the object (not the rupa itself, because the rupa was only contacted at the sense door consciousness citta). This is what you called "the something that the cittas can interact with" in your message. Larry, I hope that you feel that we are progressing. Others, please let me know if I have misrepresented somethin. Metta, Rob M :-) 17818 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 5:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Howard, Let me summarize: 1. You and I have very similar views on rupa 2. You see some form of interaction / interdependency in citta and cetasikas of one "being" and another. I do not see any form of interaction / interdependency. 3. Neither you nor I are qualified to discuss Nibbana. I'm okay with this if you are. Metta, Rob M :-) 17819 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 0:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/16/02 8:16:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > Let me summarize: > 1. You and I have very similar views on rupa > 2. You see some form of interaction / interdependency in citta and > cetasikas of one "being" and another. I do not see any form of > interaction / interdependency. > 3. Neither you nor I are qualified to discuss Nibbana. > > I'm okay with this if you are. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > ======================== Sounds cool! ;-) [Just one question though: Are we interacting now? If yes, then how is that happening? Must there not be an overlap between our "worlds of experience"?] With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17820 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 1:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi again, Rob - In a message dated 12/16/02 8:28:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > Just one question though: Are we interacting now? If > yes, then how is that happening? Must there not be an overlap between our > "worlds of experience"? ================================ Just to clarify: As we interact, (and, of course, we do), how does "your" kamma condition arising of rupa in "my" world of experience? Either there is a self-existent outside world that we are both parts of (this being the normal, everyday, basically objectivist and materialist understanding of most people), or, somehow, your kamma impacts my mindstream, and mine impacts yours. What do you say? With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17821 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 6:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Just one question though: Are we interacting now? If > yes, then how is that happening? Must there not be an overlap between our > "worlds of experience"? Citta in your mind creates a rupa (body intimation / vocal intimation). This intimation rupa becomes a condition which directly or indirectly allows one of my vipaka seed to mature into a vipaka (my current situation). From there, my accumulations take over to work with the condition and the vipaka to cause my response to arise. In my opinion, the interaction between "your citta and cetasika" and "my citta and cetasika" is indirect; it happens because "you create conditions" (at least from my perspective). Metta, Rob M :-) 17822 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 6:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi again Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Just to clarify: As we interact, (and, of course, we do), how does > "your" kamma condition arising of rupa in "my" world of experience? Either > there is a self-existent outside world that we are both parts of (this being > the normal, everyday, basically objectivist and materialist understanding of > most people), or, somehow, your kamma impacts my mindstream, and mine impacts > yours. What do you say? Yes, my citta (not kamma) causes body intimation / vocal intimation to arise which is then a condition for you (and visa-versa). From an "ethical" (internal) perspective, rupa exists (because it impinged on my senses). From an "ethical" (internal) perspective, how it got there is not on my radar screen. Only when I take a "scientific" perspective do I get tangled up in the outside world. It is only in the scientific perspective that the origin of that rupa is relevant. Metta, Rob M :-) 17823 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 1:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/16/02 9:14:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > >Just one question though: Are we interacting now? If > >yes, then how is that happening? Must there not be an overlap > between our > >"worlds of experience"? > > Citta in your mind creates a rupa (body intimation / vocal > intimation). > > This intimation rupa becomes a condition which directly or > indirectly allows one of my vipaka seed to mature into a vipaka (my > current situation). From there, my accumulations take over to work > with the condition and the vipaka to cause my response to arise. > > In my opinion, the interaction between "your citta and cetasika" > and "my citta and cetasika" is indirect; it happens because "you > create conditions" (at least from my perspective). > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > ============================ Okay. We're getting much closer in understanding, and I can see that our positions may be quite close. One question: Where is the point-of-contact? How does the rupa that is my kamma vipaka condition the ripening of a kammic seed of yours? Perhaps there is no contact point. P erhaps there is stream to stream conditioning, just as there is conditioning-at-a-distance within a single stream. That's fine. In any case, there is stream-to-stream interaction. That's about all that I claim. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17824 From: James Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 6:28pm Subject: Mara No More Hello All, Well, I got to the bottom of the `Mara Visitations' I was having. I went to see an expert meditation monk here in Phoenix, a personal friend of Thich Nhat Hahn (and he is traveling this month to France to see him at Plum Village for the yearly retreat), and I told him of my recent experiences. He and I meet frequently to discuss points of Buddhism but I don't consider his temple mine since he is Mahayana (http://aztec.asu.edu/worship/buddhist/sked.htm). He knew immediately the cause (I am very lucky to have access to such great teachers). He told me that they were meditation visions; which is seeing and hearing things during meditation that seem very real and can become a hindrance to progress. I told him that I wasn't meditating at the times I had the experiences, I was just thinking about anatta. He told me that I must have the kind of mind that goes into a deep meditative state just from thinking about dharma concepts (as I already knew about myself). I knew about meditation visions but had not expected them to occur during daily activities. Now that I know the cause, I don't suspect that they will bother me for much longer. We also had a very interesting, intense discussion for about three hours about Abhidhamma, anatta, consciousness, rupas, and emptiness and how these concepts compare and contrast between Mahayana and Theravada Buddhism. I could detail some of the gist of the conversation but that could be interpreted as off-topic for this list. Anyway, Mara of the sensual realm hasn't really visited me. It seems the Mara of my clinging ego wants me to stop with this whole `anatta business'. Metta, James 17825 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 6:35pm Subject: Re: Mara No More Hi James, I am sincerely happy for you. I have heard that meditation visions can be dangerous. Metta, Rob M :-) 17826 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 6:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Okay. We're getting much closer in understanding, and I can see that > our positions may be quite close. One question: Where is the > point-of-contact? How does the rupa that is my kamma vipaka condition the > ripening of a kammic seed of yours? Perhaps there is no contact point. P > erhaps there is stream to stream conditioning, just as there is > conditioning-at-a-distance within a single stream. That's fine. In any case, > there is stream-to-stream interaction. That's about all that I claim. > I see the interaction of streams as extremely indirect. Your citta causes your hand to move to type a message; goodness knows how many other things were conditioned (electrons moving in your computer, across the Internet and in my computer) before an image (visible object) appeared on my screen. As an "ethical phenomenologist", I only want to focus on direct interactions. Once I start accepting "indirect" and "indirect- indirect" and "indirect-indirect-indirect", I start down a slippery slope that leads to a non-phenomenological (and therefore outside of the scope of ethics) perspective. Metta, Rob M :-) 17827 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 1:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi, Rob - Okay. I'm seeing this matter a bit more clearly, I think. Our phenomenological understandings are similar. The main difference is that you are what you call an "ethical phenomenologist", whereas I am what might be called an "ontological phenomenologist", or a "phenomenalist", or, with William James, a "radical empiricist". [I believe that your position of ethical phenomenology is based on the view that this is what is relevant to liberation (a sentiment I share), but, ontologically, I'm not sure what your position is - I think it is a hybrid one.] With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/16/02 9:43:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Okay. We're getting much closer in understanding, and I can > see that > >our positions may be quite close. One question: Where is the > >point-of-contact? How does the rupa that is my kamma vipaka > condition the > >ripening of a kammic seed of yours? Perhaps there is no contact > point. P > >erhaps there is stream to stream conditioning, just as there is > >conditioning-at-a-distance within a single stream. That's fine. In > any case, > >there is stream-to-stream interaction. That's about all that I > claim. > > > > I see the interaction of streams as extremely indirect. Your citta > causes your hand to move to type a message; goodness knows how many > other things were conditioned (electrons moving in your computer, > across the Internet and in my computer) before an image (visible > object) appeared on my screen. > > As an "ethical phenomenologist", I only want to focus on direct > interactions. Once I start accepting "indirect" and "indirect- > indirect" and "indirect-indirect-indirect", I start down a slippery > slope that leads to a non-phenomenological (and therefore outside of > the scope of ethics) perspective. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17828 From: James Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:09pm Subject: Re: Mara No More --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi James, > > I am sincerely happy for you. I have heard that meditation visions > can be dangerous. (Yea! They scared the holy crap outta me! :-) But they are only dangerous if you attach to them and believe that they are real or significant. I was doing that, not knowing that they were coming from meditative states of mind, and so they were getting worse. Now that I know what they are, I know what to do. I am 100% positive they will stop. I just knew one thing for sure--I wasn't crazy.) > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Metta, James 17829 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Rob - > > Okay. I'm seeing this matter a bit more clearly, I think. Our > phenomenological understandings are similar. The main difference is that you > are what you call an "ethical phenomenologist", whereas I am what might be > called an "ontological phenomenologist", or a "phenomenalist", or, with > William James, a "radical empiricist". [I believe that your position of > ethical phenomenology is based on the view that this is what is relevant to > liberation (a sentiment I share), but, ontologically, I'm not sure what your > position is - I think it is a hybrid one.] When it comes to questions touching ethics (i.e. Buddhism), the only things on my radar screen are things that touch my mind. This is because I see ethics as being mind-based: "Mind is the forerunner of all evil states. Mind is chief; mind-made are they. If one speaks or acts with wicked mind, suffering follows one, even as the wheel follows the hoof of the draught-ox. Mind is the forerunner of (all good) states. Mind is chief; mind-made are they. If one speaks or acts with pure mind, affection follows one, even as one's shadow that never leaves." When it comes to non-ethics issues (I am an engineer by training), I no longer am a phenomenologist. I see non-ethics issues as not involving the mind. Metta, Rob M :-) 17830 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 8:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Rob, I agree the javana/vipaka relationship doesn't appear to support the idea "good intentions produce good results". However, I think it should support this idea because that is how I understand buddhist ethics and kamma. Maybe I have it wrong. How do you understand Buddhist ethics and kamma (I'm assuming they go together)? I'm starting to think the resultant javana idea won't work, so here's another: kusala intentions produce pleasant vedana results. Also, is there mind door javana and mind door vipaka, or is kamma only a reaction to rupa? Also, I've loosened up my ideas on what vipaka means. Today's weather probably wasn't due to a specific javana series in my past, but, due to a javana citta at the end of my past life I was born in this time and place and with this genetic make-up. Due to the combination of genes and culture I lived this long and ended up in this place and experienced today's weather. That is one way of explaining how today's weather is the result of a javana citta. Also, of course, my choice to drive a car and use coal produced electricity played a part in global warming and contributed to today's weather. However, since today's weather was pleasant, I must have done something right in the past. Knowing a tiny bit how painful pain can be, I will try to keep a sharp eye out for akusala cittas. Even though I am equipped with a powerful and sophisticated philosophy it is all someone else's wisdom as is the idea kusala cittas produce pleasant vedana. So, I just have to follow my accumulations:))) One slight misunderstanding in your reply. There is a rupa outside a sense door and a rupa inside a sense door. I am contending they are different kinds of phenomena. I asked Howard if I could call the rupa inside a sense door a consciousness, but he said no. So in my email to you I called it a "whatever-it-is". When a rupa touches the sensitive matter of a sense door, it seems to me this sensitive matter converts that input into something that can relate to bhavanga and all the other cittas. This whatever-it-is is not the same stuff as what is outside the sense door touching the sensitive matter. In addition to that, we have no real experience of rupa until sense consciousness arises. This sense consciousness is what we know directly as rupa and it is a different phenomenon from the rupa outside the sense door and the whatever-it-is. So basically, there are three rupas. Howard seemed to think the sense consciousness rupa would be overlaid with concepts but I don't think concepts come into the picture in a major way until the accumulations arise. I'm betting on sanna as being chiefly responsible for concepts and accumulations in general. I like your 4 part kamma progression: 1. Good intentions -> "seed for future vipaka" (not inherently good or bad) 2. Good intentions -> good accumulations 3. Conditions + "seed for future vipaka" -> current situation 4. Current situation + good accumulations -> good intentions L: My only qualm is that we have to say "current situation" is neither good nor bad. We can at least say current situation is pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral, and we can also say current situation is dukkha. Is that enough to satisfy a moral imperative? Larry 17831 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 8:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mara No More Hi James, I'm very glad to read your report. It sounds as though this wise monk was just the person to visit and it all makes very good sense. It must have been a really helpful encounter. Thank you for sharing the report. Sarah p.s - I hope you saw my DSG note to you yesterday - it didn't come through on escribe or my inbox even tho' it's there on the website. 17832 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 8:49pm Subject: Perfections, Ch 7, no 2 Perfections, Ch 7, no 2 If sati-sampajañña arises, the perfection of patience will become more refined. We need patience and endurance, because akusala citta arises often in daily life. Patience in our daily life is ³adhivåsanå khanti². The Påli word adhivasati means to inhabit (våso is habitation), and adhivåsanå khanti is acceptance and endurance with regard to our living conditions, our environment, the place where we live, thus, the dhamma of each moment. This is, for example, the change of temperature which may be hot or cold. If sati-sampajañña does not arise, we may say, ³It is very hot², and then there is likely to be already akusala citta. If sati-sampajañña has become more refined, we can find out whether our patience in action and speech with regard to our environment is deficient or whether it has grown and developed. There is khanti påramí, the perfection of patience, when sati-sampajañña arises and knows the characteristic of the citta at that moment. If sati-sampajañña knows that there is akusala citta there are conditions for the arising of kusala citta instead. If patience is developed, someone who was in the habit of complaining can refrain from it, and someone who usually was bad-tempered can understand that this is useless. If someone dislikes particular objects, he can understand that this is akusala which does not serve any purpose at all and then sati-sampajañña can arise so that the perfection of patience can further develop. In daily life we need a great deal of patience, because apart from endurance with regard to our environment or living conditions, we have to be patient and tolerant towards people with different characters and habits. Some people are in the habit of doing everything quickly, and they should be patient with people who are slow in their actions. We may meet someone who is of contrarious behaviour, but we should be patient and tolerant towards him and not complain about him. If sati-sampajañña arises there are conditions to refrain from critizing or blaming such a person, to think with mettå of giving him guidance, support and advice at the appropriate occasion. Thus we see that the perfection of khanti should not be lacking in our daily life. There should be patience and endurance in our manners and behaviour. For example, when people travel together there are bound to be difficulties as regards seats and sleeping places, the means of transportation and appointments. When someone does not complain and does not criticize, and when he has sympathetic understanding and assists others, his fellowmen will approve of him and praise him. We should know that akusala dhammas, including lobha and dosa, cannot endure, but only sobhana (beautiful) cetasikas can endure. When we see someone who is impeccable in action, speech and thinking, we know that he has endurance with regard to the different situations and events that occur, because his sobhana cetasikas have been developed. There is no being, person or self, but only sobhana cetasikas which develop when kusala citta arises. However, when patience is lacking akusala citta arises. ****** 17833 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 8:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Jon and Steve, There is a great deal on aspects of nibbana in the Book of Analysis, Ch 4, Analysis of Truth. See the truth of cessation. Considering these aspects helps us to understand a little more about the nature of nibbana. It is good to study Num's post on the Path of Discrimination 6, giving several aspects, like animitta, not nimitta which is conditioned dhamma. One aspect that may interest some who believe nibbana is a higher kind of consciousness: the Truth of cessation has no object. And: the Truth of cessation is not coexistent with consciousness. Nina op 16-12-2002 01:03 schreef jonoabb op jonoabb@y...: > --- Bodhi2500@a... wrote: > ... >> Does anyone know what the Abhidhamma states as Nibbana's own >> charateristics(sabhava??)? 17834 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 3:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi, Rob - Great! Crystal clear!! With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/16/02 10:36:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > When it comes to questions touching ethics (i.e. Buddhism), the only > things on my radar screen are things that touch my mind. This is > because I see ethics as being mind-based: > > "Mind is the forerunner of all evil states. Mind is chief; mind-made > are they. If one speaks or acts with wicked mind, suffering follows > one, even as the wheel follows the hoof of the draught-ox. Mind is > the forerunner of (all good) states. Mind is chief; mind-made are > they. If one speaks or acts with pure mind, affection follows one, > even as one's shadow that never leaves." > > When it comes to non-ethics issues (I am an engineer by training), I > no longer am a phenomenologist. I see non-ethics issues as not > involving the mind. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17835 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 9:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Maybe a little message to help things along Dear Dion, Others have added comments to your post and welcomed you on here. For any newcomers to DSG, I think it must be very confusing and frustrating in the beginning when one doesn’t ‘know’ any of the people or understand any of the threads of discussion, some of which go back a long way. Please be patient and don’t give up! A few tips: 1. Don’t try to read everything in the beginning - just select threads which seem relevant to you or can easily be understood. 2. Start your own threads - ask (polite) questions about topics which seem more relevant to your practice. 3. Refer to the Pali glossary -print it out to have next to the computer: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Glossary_of_pali_terms 4. Refer to Useful Posts and in particular, posts under ‘New to the list...’ .,’Abhidhamma -New...’ and ‘Pali’ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts 5. If you’re getting confused by all the names and the different Robs - look at the photo section under photos on the left of the home page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup (also if any new members post their photos, we’d all appreciate it ) 6. Feel free to ask for help or clarification anytime. There is a lot of goodwill and a large number of members who are always willing to help out. Everyone has been new to the list at sometime or other;-) ***** Hope you find your stay useful and enjoyable. Sarah ===== p.s Nina is now getting her mail, so I think anyone can now write to her on list (it seems her inbox was full - she may have received a large document). One of the first messages she got was yours, Dion. She laughed about ‘that Nina person’ and now refers to herself in that way;-). She also stresses that no one needs to read or like any of her books - we can all just choose what we find helpful. She looks forward to hearing more people talk about ‘experiences in life’ and to more friendships with you and others. ***** 17836 From: James Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 9:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mara No More --- Sarah wrote: > Hi James, > > I'm very glad to read your report. It sounds as though this wise monk was > just the person to visit and it all makes very good sense. It must have > been a really helpful encounter. > > Thank you for sharing the report. > > Sarah > > p.s - I hope you saw my DSG note to you yesterday - it didn't come through > on escribe or my inbox even tho' it's there on the website. Dear Sarah, Oh, no, I had missed that post. I skipped a lot of posts I thought were unrelated to me and yours was buried. I think you had a problem with my statement that lobha isn't completely abandoned in Arahants/Buddhas/Silent Buddhas. You state that the suttas say otherwise and would like proof of my statement. *Sigh* Okay, I did a quick search and found one telling sutta. I am sure I could find others but I don't see the point of that. As was already pointed out in this list, the Buddha had certain 'defilements' in regards to his view of women, that is proof enough of my statement. But I will provide more proof since you seem amazed and shocked by my comment. Here are the defilements: 1. abhijjha-visama-lobha, covetousness and unrighteous greed 2. byapada, ill will 3. kodha, anger 4. upanaha, hostility or malice 5. makkha, denigration or detraction; contempt 6. palasa, domineering or presumption 7. issa, envy 8. macchariya, jealousy, or avarice; selfishness 9. maya, hypocrisy or deceit 10. satheyya, fraud 11. thambha, obstinacy, obduracy 12. sarambha, presumption or rivalry; impetuosity 13. mana, conceit 14. atimana, arrogance, haughtiness 15. mada, vanity or pride 16. pamada, negligence or heedlessness; in social behavior, this leads to lack of consideration. Here is the sutta where the Buddha proclaims that they are only abondoned "in part" by aryians: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn007.html Please don't ask me to prove more. This makes me very uncomfortable to even prove this much. I don't like to focus on what can't be done; I like to focus on what can be done. But the goal should be reasonable and not based on 'wishful fantasy'. I am not sure what the Abhidhamma says in regards to this issue. I don't believe/follow the Abhidhamma. Metta, James 17837 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 9:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Dear Nina, Steve & Jon, I just posted before I saw yr messages;-) --- nilo@e... wrote: > Jon and Steve, > There is a great deal on aspects of nibbana in the Book of Analysis, Ch > 4, > Analysis of Truth. See the truth of cessation. Considering these aspects > helps us to understand a little more about the nature of nibbana. .... We also had some discussion before on sabhava and nibbana (there will be more quotes from texts in U.P. under 'sabhava' or 'nibbana' on this). There is a lot of detail in a couple of footnotes in Vism (BPS), esp V111, n68, p.789. One quote from it: "Of nibbana (for which see XV1, 46ff), which has its own individual essence, the Mula Tika says: 'Nibbana is not like other dhammas; because of its extreme profundity it cannot be made an object of consciousness (aalambitu.m) by one who has not realized it. that is why it has to be realized by change-of-lineage. it has profundity surpasing any individual essence belonging to the three periods of time' (VbhAA.38)." ***** Sarah ====== 17838 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 9:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Some interesting comments on Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Rob, My main response is that people who are only interested in what the Buddha himself said are people who don't talk to other people about buddhadhamma. And what do you mean by pseudo science? They got it wrong? If so, how should it go? Here is a snippet from the introduction to "A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma": While it is tempting to try to discern evidence of historical development in the Commentaries over and beyond the ideas imbedded in the Abhidhamma Pitaka, it is risky to push this line too far, for a great deal of the canonical Abhidhamma seems to require the Commentaries to contribute the unifying context in which the individual elements hang together as parts of a systematic whole and without which they lose important dimensions of meaning. It is thus not unreasonable to assume that a substantial portion of the commentarial apparatus originated in close proximity to the canonical Abhidhamma and was transmitted concurrently with the latter; though lacking the stamp of finality it was open to modification and amplification in a way that the canonical texts were not. Bearing this in mind, we might briefly note a few of the Abhidhammic conceptions that are characteristic of the Commentaries but either unknown or recessive in the Abhidhamma Pitaka itself. L: It then lists citta process, "moment" for "occasion", arising, presense, and dissolusion of a moment, kalapa as a way of organizing material phenomena, heart base, a limited number of cetasikas, intrinsic nature, and the defining device of characteristic, function, manifestation, and proximate cause. It doesn't attribute any of these concepts to Acariya Anuruddha. The CMA is a manual for beginners, not a commentary. Its usefulness is very much a matter of accumulations and javana cittas, but I would say it has survived the test of time, so far. Larry 17839 From: robmoult Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 0:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some interesting comments on Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > My main response is that people who are only interested in what the > Buddha himself said are people who don't talk to other people about > buddhadhamma. And what do you mean by pseudo science? They got it wrong? I hope that you are not counting me as one of those "who are only interested in what the Buddha himself said". Here is a key message from my posting: Please don't get me wrong. I am not suggesting that we stop studying the commentarial literature. I suspect that Acariya Anuruddha and Buddhaghosa may have been Arahants and they definitely have much to teach us. I am suggesting that we see the commentarial literature for what it is; use it and learn from it but that we should remember the Buddha's words "Avoid evil, do good, purify the mind" as our guideline as to our focus. I am not making any comment about the accuracy or inaccuracy of the commentaries. I am commenting that much of what is in the commentaries takes a "scientific view" rather than an "ethical view". A "scientific view" is concerned with creating accurate models of reality and with classifications; these things are not part of "ethics". For example, what if there three javana cittas in a thought process rather than seven; it would change the model but it would have no bearing on ethics. Similarly, if there were really 90 classifications of cittas rather than 89, that would not have any ethical impact either. I call this scientific because it is disconnected from ethics. I added the prefix "pseudo-" because it may not qualify under today's definitions of "science" (i.e. repeatable, measurable results, etc.). I did not mean the term "pseudo-science" to have any negative connotations. Metta, Rob M :-) 17840 From: robmoult Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 1:17am Subject: Going off-line Friends, I will be spending the next few days in cities in China whose names I can't pronounce. My internet access does not extend to these cities, so I will not be able to respond to messages. Please don't think that I am ignoring you... I will reply. Metta, Rob M :-) 17841 From: Star Kid Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 2:30am Subject: Reply to James Dear James: Thanks a lot for writing to me in 17230. I certainly agree with you in the letter that when we do wrong things, we should always apologise to people. I am very surprsed that you would use the example of the cartoon Winnie the Pooh. I also agree that we should always be optimistic, so we would enjoy life. Once again, thanks a lot for writing and for your advice. Merry Christmas! Yours sincerely, Philip 17842 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 2:38am Subject: Samvega and Pasada Dear Group, The anxious and weary feeling that life is pointless and sometimes unbearable, that no matter how happy or enjoyable something is - it's doomed to change and end, an intense desire for things to be different, the irresistable attraction of the Teachings - that's samvega and pasada. Be glad of it, it means hopefully you won't waste this rare human birth on mundane pleasures. Samvega means a sense of urgency to escape the round of meaningless existence; and pasada, a clarity and serene confidence that allows one to proceed confidently towards the goal without lapsing into despair. A modern day cause of Samvega? http://www.antiwar.com/ Affirming the Truths of the Heart - The Buddist teachings on Samvega & Pasada. Thanissaro Bhikkhu. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/affirming.html Suttas about Samvega: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/affirming.html Samyutta Nikaya III.25 Pabbatopama Sutta 'The Simile of the Mountains' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn03-025.htmlSutta Nipata II.10 Utthana Sutta 'On Vigilance' http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/5354/snp2-10.htm Anguttara Nikaya III.91 Accayika Sutta 'Urgent' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an03-091.html Anguttara Nikaya V.77-80 Anagata-bhayani Suttas 'The Discourses on Future Dangers' (four consecutive suttas) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an05-077.html#1 And my favourite yet again - sorry, but there's no link - I just think this translation is much more elegant than the one at ATI. Majjhima Nikaya 131 Bhaddekaratta Sutta 'A Single Excellent Night' (Bhikkhus Nanomoli and Bodhi trans.) "Let not a person revive the past Or on the future build his hopes; For the past has been left behind And the future has not been reached. Instead with insight let him see Each presently arisen state; Let him know that and be sure of it, Invincibly, unshakeably. Today the effort must be made; Tomorrow Death may come, who knows? No bargain with Mortality Can keep him and his hordes away, But one who dwells thus ardently, Relentlessly, by day, by night - It is he, the Peaceful Sage has said, Who has had a single excellent night." metta, Christine 17843 From: ajahn_paul Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 3:21am Subject: Re: May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan thx Rob! ^_~ --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Ajahn Paul, > > The book was prepared in Penang. I have sent a letter to Penang > asking for a copy to be sent to me. No reply yet. I will be > following up with a phone call next week. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17844 From: chase8383 Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 4:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mara No More Hi James From the Bloodstream Sermon of Bodhidharma: >>Everything that appears in the three realms comes from the mind. Hence Buddhas of the past and future teach mind to mind without bothering about definitions. Student: But if they don't define it, what do they mean by mind? Bodhidharma: You ask. That's your mind. I answer. That's my mind. If I had no mind how could I answer? If you had no mind, how could you ask? That which asks is your mind. Through endless kalpas" without beginning, whatever you do, wherever you are, that's your real mind, that's your real buddha. This mind is the buddha" says the same thing. Beyond this mind you'll never find another Buddha. To search for enlightenment or nirvana beyond this mind is impossible. The reality of your own self-nature the absence of cause and effect, is what's meant by mind. Your mind is nirvana. You might think you can find a Buddha or enlightenment somewhere beyond the mind', but such a place doesn't exist.Trying to find a Buddha or enlightenment is like trying to grab space. Space has a name but no form. It's not something you can pick up or put down. And you certainly can't grab if. Beyond mind you'll never see a Buddha. The Buddha is a product of the mind. Why look for a Buddha beyond this mind? Buddhas of the past and future only talk about this mind. The mind is the Buddha, and the Buddha is the mind. Beyond the mind there's no Buddha and beyond the Buddha there's no mind. If you think there is a Buddha beyond the mind', where is he? There's no Buddha beyond the mind, so why envision one? You can't know your real mind as long as you deceive yourself. As long as you're enthralled by a lifeless form, you're not free. If you don't believe me, deceiving yourself won't help. It's not the Buddha's fault. People, though, are deluded. They're unaware that their own mind is the Buddha. Otherwise they wouldn't look for a Buddha outside the mind. Buddhas don't save Buddhas. If you use your mind to look for a Buddha, you won't see the Buddha. As long as you look for a Buddha somewhere else, you'll never see that your own mind is the Buddha. Don't use a Buddha to worship a Buddha. And don't use the mind to invoke a Buddha." Buddhas don't recite sutras." Buddhas don't keep precepts." And Buddhas don't break precepts. Buddhas don't keep or break anything. Buddhas don't do good or evil. To find a Buddha, you have to see your nature." Whoever sees his nature is a Buddha. If you don't see your nature, invoking Buddhas, reciting sutras, making offerings, and keeping precepts are all useless. Invoking Buddhas results in good karma, reciting sutras results in a good memory; keeping precepts results in a good rebirth, and making offerings results in future blessings-but no buddha. If you don't understand by yourself, you'll have to find a teacher to get to the bottom of life and death. But unless he sees his nature, such a person isn't a tea6er. Even if he can recite the Twelvefold Canon he can't escape the Wheel of Birth and Death. He suffers in the three realms without hope of release. Long ago, the monk Good Star 21 was able to recite the entire Canon. But he didn't escape the Wheel, because he didn't see his nature. If this was the case with Good Star, then people nowadays who recite a few sutras or shastras and think it's the Dharma are fools. Unless you see your mind, reciting so much prose is useless.<< James: "I think you had a problem with my statement that lobha isn't completely abandoned in Arahants/Buddhas/Silent Buddhas. You state that the suttas say otherwise and would like proof of my statement. *Sigh* Okay, I did a quick search and found one telling sutta. I am sure I could find others but I don't see the point of that. As was already pointed out in this list, the Buddha had certain 'defilements' in regards to his view of women, that is proof enough of my statement. But I will provide more proof since you seem amazed and shocked by my comment. Here are the defilements: 1. abhijjha-visama-lobha, covetousness and unrighteous greed 2. byapada, ill will 3. kodha, anger 4. upanaha, hostility or malice 5. makkha, denigration or detraction; contempt 6. palasa, domineering or presumption 7. issa, envy 8. macchariya, jealousy, or avarice; selfishness 9. maya, hypocrisy or deceit 10. satheyya, fraud 11. thambha, obstinacy, obduracy 12. sarambha, presumption or rivalry; impetuosity 13. mana, conceit 14. atimana, arrogance, haughtiness 15. mada, vanity or pride 16. pamada, negligence or heedlessness; in social behavior, this leads to lack of consideration." Peace, David 17845 From: Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 0:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some interesting comments on Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, Larry (and Rob) - In a message dated 12/17/02 12:59:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > ... Bearing this in mind, we might briefly > note a few of the Abhidhammic conceptions that are characteristic of the > Commentaries but either unknown or recessive in the Abhidhamma Pitaka > itself. > > L: It then lists citta process, "moment" for "occasion", arising, > presense, and dissolusion of a moment, kalapa as a way of organizing > material phenomena, heart base, a limited number of cetasikas, intrinsic > nature, and the defining device of characteristic, function, > manifestation, and proximate cause. It doesn't attribute any of these > concepts to Acariya Anuruddha. The CMA is a manual for beginners, not a > commentary. Its usefulness is very much a matter of accumulations and > javana cittas, but I would say it has survived the test of time, so far. > > ========================== So you are saying that all these notions provided in the list appear in the commentaries but not in the Abhidhamma Pitaka, itself? If so, I have just felt the cheese become a bit more binding. Included in this list are such troublesome-to-some notions as moments and their phases, kalapas, and intrinsic nature. These notions are among those which lie at the frontier of differentiation between Theravada and Mahayana. [Two things have arisen in me: 1) an increase in caution with regard to the commentaries, and 2) an increase in confidence in the Abhidhamma Pitaka and its origins. But these are just tentative inclinations on my part - nothing firm yet.] I have a copy of the CMA. I look forward to reexamining its introduction. I'm particularly interested in seeing which cetasikas are not included in the Abhidhamma Pitaka. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17846 From: chase8383 Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 5:01am Subject: Re: Samvega and Pasada Hi Christine Excellent post. You quoted: ""Let not a person revive the past Or on the future build his hopes; For the past has been left behind And the future has not been reached. Instead with insight let him see Each presently arisen state; Let him know that and be sure of it, Invincibly, unshakeably. Today the effort must be made; Tomorrow Death may come, who knows? No bargain with Mortality Can keep him and his hordes away, But one who dwells thus ardently, Relentlessly, by day, by night - It is he, the Peaceful Sage has said, Who has had a single excellent night." When a log burns, it becomes ash. Why worry about how it became ash? It's ash now. When a bird flys from one tree to another, it's in the other tree now. Did it leave a trace as it flew through the air? Is part of it still in the tree it flew from? No, it's just in the tree it flew to. Peace, David 17847 From: Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 0:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Going off-line Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/17/02 4:18:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Friends, > > I will be spending the next few days in cities in China whose names > I can't pronounce. My internet access does not extend to these > cities, so I will not be able to respond to messages. > > Please don't think that I am ignoring you... I will reply. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > ============================= Have a wonderful trip, Rob. BTW, I've thoroughly enjoyed our recent exchanges. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17848 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 5:28am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis With due respect, there is suffering kind rgds KC --- "ven.yanatharo.bikkhu" wrote: > Dear Peter, thank you for explaining to all the members this rules. > If I was > a woman, under no circunstances I will humiliate myself to be > treaty that > way. Many times I have to shut and bite my tonge when I see in the > temples > where I go ( this afternoon for example) the Sri Lanka monk is in > SriLanka > so at 5 pm I am conducting by myself the entire ceremony, allthe > men will > kneel in the front and the women at the back. It looks like the > 21st century > has not reach Buddhism. Ven. Yanatharo > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: peterdac4298 > [mailto:peterdac4298@y...] > Enviado el: Domingo, Diciembre 15, 2002 12:21 p.m. > Asunto: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis > > > Hi Christine, Sarah, and all > > In my previous post on this thread I used the > expression "intimidating and demeaning" in brief reference to the > original, historic Bhikkhuni Sangha, and how this was absent from > the more democratic Amaravati style DSM Sangha of today. I feel I > aught to expand this so as to avoid any misunderstanding. > > As most of us are aware, at the time of the Buddha, when Ananda > thrice requested the admittance of women to the Sangha, the Buddha > replied in what could be seen by todays standards as rather a > derogatory, if not paranoid manner. > > He spoke about the Sasana lasting only half the time it originally > would have. And also insisted on eight restrictions ('capital > points', ~Naa.namoli) to be imposed on the nuns as a condition for > their admittance. One of which was that a nun of advanced > seniority > would be junior to a monk newly admitted that very day. Another > spoke of Bhikkhunis not being allowed to find fault with Bhikkhus > nor admonish them at all. A Bhikkhuni must never address > discourses > to Bhikkhus, but Bhikkhus may address discourses to Bhikkhunis. In > the matter of grave offences a Bhikkhuni must do penance before > both > Sanghas. Additionally to these eight capital points, a Bhikkhuni > must be given the admission by both Sanghas (and is why the lineage > could not be restored once broken: hence the need to find an > unbroken branch elsewhere). > > The Buddha gave his reasons for insisting on these eight conditions > of acceptance. He unflatteringly likened women in the Sangha to a > rice field being infected by various kinds of fungus or mildew. A > clan with too many women and too few men is vulnerable to robbers > and bandits is likened to the Sangha with women admitted. "...As > a > man might construct in advance an embankment so that the waters of > a > great reservoir should not cause a flood, so I too have made known > in advance these eight cardinal points..." (~Naa.namoli) > > Now this can't be explained as some kind of slip of the tongue, or > even playing to contemporary sensibilities. These are powerful and > systematic statements. What are we to make of them? The Buddha, > having willingly recognised their equal ability to fully penetrate > and realize the Dhamma, is more than creating an historic precedent > by granting women the admission. This is virtual revolution by the > standards of that time. But he goes to great lengths to ensure > that > there is no mistaking his view on female admission. It's always > possible the Buddha, being a mere mortal, had some kind of a blind > spot and got this bit wrong! > > Either way, the Amaravati DSM's evade this whole issue, and seem > quite happy having equal rank with Bhikkhus even though it is only > within the Amaravati Sangha. They enjoy the holy life, exhibit a > mature understanding of the Dhamma and are much sought after for > teaching engagements. > > Cheers > Peter > > --- "christine_forsyth > " wrote: > > Hi Sarah, and all, > > > > You are correct - any discussion of this matter on this list, > > particularly between you and I, has been respectfully conducted. > > The rest is probably my subjective interpretation. Implacability, > > though, has been evinced by people taking the 'the scriptures say > > it's impossible to reinstate' line. e.g. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15646 > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15653 > > > > Of great interest to me is this article which states: 'There is > > permission in the Vinaya Chullavagga for monks to ordain nuns." > > and, "the Bhikkhuni Sasana has been revived in Sri Lanka > According > > to full Theravada ceremonial." > > http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/nunorder.htm > > > > > metta, > > > > Christine > > > > > > --- Sarah > wrote: > > > Dear Christine, > > > > > > --- "christine_forsyth " > > > wrote: > Dear Peter, > > > > > > > > On a number of lists (including this one) and over a period > of > > time, > > > > I have found the topic of the Bhikkuni Sangha, and > especially > > the > > > > issue of its Restoration in terms of the original, to be > > > > uncomfortable to many posters. 17849 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 5:28am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis With due respect, I mean this is suffering kind rgds KC --- "ven.yanatharo.bikkhu" wrote: > Dear Peter, thank you for explaining to all the members this rules. > If I was > a woman, under no circunstances I will humiliate myself to be > treaty that > way. Many times I have to shut and bite my tonge when I see in the > temples > where I go ( this afternoon for example) the Sri Lanka monk is in > SriLanka > so at 5 pm I am conducting by myself the entire ceremony, allthe > men will > kneel in the front and the women at the back. It looks like the > 21st century > has not reach Buddhism. Ven. Yanatharo > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: peterdac4298 > [mailto:peterdac4298@y...] > Enviado el: Domingo, Diciembre 15, 2002 12:21 p.m. > Asunto: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis > > > Hi Christine, Sarah, and all > > In my previous post on this thread I used the > expression "intimidating and demeaning" in brief reference to the > original, historic Bhikkhuni Sangha, and how this was absent from > the more democratic Amaravati style DSM Sangha of today. I feel I > aught to expand this so as to avoid any misunderstanding. > > As most of us are aware, at the time of the Buddha, when Ananda > thrice requested the admittance of women to the Sangha, the Buddha > replied in what could be seen by todays standards as rather a > derogatory, if not paranoid manner. > > He spoke about the Sasana lasting only half the time it originally > would have. And also insisted on eight restrictions ('capital > points', ~Naa.namoli) to be imposed on the nuns as a condition for > their admittance. One of which was that a nun of advanced > seniority > would be junior to a monk newly admitted that very day. Another > spoke of Bhikkhunis not being allowed to find fault with Bhikkhus > nor admonish them at all. A Bhikkhuni must never address > discourses > to Bhikkhus, but Bhikkhus may address discourses to Bhikkhunis. In > the matter of grave offences a Bhikkhuni must do penance before > both > Sanghas. Additionally to these eight capital points, a Bhikkhuni > must be given the admission by both Sanghas (and is why the lineage > could not be restored once broken: hence the need to find an > unbroken branch elsewhere). > > The Buddha gave his reasons for insisting on these eight conditions > of acceptance. He unflatteringly likened women in the Sangha to a > rice field being infected by various kinds of fungus or mildew. A > clan with too many women and too few men is vulnerable to robbers > and bandits is likened to the Sangha with women admitted. "...As > a > man might construct in advance an embankment so that the waters of > a > great reservoir should not cause a flood, so I too have made known > in advance these eight cardinal points..." (~Naa.namoli) > > Now this can't be explained as some kind of slip of the tongue, or > even playing to contemporary sensibilities. These are powerful and > systematic statements. What are we to make of them? The Buddha, > having willingly recognised their equal ability to fully penetrate > and realize the Dhamma, is more than creating an historic precedent > by granting women the admission. This is virtual revolution by the > standards of that time. But he goes to great lengths to ensure > that > there is no mistaking his view on female admission. It's always > possible the Buddha, being a mere mortal, had some kind of a blind > spot and got this bit wrong! > > Either way, the Amaravati DSM's evade this whole issue, and seem > quite happy having equal rank with Bhikkhus even though it is only > within the Amaravati Sangha. They enjoy the holy life, exhibit a > mature understanding of the Dhamma and are much sought after for > teaching engagements. > > Cheers > Peter > > --- "christine_forsyth > " wrote: > > Hi Sarah, and all, > > > > You are correct - any discussion of this matter on this list, > > particularly between you and I, has been respectfully conducted. > > The rest is probably my subjective interpretation. Implacability, > > though, has been evinced by people taking the 'the scriptures say > > it's impossible to reinstate' line. e.g. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15646 > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15653 > > > > Of great interest to me is this article which states: 'There is > > permission in the Vinaya Chullavagga for monks to ordain nuns." > > and, "the Bhikkhuni Sasana has been revived in Sri Lanka > According > > to full Theravada ceremonial." > > http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/nunorder.htm > > > > > metta, > > > > Christine > > > > > > --- Sarah > wrote: 17850 From: nidive Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 5:57am Subject: Do brahmas experience vipaka? Since brahmas have no five senses, does this mean they don't experience vipaka of any kind? If not, how do they experience vipaka? 17851 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 7:18am Subject: RE: [dsg] Do brahmas experience vipaka? Dear Swee Boon, Only arupa brahmas and a particular rupa brahma doesn't have the 5 senses. The arupa brahmas have vipaka cittas too. The bhavanga cittas interrupting the citta vithis are vipaka. Also, if they reach the supra-mundane path, the supra-mundane fruit is vipaka. Also, if they have meditation on supra-mundane fruit (as an Ariyan), the citta vithi is vipaka. We can't verify any of this, can we? kom > -----Original Message----- > From: nidive [mailto:nidive@y...] > Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 5:58 AM > Subject: [dsg] Do brahmas experience vipaka? > > > Since brahmas have no five senses, does this mean > they don't > experience vipaka of any kind? If not, how do > they experience vipaka? 17852 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 7:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis Hi Peter "It's always > possible the Buddha, being a mere mortal, had some kind of a blind > spot and got this bit wrong!" Buddha does not have a blind spot and he has good reasons to do this. He is a man of equality, he has reservation, then there must be very good reason and not discounting that he could see things in the future. As I said before, Buddha is not affected by any norms or culture. I think it is not fair to judge his actions of him putting so much rules on a Bhikkhunis and his actions seems to be of inequality. His rules are not to be changed. For this we have to accept it even though it could be very hard for us bc now we are in the world where all humans have equal rights. It is also wrong for us to do against his rules bc there are very good reasons for him doing that. We are not at his level, so if we need to accept his teachings then we got to accepts his reasons on issues that he don't wish to discuss too much on. Certain norms set by him previously have been changed. The consequences is very damaging to the Sangha world. Take for example the acceptance of money rather than begging in the Chinese customs. What was meant to suite cultural norms at that time but its initial good intention has been corroded and has now becoming a maglinant cancer. If my words are too strong, I am very sorry but this is a truth I have observe. But what to do, even Buddha laws will eventually disappear from this world. Solemn and disheartening but this is the truth. rgds KC --- "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi Christine, Sarah, and all > > In my previous post on this thread I used the > expression "intimidating and demeaning" in brief reference to the > original, historic Bhikkhuni Sangha, and how this was absent from > the more democratic Amaravati style DSM Sangha of today. I feel I > aught to expand this so as to avoid any misunderstanding. > > As most of us are aware, at the time of the Buddha, when Ananda > thrice requested the admittance of women to the Sangha, the Buddha > replied in what could be seen by todays standards as rather a > derogatory, if not paranoid manner. > > He spoke about the Sasana lasting only half the time it originally > would have. And also insisted on eight restrictions ('capital > points', ~Naa.namoli) to be imposed on the nuns as a condition for > their admittance. One of which was that a nun of advanced > seniority > would be junior to a monk newly admitted that very day. Another > spoke of Bhikkhunis not being allowed to find fault with Bhikkhus > nor admonish them at all. A Bhikkhuni must never address > discourses > to Bhikkhus, but Bhikkhus may address discourses to Bhikkhunis. In > > the matter of grave offences a Bhikkhuni must do penance before > both > Sanghas. Additionally to these eight capital points, a Bhikkhuni > must be given the admission by both Sanghas (and is why the lineage > > could not be restored once broken: hence the need to find an > unbroken branch elsewhere). > > The Buddha gave his reasons for insisting on these eight conditions > > of acceptance. He unflatteringly likened women in the Sangha to a > rice field being infected by various kinds of fungus or mildew. A > clan with too many women and too few men is vulnerable to robbers > and bandits is likened to the Sangha with women admitted. "...As > a > man might construct in advance an embankment so that the waters of > a > great reservoir should not cause a flood, so I too have made known > in advance these eight cardinal points..." (~Naa.namoli) > > Now this can't be explained as some kind of slip of the tongue, or > even playing to contemporary sensibilities. These are powerful and > > systematic statements. What are we to make of them? The Buddha, > having willingly recognised their equal ability to fully penetrate > and realize the Dhamma, is more than creating an historic precedent > > by granting women the admission. This is virtual revolution by the > > standards of that time. But he goes to great lengths to ensure > that > there is no mistaking his view on female admission. It's always > possible the Buddha, being a mere mortal, had some kind of a blind > spot and got this bit wrong! > > Either way, the Amaravati DSM's evade this whole issue, and seem > quite happy having equal rank with Bhikkhus even though it is only > within the Amaravati Sangha. They enjoy the holy life, exhibit a > mature understanding of the Dhamma and are much sought after for > teaching engagements. > > Cheers > Peter > > --- "christine_forsyth > " wrote: > > Hi Sarah, and all, > > > > You are correct - any discussion of this matter on this list, > > particularly between you and I, has been respectfully conducted. > > > The rest is probably my subjective interpretation. Implacability, > > > though, has been evinced by people taking the 'the scriptures say > > > it's impossible to reinstate' line. e.g. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15646 > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15653 > > > > Of great interest to me is this article which states: 'There is > > permission in the Vinaya Chullavagga for monks to ordain nuns." > > and, "the Bhikkhuni Sasana has been revived in Sri Lanka > According > > to full Theravada ceremonial." > > http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/nunorder.htm > > > > > metta, > > > > Christine 17853 From: James Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 8:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mara No More --- "chase8383 " wrote: Hi David, What you describe is The Third Gate of the Dharma Seal of Mahayana Buddhism; called 'Wishlessness'. Not only is it off-topic for this list, it is impossible to reach with so much platitudes. Metta, James 17854 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 11:48am Subject: Re: Samvega and Pasada Hi David, You wrote: "When a log burns, it becomes ash. Why worry about how it became ash? It's ash now. When a bird flys from one tree to another, it's in the other tree now. Did it leave a trace as it flew through the air? Is part of it still in the tree it flew from? No, it's just in the tree it flew to. " I agree. But living one's life that way is a little more difficult. Your mention of the bird flying from one tree to another, reminds me of this poem (cut and pasted below) on the Present Moment being all there is. The poem takes a lot longer to say what you did in fewer words. :) Thanks. metta, Christine Excerpts from "Now and Then" June 18, 1995 Each and every morning, first this spring and now this summer, a house wren calls out. He calls out, "I am THIS house wren and this is my house. Stay away." His house is a hole in the wall of the house neighbouring this building. It is a brick wall that faces onto and adjoins the monastery garden. The house wren sits in this hole sometimes, and there he calls out his message. Sometimes, however, he sits amongst the branches and leaves of the sumac tree. Sometimes he sits on the wires. Now he is here and now he's there. When here, it is here, now. When there, it is then. But when "then" was "now," "there" was "here." Whenever anything happens it happens now and "now" IS this "happening." Each moment, when it is THIS moment, is right now. But "then" was once "now" and "right now" tick tick tick is now "then." This moment is not the past moment, not the future moment but in this moment what happens as this moment both shows and hides the past. The bird was "there" and now is "here." The future, however, seems to be utterly hidden. We can have some very small sense of the future, in that, we can know, somewhat, the future completion of the motion of lifting, placing, and setting the foot. But we might die before the foot makes contact with the next stair and go tumbling down. We don't know. We don't know. The future is that hidden. Because it is so hidden from us, we can engage in all manner of speculation. We can lose ourselves in all manner of hopes and fears. We can imagine future glories, or complete and abject failure, or any combination thereof... And so it can seem to us that time moves as past, present and future. Each moment has a past and a future. Each moment is this moment and there is only this moment. But each moment, when it is this moment, is only this moment. And this moment contains within itself past and future. But "past" and "future" only have meaning when measured from this moment; and this moment has no width. It has no depth. There is nothing that is this moment. There is only this presencing, this activity of Experiencing that is happening everywhere right now. ---------------------------- We understand nothing about time because we understand nothing about this moment. --------------------------------- Time is not merely something which "passes." "It is the utter and radical impermanence that makes life possible so that when you breathe in you don't have to hold it forever and ever. You can breathe out. And when you breathe out there is room to breathe in. And this impermanence is so radical that it must be understood not as some thing which happens "to" things but as the activity, the presencing, of Reality." ------------------------------ then, knowing that you don't know what anything is becomes such an open ended questioning that it opens into wonder. And when this wonder is unfolded in each moment of your life, not just your "practice" but your life, when you understand that "practice" is your life, when you are practising your life, then the doubt which became questioning, which became wonder, becomes understanding. http://www.wwzc.org/teisho/wildTime.htm --------------------------------- --- "chase8383 " wrote: > Hi Christine 17855 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 11:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mara No More > Dear Sarah, > > Oh, no, I had missed that post. I skipped a lot of posts I thought > were unrelated to me and yours was buried. I think you had a > problem with my statement that lobha isn't completely abandoned in > Arahants/Buddhas/Silent Buddhas. You state that the suttas say > otherwise and would like proof of my statement. *Sigh* Okay, I did > a quick search and found one telling sutta. I am sure I could find > others but I don't see the point of that. As was already pointed > out in this list, the Buddha had certain 'defilements' in regards to > his view of women, that is proof enough of my statement. But I will > provide more proof since you seem amazed and shocked by my comment. > Here are the defilements: > > 1. abhijjha-visama-lobha, covetousness and unrighteous greed > 2. byapada, ill will > 3. kodha, anger > 4. upanaha, hostility or malice > 5. makkha, denigration or detraction; contempt > 6. palasa, domineering or presumption > 7. issa, envy > 8. macchariya, jealousy, or avarice; selfishness > 9. maya, hypocrisy or deceit > 10. satheyya, fraud > 11. thambha, obstinacy, obduracy > 12. sarambha, presumption or rivalry; impetuosity > 13. mana, conceit > 14. atimana, arrogance, haughtiness > 15. mada, vanity or pride > 16. pamada, negligence or heedlessness; in social behavior, this > leads to lack of consideration. > > Here is the sutta where the Buddha proclaims that they are only > abondoned "in part" by aryians: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn007.html > > Please don't ask me to prove more. This makes me very uncomfortable > to even prove this much. I don't like to focus on what can't be > done; I like to focus on what can be done. But the goal should be > reasonable and not based on 'wishful fantasy'. I am not sure what > the Abhidhamma says in regards to this issue. I don't > believe/follow the Abhidhamma. > > Metta, James Actually I think this Sutta indirectly supports the position that an Arahant does not have any defilements. You will notice in the Sutta that the first sections that talk about giving up the defilements in part have this paragraph before the next section ""He knows: 'I have given up, renounced, let go, abandoned and relinquished [the defilements] in part'; and he gains enthusiasm for the goal, gains enthusiasm for the Dhamma, gains gladness connected with the Dhamma." Now in the notes of the MLD by Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi, it states that these sections apply to a once returner, based on the defilements talked about. But you will notice that towards the end of the Sutta after talking about developing the brahmavihara there is this: "13. "He understands what exists, what is low, what is excellent,[13] and what escape there is from this [whole] field of perception.[14] " Here we have the development of insight which leads to Arhantship and then we get this as the result...notice the mention of "in part" is now gone... "14. "When he knows and sees[15] in this way, his mind becomes liberated from the canker of sensual desire, liberated from the canker of becoming, liberated from the canker of ignorance.[16] When liberated, there is knowledge: 'It is liberated'; and he knows: 'Birth is exhausted, the life of purity has been lived, the task is done, there is no more of this to come.' Such a monk is called 'one bathed with the inner bathing."[17] " Thus there are no more defilements to be relinquished. Oh one note down from the note you quoted shows which defilements are relinquished with each path... According to the Comy., the sixteen defilements are finally abandoned by the noble paths (or stages of sanctity) in the following order: "By the path of Stream-entry (sotapatti-magga) are abandoned: (5) denigration, (6) domineering, (7) envy, (8) jealousy, (9) hypocrisy, (10) fraud. "By the path of Non-returning (anagami-magga): (2) ill will, (3) anger, (4) malice, (16) negligence. "By the path of Arahatship (arahatta-magga): (1) covetousness and unrighteous greed, (11) obstinacy, (12) presumption, (13) conceit, (14) arrogance, (15) vanity." Thus I think it is apparent that the first part of the Sutta that deals with relinquishing the defilements in part was not speaking about the attainments of an Arhant......Ray 17856 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 0:55pm Subject: Dualism/Non-Dualism Dear Group, 'Talking' with Buddhists of other traditions on the Internet, and even 'listening' to those who see themselves as Theravada, it seems to me Dualism/Non-Dualism is a confusion. My understanding of Non-Dualism is that it asserts that the ground of being is One. All separations or dualities are formed symbolically by Mind. I don't understand how this isn't just another way of ensuring there is an eternal self, albeit a Super Self - the dew-drop slipping into the shining sea. Does the Canon clarify what the Buddha taught in this respect? What is the Theravada perspective? metta, Christine 17857 From: James Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 1:36pm Subject: Re: Mara No More --- "Ray Hendrickson" > Actually I think this Sutta indirectly supports the position that an > Arahant does not have any defilements. You will notice in the Sutta that > the first sections that talk about giving up the defilements in part have > this paragraph before the next section ""He knows: 'I have given up, > renounced, let go, abandoned and relinquished [the defilements] in part'; > and he gains enthusiasm for the goal, gains enthusiasm for the Dhamma, gains > gladness connected with the Dhamma." Now in the notes of the MLD by Bhikkhu > Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi, it states that these sections apply to a once > returner, based on the defilements talked about. But you will notice that > towards the end of the Sutta after talking about developing the brahmavihara > there is this: > > "13. "He understands what exists, what is low, what is excellent, [13] and > what escape there is from this [whole] field of perception.[14] " > > Here we have the development of insight which leads to Arhantship and then > we get this as the result...notice the mention of "in part" is now gone... > > "14. "When he knows and sees[15] in this way, his mind becomes liberated > from the canker of sensual desire, liberated from the canker of becoming, > liberated from the canker of ignorance.[16] When liberated, there is > knowledge: 'It is liberated'; and he knows: 'Birth is exhausted, the life of > purity has been lived, the task is done, there is no more of this to come.' > Such a monk is called 'one bathed with the inner bathing."[17] " > > Thus there are no more defilements to be relinquished. Oh one note down > from the note you quoted shows which defilements are relinquished with each > path... > > According to the Comy., the sixteen defilements are finally abandoned by the > noble paths (or stages of sanctity) in the following order: > > "By the path of Stream-entry (sotapatti-magga) are abandoned: (5) > denigration, (6) domineering, (7) envy, (8) jealousy, (9) hypocrisy, (10) > fraud. > "By the path of Non-returning (anagami-magga): (2) ill will, (3) anger, (4) > malice, (16) negligence. > > "By the path of Arahatship (arahatta-magga): (1) covetousness and > unrighteous greed, (11) obstinacy, (12) presumption, (13) conceit, (14) > arrogance, (15) vanity." > > Thus I think it is apparent that the first part of the Sutta that deals > with relinquishing the defilements in part was not speaking about the > attainments of an Arhant......Ray Ray, Good reading. Now, look a bit deeper. I state that Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi make this assertion of `once-returner' interpretation, etc. with absolutely nothing contextually to support it. The structure of this sutta is very straightforward parallelism. 1. The defilements are listed; 2. The monk is praised who abandons these defilements `in part' (with no classifications whatsoever…meaning all monks) 3. The reward/consequence for such monks is detailed…and nibbana is the ultimate reward---for all 'before described monks'—no new classifications are set up for arahants. What Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi do in the footnotes of this sutta, quite purposefully throwing its exact meaning into doubt and confusion--is a travesty. But it hasn't been the first time monks have pushed a personal agenda in the interpretation of suttas. Question: Why does this simple sutta have such extensive footnotes? Answer: Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi want it to mean what they want it to mean. It makes me smile to see such scrambling to change the meaning. You don't see that with other suttas, and much more complex suttas, do you? Metta, James 17858 From: chase8383 Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 8:01am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis Hi KC KC "Buddha does not have a blind spot and he has good reasons to do this. He is a man of equality, he has reservation, then there must be very good reason and not discounting that he could see things in the future. As I said before, Buddha is not affected by any norms or culture. I think it is not fair to judge his actions of him putting so much rules on a Bhikkhunis and his actions seems to be of inequality. His rules are not to be changed. For this we have to accept it even though it could be very hard for us bc now we are in the world where all humans have equal rights. It is also wrong for us to do against his rules bc there are very good reasons for him doing that. We are not at his level, so if we need to accept his teachings then we got to accepts his reasons on issues that he don't wish to discuss too" The Buddha was not a God. I think it would be a mistake not to realize that he was effected at times by his times. And I think it would be a further mistake not to allow Buddhism to grow. If you don't you have a spirituality that is no different from that of fundimentalist Christian or Islam. It is the heart of the Buddhas teaching that counts. Peace, David 17859 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 2:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mara No More What Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi do in the footnotes of this sutta, quite purposefully throwing its exact meaning into doubt and confusion--is a travesty. But it hasn't been the first time monks have pushed a personal agenda in the interpretation of suttas. Question: Why does this simple sutta have such extensive footnotes? Answer: Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi want it to mean what they want it to mean. It makes me smile to see such scrambling to change the meaning. You don't see that with other suttas, and much more complex suttas, do you? Metta, James I agree one has to be careful not to read the Suttas in order to support a pre-held view. Personally some of my greatest ah hasss have come from contemplating a Sutta which contradicted some notion I had about Buddhism. I have found the notes from the MLD to be very helpful, even if I disagree from time to time. I have read nothing from Bhikkhu Bodhi or about him that would lead to think that he would purposely try to mislead others about a translation or attempt to mislead others about a Sutta to push some personal agenda. Often in the MLD the notes go to the commentaries to help with the suttas, I dont think what is done within this Sutta is any different. Its seems to me that the notes from MLD support and are consistent with the notes found on the Access to Insight translation..... Ray 17860 From: Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 9:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dualism/Non-Dualism Hi, Christine - In a message dated 12/17/02 3:56:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > > Dear Group, > > 'Talking' with Buddhists of other traditions on the Internet, and > even 'listening' to those who see themselves as Theravada, it seems > to me Dualism/Non-Dualism is a confusion. > > My understanding of Non-Dualism is that it asserts that the ground of > being is One. All separations or dualities are formed symbolically by > Mind. I don't understand how this isn't just another way of ensuring > there is an eternal self, albeit a Super Self - the dew-drop slipping > into the shining sea. > > Does the Canon clarify what the Buddha taught in this respect? What > is the Theravada perspective? > > metta, > Christine > > ========================= I see the Dhamma as neither a species of dualism (or multiple-ism), nor of monism. Advaita Vedanta, which incorporates into its own name the Sanskrit term for 'nondual' is, as I see it, actually a species of monism, with Brahman/Atman being the one and only (unitary) reality, and all else being illusory. In some small corners of the eighteen original Buddhist schools there may have been dualist or multiple-ist views, seeing conditions as separate, self-existent things, and the Sarvastivadins tended towards a kind of monism with an eternalist flavor. There are tendencies of both sorts in Mahayana as well. But the core of both Theravada and Mahayana, as I understand them, and what I believe the Buddha taught, is a nonduality wherein there are many conditions, but interdependent and empty of own-being, existing, but as things-in-relation and not as things-in-and-of-themselves. Thus, in this view, nothing ever arises or ceases, nothing truly separate and self-sufficient, yet all the while, there is the ongoing flow of conditions - a dynamic, living reality. Seen under the dark cloud of avijja, this is samsara, but seen as it is, this is nibbana . This is how I view the matter. Of course I could be wrong! ;-) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17861 From: peterdac4298 Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 2:55pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhunis Hi Kenneth Apologies for using unskillful speech, no disrespect intended. I will endeavour to show better sense in the future. It seems to me that the Buddha's main concern was maintaining the credibility of the Sangha wrt the supporting lay communities. The Sangha had to be totally free from gossip or scandal if the monastic community were to be supported with alms on a regular and indefinite basis. I am sure you know, there is a Vinaya story behind the laying down of each rule. A reading of these stories will show that the Buddha, on numerous occasions responded to lay criticism very quickly and decisively. Probably the most famous case was when King Bimbisara wanted to bathe in the Ganges where Bhikkhus were already doing so, pacittiya 57:- http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/bmc1/ch08- 6.html#57. This rule was introduce decisively so as to reassure lay concerns, and then latter adjusted as needed so as to make it practical for training in mindfulness and restraint. The case of the eight capital points for Bhikkhunis seems to be one where the Buddha anticipated lay concern, as indicated by his choice of respective analogies. Though the Buddha could well be thought of as doing the Bhikkhunis a service by giving them such difficult rules: they would be taken much more seriously by an otherwise skeptical society. Any person living in a community and accepting such constraints of behaviour must take their practice very seriously. Cheers Peter --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Peter > > "It's always > > possible the Buddha, being a mere mortal, had some kind of a blind > > spot and got this bit wrong!" > > Buddha does not have a blind spot and he has good reasons to do this. > He is a man of equality, he has reservation, then there must be very > good reason and not discounting that he could see things in the > future. As I said before, Buddha is not affected by any norms or > culture. > > I think it is not fair to judge his actions of him putting so much > rules on a Bhikkhunis and his actions seems to be of inequality. His > rules are not to be changed. For this we have to accept it even > though it could be very hard for us bc now we are in the world where > all humans have equal rights. It is also wrong for us to do against > his rules bc there are very good reasons for him doing that. We are > not at his level, so if we need to accept his teachings then we got > to accepts his reasons on issues that he don't wish to discuss too > much on. > > Certain norms set by him previously have been changed. The > consequences is very damaging to the Sangha world. Take for example > the acceptance of money rather than begging in the Chinese customs. > What was meant to suite cultural norms at that time but its initial > good intention has been corroded and has now becoming a maglinant > cancer. If my words are too strong, I am very sorry but this is a > truth I have observe. But what to do, even Buddha laws will > eventually disappear from this world. Solemn and disheartening but > this is the truth. > > > > rgds > KC > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- "peterdac4298 " > wrote: > Hi Christine, Sarah, and all > > > > In my previous post on this thread I used the > > expression "intimidating and demeaning" in brief reference to the > > original, historic Bhikkhuni Sangha, and how this was absent from > > the more democratic Amaravati style DSM Sangha of today. I feel I > > aught to expand this so as to avoid any misunderstanding. > > > > As most of us are aware, at the time of the Buddha, when Ananda > > thrice requested the admittance of women to the Sangha, the Buddha > > replied in what could be seen by todays standards as rather a > > derogatory, if not paranoid manner. > > > > He spoke about the Sasana lasting only half the time it originally > > would have. And also insisted on eight restrictions ('capital > > points', ~Naa.namoli) to be imposed on the nuns as a condition for > > their admittance. One of which was that a nun of advanced > > seniority > > would be junior to a monk newly admitted that very day. Another > > spoke of Bhikkhunis not being allowed to find fault with Bhikkhus > > nor admonish them at all. A Bhikkhuni must never address > > discourses > > to Bhikkhus, but Bhikkhus may address discourses to Bhikkhunis. In > > > > the matter of grave offences a Bhikkhuni must do penance before > > both > > Sanghas. Additionally to these eight capital points, a Bhikkhuni > > must be given the admission by both Sanghas (and is why the lineage > > > > could not be restored once broken: hence the need to find an > > unbroken branch elsewhere). > > > > The Buddha gave his reasons for insisting on these eight conditions > > > > of acceptance. He unflatteringly likened women in the Sangha to a > > rice field being infected by various kinds of fungus or mildew. A > > clan with too many women and too few men is vulnerable to robbers > > and bandits is likened to the Sangha with women admitted. "...As > > a > > man might construct in advance an embankment so that the waters of > > a > > great reservoir should not cause a flood, so I too have made known > > in advance these eight cardinal points..." (~Naa.namoli) > > > > Now this can't be explained as some kind of slip of the tongue, or > > even playing to contemporary sensibilities. These are powerful and > > > > systematic statements. What are we to make of them? The Buddha, > > having willingly recognised their equal ability to fully penetrate > > and realize the Dhamma, is more than creating an historic precedent > > > > by granting women the admission. This is virtual revolution by the > > > > standards of that time. But he goes to great lengths to ensure > > that > > there is no mistaking his view on female admission. It's always > > possible the Buddha, being a mere mortal, had some kind of a blind > > spot and got this bit wrong! > > > > Either way, the Amaravati DSM's evade this whole issue, and seem > > quite happy having equal rank with Bhikkhus even though it is only > > within the Amaravati Sangha. They enjoy the holy life, exhibit a > > mature understanding of the Dhamma and are much sought after for > > teaching engagements. > > > > Cheers > > Peter > > > > --- "christine_forsyth > > " wrote: > > > Hi Sarah, and all, > > > > > > You are correct - any discussion of this matter on this list, > > > particularly between you and I, has been respectfully conducted. > > > > > The rest is probably my subjective interpretation. Implacability, > > > > > though, has been evinced by people taking the 'the scriptures say > > > > > it's impossible to reinstate' line. e.g. > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15646 > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15653 > > > > > > Of great interest to me is this article which states: 'There is > > > permission in the Vinaya Chullavagga for monks to ordain nuns." > > > and, "the Bhikkhuni Sasana has been revived in Sri Lanka > > According > > > to full Theravada ceremonial." > > > http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/nunorder.htm > > > > > > > > metta, > > > > > > Christine 17862 From: James Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 3:30pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Mara No More --- "Ray Hendrickson" wrote: > I agree one has to be careful not to read the Suttas in order to support a > pre-held view. Personally some of my greatest ah hasss have come from > contemplating a Sutta which contradicted some notion I had about Buddhism. > I have found the notes from the MLD to be very helpful, even if I disagree > from time to time. I have read nothing from Bhikkhu Bodhi or about him that > would lead to think that he would purposely try to mislead others about a > translation or attempt to mislead others about a Sutta to push some personal > agenda. Often in the MLD the notes go to the commentaries to help with the > suttas, I dont think what is done within this Sutta is any different. Its > seems to me that the notes from MLD support and are consistent with the > notes found on the Access to Insight translation..... Ray Ray and All, You know, I am getting pretty tired of the `non-put up or shut up attitude' in this group. I continue to make statements that members disagree with, those members ask me to support them, I do so with logic and evidence, and then I get a response like, `Oh, well, I just don't agree with that and that's the end of that. That is all the proof I need.' Excuse me? Is this a group of omniscient Buddhas and no one alerted me to that fact? Am I the only one who feels it necessary to think about, research, and support the dhamma in my statements and daily life? Am I the only one who knows that just because I think something it doesn't make it automatically correct and I need to have the support of evidence or accepted logic? Nothing I say is personal. I am not attacking the personal integrity of either of those monks in question. The simply have defilements…like the rest of us have defilements…like the Buddha had defilements. And now, everyone is trying to backtrack like crazy about earlier statements said in this regard because I have exposed the whole ugly truth that few want to face. These are the facts: The Lord Buddha was sexist and it took Ven. Ananda to talk some sense into him. At least he finally listened…more that most did before or after. But it doesn't chance the fact of the incidents that occurred. If anyone wants to state otherwise, I want some simple, straightforward logic or evidence to argue otherwise. I don't know why people continue to make statements and think that their word is proof enough. It isn't enough proof. Like arses, we all have opinions. As they say, "Put up or shut up". Metta, James 17863 From: Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 10:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dualism/Non-Dualism Hi, Christine, There are different senses of dualism; it's not "All-Oneism." There's another meaning that when one perceives something there should be just the perception, just the seeing or hearing or sensation, not the dualism of self and object, subject and predicate. This may be the very essence of the Dhamma (as in the advice to Bahiya) even within the Thera; it certainly seems to be close to the core of some other interpretations. (And mine ;-) metta, stephen Udana I.10: Bahiya Sutta 17864 From: nidive Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 4:25pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Mara No More Hi James, > And now, everyone is trying to backtrack like crazy about earlier > statements said in this regard because I have exposed the whole > ugly truth that few want to face. These are the facts: The Lord > Buddha was sexist and it took Ven. Ananda to talk some sense into > him. At least he finally listened…more that most did before or > after. But it doesn't chance the fact of the incidents that > occurred. If anyone wants to state otherwise, I want some simple, > straightforward logic or evidence to argue otherwise. I don't > know why people continue to make statements and think that their > word is proof enough. It isn't enough proof. Like arses, we all > have opinions. As they say, "Put up or shut up". (1) How is being sexist a defilement? (2) How do you know that the Buddha was sexist? Or is that your own interpretation or perception of things? We are all aware that a certain act by a certain person can be interpreted in different ways by different people. There is no way we can verify that the Buddha was sexist. There is no way we can verify that there were other reasons besides 'being sexist' for the Buddha to not form a Bikkhuni Sangha. In my opinion, saying that the Buddha was sexist is merely a form of speculation, because none of us knows what was going on in his mind at that time. For me, to be on the cautious side, I would say there were other reasons besides 'being sexist'. Regards, NEO Swee Boon 17865 From: Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 4:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dualism/Non-Dualism Hi Christine, When we were talking about conceit it occured to me that the end of conceit might be an end of a sense of being separate from others in terms of comparing oneself to others. Even if there is a feeling of equality that is still a kind of separation. So the compete end of any sense of self, either mine or yours, could be considered as nonduality. Larry 17866 From: Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 5:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Some interesting comments on Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Rob, I'm looking forward to continuing this discussion on ethics and science when you come back on-line. I don't see how you can separate the two, even in a non-buddhist context. Any reason to be ethical has to be ultimately grounded in science, I would think. I agree Buddhist science is a different kettle of fish, basically because it includes kamma, which is completely comprehensible only to the Buddha. However, he did very much insist on kamma. Citta process is a small step in the direction of beginning to explain kamma, imo. There is some question in my mind as to how citta process could be an object of satipatthana. Satipatthana being the only laboratory available for us junior scientists. But I'm adopting a wait and see attitude on that one. Larry 17867 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 5:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mara No More Ray and All, You know, I am getting pretty tired of the `non-put up or shut up attitude' in this group. I continue to make statements that members disagree with, those members ask me to support them, I do so with logic and evidence, and then I get a response like, `Oh, well, I just don't agree with that and that's the end of that. That is all the proof I need.' Excuse me? Is this a group of omniscient Buddhas and no one alerted me to that fact? Am I the only one who feels it necessary to think about, research, and support the dhamma in my statements and daily life? Am I the only one who knows that just because I think something it doesn't make it automatically correct and I need to have the support of evidence or accepted logic? I presented both evidence and logic to discuss the point you made. I understand that you accept neither as being on point. I am perfectly willing to continue to discuss the Sutta, but I see no reason for you to assume that you are "the only one who feels it necessary to think about, research, and support the dhamma in statements and in daily life." >>>Nothing I say is personal. I am not attacking the personal >>>integrity of either of those monks in question. The simply have >>>defilements.like the rest of us have defilements.like the Buddha had >>>defilements. Yes, they certainly have defilements, but that does not mean that their notes were put into their books to confuse people about the true meaning of any particular Sutta. In fact I think the notes are there to help avoid confusion. But lets forget about the notes, lets look at the Sutta itself. As I mention before in the paragraph which is one used to describe the knowledge of an Arhant, you will notice that the wording, "abandoned and relinquished [the defilements] in part'" is no longer used. It has been dropped because IMO it no longer applies because the paragraph now refers to the path of Arhantship. Here is the paragraph again.... "14. "When he knows and sees[15] in this way, his mind becomes liberated from the canker of sensual desire, liberated from the canker of becoming, liberated from the canker of ignorance.[16] When liberated, there is knowledge: 'It is liberated'; and he knows: 'Birth is exhausted, the life of purity has been lived, the task is done, there is no more of this to come.' Such a monk is called 'one bathed with the inner bathing."[17] " I think that if the Buddha wanted to say that there were still some defilements he would of said so in this paragraph. But the fact it is not there shows the path of Arhantship is different from what he was talking about above. This listing of successive attainments is done often in the Suttas. Often going from the first Jhana through to Arhantship. I think this sutta is another example of such a progression....Ray 17868 From: Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 2:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dualism/Non-Dualism Hi, Stephen (and Christine) - In a message dated 12/17/02 6:46:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, oreznoone@a... writes: > > Hi, Christine, > > There are different senses of dualism; it's not "All-Oneism." There's > another > meaning that when one perceives something there should be just the > perception, just the seeing or hearing or sensation, not the dualism of > self > and object, subject and predicate. This may be the very essence of the > Dhamma > (as in the advice to Bahiya) even within the Thera; it certainly seems to > be > close to the core of some other interpretations. > (And mine ;-) > metta, stephen > > Udana I.10: Bahiya Sutta > > ============================ I completely agree. The interdependence of subject and object is a central aspect of Buddhist nonduality which I failed to emphasize in my post on this thread. I think the Bahiya Sutta is one of the most important of the "philosophical suttas" - it is certainly one of my favorites along with the Kaccayanagotta Sutta and the Kalakarama Sutta, all of which express slightly differing aspects of Buddhist, middle-way nondualism. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17869 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 7:20pm Subject: Commentaries are papanca-like? RobM: Hi Robert (and All); I don't see any conflict. Kamma / citta / utu / oja are what create rupa and consciousness is a necessary condition for rupa to arise. __________ Dear RobM, While some ruaps are conditioned by citta (consciousness) others, such as the rupas that make up rocks or trees are conditioned by utu, not citta. Hence, I believe Citta is not a necessary condition for all rupas to arise. ______________ RobM: I believe that "paramattha dhamma", another critical term in the Abhidhammatthasangaha, is also not found in the Suttas nor in the original seven volumes of the Abhidhamma. Citta-vithi, paramattha may have appeared in commentarial literature prior to Anuruddha, but my point is that they are not in the Tipitaka. ________________ RobertK: The commentaries explain and give more details than the original words of the Buddha. This is to help us - who are weak in understanding- to comprehend. I am not sure why you think that a word such as paramattha is misleading? _____________ RobM: So why did the Buddha deliver the Madhupindika Sutta? To show how papanca (conceptual proliferation) arises to cloud the mind. In his commentary to the Sutta above, Thanissaro Bhikkhu explains how papanca arises from a lack of understanding anatta. ___________________ RobertK: In the sutta link you give Thanissaro notes about papanca: "in Buddhist philosophical discourse it carries negative connotations, usually of falsification and distortion. The word itself is derived from a root that means diffuseness, spreading, proliferating. The Pali Commentaries define papañca as covering three types of thought: craving, conceit, and views. They also note that it functions to slow the mind down in its escape from samsara. "" This is a succint and good definition of papanca, and as the venerable Thanissaro says papanca does indeed result from not understanding anatta. ______________ RobM.: My suspicion is that, though the Tipitaka provides a complete ethical system, later thinkers did not find it "scientific" enough and felt the need to add a layer of "pseudo-science" (not unlike papanca) on top of the ethical base found in the Tipitaka. Citta- vithi, paramattha and a host of other ideas were later additions which were not taught by the Buddha because they are not essential to the Four Noble Truths, conducive to the holy life and leading one to Nibbana. One might also say that these mental proliferations act as a distraction, clouding the mind so that it is more difficult to focus on the ethical aspects of the Teaching. Our discussion on rupas falls into this category. The origin of rupas (kamma / citta / utu / oja) and the classification according to characteristic / function / manifestation / proximate cause does not appear in the Tipitaka. I believe that it first arises in Buddhaghosa's Visuddhimagga. In other words, it is part of the pseudo-scientific, papanca-like, commentarial literature. ____________________ RobertK: I think it is most useful to examine the actual dhammas that are arising while we study, contemplate, speak, or write about Dhamma. Is it not true that sometimes, when we read some suttas, that the cittas that are arising are rooted in confusion or attachment or doubt. It must be that way because the roots of moha, dosa and lobha have not been eradicated yet. But most people are not so hasty as to conclude that the suttas are productive of papanca. It is the same with the commentaries: if we read with attachment, with a subtle wanting , without awareness of the actual moment, then there cannot be any real understanding. In fact there will be the opposite. I have said several times how such works as the Visuddhimagga look very different to me now compared when I first took them up. They appear much more profound. Anyway there is never any compulsion to study what we don't like. We take it all patiently. As Ken O said: "Hence the first thing, what a Buddhist accomplish to the road of nibbana is to discard wrong views. Easy to say but hard to do. Just imagine Buddha took countless lives, that does not mean we should be discourage as one day you will also be one. At the meantime, relax and enjoy your life, do what we can and not what we cannot. :) Each one of us has their own accumulations. I personally never force myself to do anything"" RobertK 17870 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 8:49pm Subject: Foundation Bulletin,Dhamma Issues no 1 Foundation Bulletin, Dhamma Issues, no 1. Preface In the Board Meetings of the Dhamma Study and Support Foundation different subjects of Dhamma are discussed. The sources which are used are the Tipitaka, the Commentaries and subcommentaries. These discussions are profound and also Pali experts contribute to them. The conclusions are published in booklets. Since I find this material important I like to make it available to a wider public. Therefore I have selected some of the topics of discussion and translated them from Thai into English. I have added in footnotes some explanations of the subjects under discussion for the sake of those who are not familiar with the terms used. Nina van Gorkom Chapter 1 Åyatanas The åyatanas, sometimes translated as bases or sense-fields are: six internal bases: the physical bases of the eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue, the bodysense and the mind-base or consciousness (manåyatana), six external bases: which are six classes of objects: visible object, sound, odour, taste, tactile object and mind-object (dhammåyatana), comprising: cetasikas, subtle rúpas and nibbåna.(1) Issues of analysis: 1: Is the eyesense (the cakkhu pasåda rúpa) åyatana at each moment of citta in the eye-door process (2 or only at the moment when seeing (cakkhuviññåùa) arises? And the same for the other sense-organs. 2. Is cetasika an internal åyatana or an external åyatana? 3. Is the cetasika which is the object, årammana, of citta, dhammårammana or dhammåyatana? The sources which support the conclusions of the analysis: 1. The ³Dispeller of Delusion², Sammohavinodaní, the Commentary to the Book of Analysis, Ch 2, Classification of the Bases (åyatanas), Suttanta Division. 2. Visuddhimagga, Ch XV, Description of the Bases and Elements. Conclusion regarding the first issue: In the five sense-door processes the eye-sense (cakkhu pasåda rúpa) etc. is åyatana at each moment of citta in the eye-door process, not only at the moment seeing (cakkhuviññåna) arises. The reason for this conclusion is given by the ³Dispeller of Delusion², Classification of the Bases (åyatanas), and the Visuddhimagga (XV, 10). We read in the ³Visuddhimagga²: ³For only the åyatana of the eye-base is the door of arising, and only the åyatana of visible object is the object of the consciousness group (viññåna kåya) comprised in a cognitive series containing eye-consciousness.² (3 This shows that the rúpa of eyesense (cakkhuppasåda rúpa) is the eye-door and the åyatana of the eye (cakkhåyatana) at each moment of citta in the eye-door process and that evenso visible object is the åyatana of visible object (rúpåyatana) at each moment of citta in the eye-door process. The reason is that both the eye-sense and the visible object are realities which have not fallen away yet and that they are ³associating² at each moment of citta of the eye-door process (4 . Conclusion regarding the second issue: Cetasika must be an external åyatana and it cannot be an internal åyatana. The reason: Citta is an internal åyatana (manåyatana or mind-base), whereas cetasikas are different from citta, they are accompanying citta, and thus, they are external åyatanas (5. Conclusion regarding the third issue: the cetasikas which have fallen away and are the object (årammaùa) of citta are dhammårammaùa (mental object) 6 . The reason: the cetasika which has fallen away is only dhammårammaùa, it is not dhammåyatana. Since it has fallen away it cannot be associating with another reality. With regard to those who have ³penetrating knowledge of the mind of others² (ceto-pariya-ñåna, one of the supranatural powers), when the cetasika of someone else is the object, it is at that moment dhammårammana. **** Footnotes 1. I have added this explanation of the åyatanas, which is sometimes translated as base. However, åyatana has several meanings: dwelling place, birthplace or meeting place for citta and cetasikas; ³mine² (åkara) or place of production, and cause or reason (karana). Åyatana implies association of dhammas. 2. When visible object impinges on the eyesense there is not only seeing which experiences it, but also other cittas arising in a process which experience visible object through the eye-door while they perform their own function. It is the same in the case of the other other sense-door processes. 3. The ³Visuddhimagga² ( XV, 9) gives the reason why there are just as many as twelve åyatanas. It states: ³It is for the sake of defining door-cum-object for the arising of the six consciousness groups. And here they are stated as twelve since this is how they are classed when so defined.² That is why the word²only² is used in ³for only the åyatana of the eye is the door of arising, and only the åyatana of visible object is the object², namely, for the cognitive series containing eye-consciousness. It is the same in the case of the other processes, thus, there are twelve åyatanas. The ³Dispeller of Delusion², 46, uses a similar wording. 4. Rúpa lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta, thus, the sense-organ and the object on which sense-door process cittas depend are still present during that process. 5. Citta has as function clearly to know an object, it is the leader in knowing an object. The cetasikas which arise and accompany citta each perform their own function, they are entirely different from citta. 5. There are six classes of objects: five classes of the five sense objects and the sixth class which is dhammårammana. Dhammårammana can be experienced only through the mind-door; it includes: the five sense-organs, the subtle rúpas, citta, cetasika, nibbåna and concepts. ***** My own remarks: the ayatanas are dhammas arising at this moment. The conclusion above reminds us that ayatanas are the association or meeting of object, sense-organ and citta during a sense-door process of cittas, so that objects can be experienced through the different doorways. Nina. 17871 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 8:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Do brahmas experience vipaka? op 17-12-2002 14:57 schreef nidive op nidive@y...: > Since brahmas have no five senses, does this mean they don't > experience vipaka of any kind? If not, how do they experience vipaka? >Nina: vipaka citta can arise independedly of the senses: it can experience an object through the mind-door. In this plane the tadarammana cittas, retention, arising after the javanas of the mind-door process. In the arupa brahma planes, the rebirth-consciousness and the bhavanga-cittas are vipakacittas, results of arupavacara kusala cittas. I hope this clarifies somewhat I just saw Kom's answer, I join him. Nina. 17872 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 8:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] processes of citta also in Abhidhamma. Dear Rob M, I hope you have a nice time in Beijing. Vacation? Just a remark about citta processes and Abhidhamma: you wrote: op 16-12-2002 23:17 schreef robmoult op rob.moult@j...: > The citta-process (17 cittas in a row) was never laid down by the > Buddha in the Suttas. The citta-process is not even in the seven > volumes of the Abhidhamma. In other words, the citta-process is not > part of the Tipitaka. According to Nyanatiloka (Buddhist Dictionary - > Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines - Appendix), "citta-vithi, > as well as all terms for the various functions within the processes > of consciousness, such as avajjana-citta, sampaticchana, santirana, > votthapana, javana, tadarammana, bhavanga, cuti: none of these terms > is found in the Sutta Canon. except javana, in Pts.M. Even in the > Ahh. Canon (e.g. Patth) only javana and bhavanga are twice or thrice > briefly mentioned. The stages, however, must have been more or less > known." Nina: I wrote to you and Jon before about the processes of citta in the Abhidhamma, and quote again: the Path of Discrimination, Treatise on Knowledge,Ch XVII, Behaviour, Cariyaa, under behaviour of consciousness. Cittas are classified as dhatus, elements. Here they are explained as directing onto the object, but we have to keep in mind that such moments are extremely fast. We see here the name of adverting, but we do not see the names of receiving and investigating, they are just two more moments of vipaka after seeing, they just experience visible object and then they are gone immediately. Then we read about the other sense-door processes and then about , kiriyacitta which is mind-door adverting citta, and also resultant mind-principle . This is vipakacitta in the mind-door process, later on named tadarammana-citta. Now about the javanas, named here as such: What is behaviour of unknowing (a~naa.na caariya): The same of hate, delusion and other akusala cetasikas. And also with regard to the other sense objects and mental object. It is interesting that here is stressed akusala as behaviour of ignorance. And about behaviour of knowledge, panna, functional indeterminate adverting for the purpose of contemplating impermanence, the contemplation of impermanence is a behaviour of knowledge. Here are the stages of insight mentioned, up to the stages of enlightenment. You see, the nucleus of the process is there. It does not matter that names are different, they have their own place in the order of the process, which is citta niyama: certainty, definiteness. It is like a natural law. It could not be altered, it is amazing when we come to think of it. How do cittas know? They cannot do otherwise but follow this way, viithi. The Path of Discrimination is Part of the Khuddaka Nikaya, thus of the Suttanta. As to the Abhidhamma, the first Book, Dhsg, enumerates cittas arising in different processes. The Vibhanga, the Book of Analysis, under Analysis of Elements, refers to the processes. So does the Patthana, Conditional Relations, under: contiguity-condition, anantara paccaya. As to the Commentaries, Buddhagosa did not give his own ideas, his explanations were firmly based on the Tipitaka. As to the names, cittas are classified as dhatus, mind element, mind-consciousness element, etc. Hoping that this clarifies, best wishes, Nina. 17873 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 8:49pm Subject: subtle points Subtle points: Dear friends, I am starting a new series, a translation of the Foundation Bulletin. Subtle points of Dhamma are discussed here and some of you might be interested. I translate this material as it is, and I realize that it may be too detailed and compact for some of you. Please, do not read it then. We have different corners here for people with different inclinations, and that makes dsg interesting. Nina. 17874 From: Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 8:55pm Subject: Way 27, Comm Welcome back Nina and greetings all, For those new to the group this is the continuation of a study thread on the Satipatthana Sutta, using Soma Thera's "Way of Mindfulness" which is Soma Thera's translation of Bh. Buddhaghosa's Commentary on the Satipatthana Sutta and excerpts from Dhammapala Thera's Tika (subcommentary). The book is available on-line at the link below and a print copy is available from BPS. We are now near the end of The Section of the Synopsis. I will post approximately one page three times a week unless we get involved in an extended discussion. All are invited to participate. "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html Vedanasu Vedananupassi... citte cittanupassi... dhammesu dhammanupassi viharati = "He lives contemplating feeling in the feelings... the consciousness in consciousness... mental object in mental objects." Here the repetition of "feelings", "consciousness" and "mental objects" should be understood according to the reasons given for the repetition of the word "body" in body-contemplation. "Feeling" = The three feelings: pleasurable, painful and the neither pleasurable nor painful. These are only mundane. [Tika] The word "feelings" is repeated to limit (or unambiguously determine) the object by isolating it [anissato vavatthanam], for the analysis of the apparently compact [ghana vinibbhoga] and for such other purposes, in order to prevent any straying from the contemplation on feelings to some other object. Erratic contemplation takes place because of the connection of the other non-material aggregates with feelings, and because of the dependence of non-material things like feelings on material form in the five-constituent-existence [pañca vokara bhava] or the sensuous plane of becoming [kama bhava]. [T] By the repetition of the word, the limiting of the object by isolating it, is shown through the pointing out of only a doer of feeling-contemplation in the property called feeling, as there is no contemplating of the body, or consciousness or mental objects in feeling but only the contemplating of feeling. [T] As, in this matter of feeling, when a pleasurable feeling occurs, there is no occurrence of the other two, and when a painful feeling or a neither pleasurable nor painful feeling occurs, there is no occurrence of the remaining ones, so is shown the analysis (sifting out or penetration or dissection) of the apparently compact, the absence of permanence (or stability), by the pointing out of different feelings, after penetrating them severally, and not having spoken of the state of feeling in a general way. [T] Through the noticing of feelings as lasting just for the measure of a moment in time, the seeing of impermanence is made clear. Through the same cognizance, suffering and soullessness too are seen. [T] "For the analysis of the apparently compact and for such other purposes." By the words, "And for such other purposes," the following should be understood: "This yogavacara (the Buddha's disciple who is endeavoring for spiritual insight) contemplates just feelings and not any other thing, because he is not one who contemplates by way of the lovely (the good or the desirable), after the manner of a fool who sees a gem in a bubble of water which has not the quality of a gem. He does not see in this foolish way even in the stable instant when he experiences a pleasant feeling. Much more so does he not stray away into fanciful thinking in regard to the two remaining feelings of pain and indifference. On the other hand, he contemplates along the real way of impermanence, soullessness, and the unlovely, by way of momentary dissolution, lack of power to control (sway or rule), and the trickling of the dirt of defilement, and distinctively contemplates suffering, as the pain of vicissitude, and of the formations or the constituents of life. 17875 From: Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 4:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dualism/Non-Dualism In a message dated 12/17/2002 12:56:04 PM Pacific Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > 'Talking' with Buddhists of other traditions on the Internet, and > even 'listening' to those who see themselves as Theravada, it seems > to me Dualism/Non-Dualism is a confusion. > > My understanding of Non-Dualism is that it asserts that the ground of > being is One. All separations or dualities are formed symbolically by > Mind. I don't understand how this isn't just another way of ensuring > there is an eternal self, albeit a Super Self - the dew-drop slipping > into the shining sea. > > Does the Canon clarify what the Buddha taught in this respect? What > is the Theravada perspective? > > metta, > Christine > Hi Christine I think this is an excellent observation you have made. The issue of dualism scarcely appears in the suttas. I believe there is one or maybe two suttas that deal primarily with that topic and in a very different manner than it is dealt with in later Buddhism. The gist of the "sutta dualism" runs:-- Owing to a dual thing, consciousness comes into being. Owing to eye and forms, eye consciousness comes into being. Owing to ear and sounds, ear consciousness comes into being...etc., for the other four sense bases, objects, and consciousness'. There are a couple of suttas that talk directly about... the ending of all conceivings. These, however, do not describe such states in terms of "non-dualism." Nagarjuna's dialectical criticism may be largely responsible for dualism attaining a significant status in later Buddhism...and a different slant on the idea. But Nagarjuna's teaching, to the best of my recollection, would not have supported any notion of "Oneness" or Super-self. I think those notions are the result of a self view-pointed mind grappling with the notion of non-dualism. TG 17876 From: Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 9:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Foundation Bulletin,Dhamma Issues no 1 Hi Nina, I wonder about this: "Conclusion regarding the second issue: Cetasika must be an external åyatana and it cannot be an internal åyatana. The reason: Citta is an internal åyatana (manåyatana or mind-base), whereas cetasikas are different from citta, they are accompanying citta, and thus, they are external åyatanas" I thought external meant object but a cetasika accompanying a citta isn't the object of that citta, is it? Larry 17877 From: Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 5:16pm Subject: Re: Dukkha as Flaw (A Pep Talk! ;-) Hello Howard, I think we're very much in agreement, yet I can't quite follow part of your reasoning; or perhaps I just wish to push it further. You begin: >All conditions/formations are flawed. They are imperfect in that >they are, none of them, of the nature to satisfy. If they are not inherently flawed, why not? The problem would seem to be inherent to desire in that case. But perhaps only desire based on belief in a Self (moha), which leads to dosa and lobha, not all desiring. So water, for instance, can satisfy a thirst. Does an enlightened person live in a neutral world? *Mere* phenomena rolling on? It is, perhaps, only within the Theravada that conditions are seen as intrinsically unsatisfying (dukkha) and nibbana is completely outside of the world, requiring its extinction for true happiness. All (?) other forms of Buddhism equate samsara with nibbana and say that to an enlightened person the world is not flawed, but utterly perfect in its suchness. In some sense, at least, ultimately satisfying. I'd say that, but I rather doubt you would ;-) So I fear we've left our agreement behind; but just where? metta, stephen 17878 From: Sarah Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 11:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis Dear KC, Peter & All, I’ve appreciated your comments and the quotes from the Vinaya which Nanamoli gives in ‘The Life of the Buddha’. I’ve always liked this book because it is full of useful quotes. You’ve encouraged me to pull it and other Vinaya texts out. Peter wrote: “It seems to me that the Buddha's main concern was maintaining the credibility of the Sangha wrt the supporting lay communities. The Sangha had to be totally free from gossip or scandal if the monastic community were to be supported with alms on a regular and indefinite basis. I am sure you know, there is a Vinaya story behind the laying down of each rule. A reading of these stories will show that the Buddha, on numerous occasions responded to lay criticism very quickly and decisively.” ..... I agree. As you showed with the example of the monastery in Scotland, not only lay support, but confidence in the teachings can very easily be adversely affected. When I read the Vinaya, I read about human nature - lay human nature and also that of bhikkhus and bhikkhunis. Circumstances affecting the behaviour of those who have ordained are also emphasised. ..... I agree with all KC’s points and in particular those regarding any supposed ‘blind spot’ of the Buddha. Even Ananda couldn’t appreciate the full wisdom of the Buddha or his omniscient knowledge about human behaviour. Who are we to put those aspects of his teachings which we don’t comprehend down to ‘blind spots’? ..... KC wrote: > Buddha does not have a blind spot and he has good reasons to do this. > He is a man of equality, he has reservation, then there must be very > good reason and not discounting that he could see things in the > future. As I said before, Buddha is not affected by any norms or > culture. > > I think it is not fair to judge his actions of him putting so much > rules on a Bhikkhunis and his actions seems to be of inequality. ” .... In Cullavagga X1, Bk of Discipline V (PTS p.399) we read: “Then the Venerable Kassapa the Great informed the Order, saying: “your reverences, let the Order listen to me. There are rules of training for us which affect householders, and householders know concerning us: ‘This is certainly allowable for the recluses, sons of the Sakyans, this is certainly not allowable.’ If we were to abolish the lesser and minor rules of training there would be those who would say: ‘At that time of his cremation a rule of training had been laid down by the recluse Gotama for disciples; while the Teacher was amongst them these trained themselves in the rules of training, but since the Teacher has attained nibbana among them, they do not now train themselves in the rules of training.’ if it seems right to the Order, the Order should not lay down what has not been laid down, nor should it abolish what has been laid down. It should proceed in conformity with and according to the rules of training that have been laid down...” ***** As Peter related, the Buddha only very reluctantly admitted women to the Order after Pajapati accepted eight rules for ordination. These include: - “A nun who has been ordained (even) for a century must greet respectfully, rise up form her seat, salute with joined palms, do proper homage to a monk ordained but that day. And this rule is to be honoured, respected, revered, venerated, never to be transgressed during her life.” - “When, as a probationer, she has trained in the six rules for two years, she should sek ordination from both Orders. This rule is to be.....” - “From today admonition of monks by nuns is forbidden, admonition of nuns by monks is not forbidden. This rule too is to be honoured, respected, revered, venerated, never to be transgressed during her life.” ***** As Peter also mentioned, the Buddha explains a little more on why the dhamma will last half as long as a result of the bhikkhuni order and the reasons for the extra 8 rules: “Even, Ananda, as those households which have many women and few men easily fall a prey to robbers, to pot-thieves, even so, Ananda in whatever dhamma and discipline women obtain the going forth from home into homelessness, that Brahma-faring will not last long.... “Even, Ananda, as when the disease known as mildew attacks a whole field that field of rice does not last long.... “Even, Ananda, as when the disease known as red rust attacks a whole field of sugar-cane, the field of sugar-cane does not last long... “Even, Ananda, as a man, looking forward, may build a dyke to a great reservoir so that the water may not overflow, even so, Ananda, were the eight important rules for nuns laid down by me, looking forward, not to be transgressed during their life.” ***** We read about further discussions, reasons, stories related to these rules and others. Pajapati asks if the Buddha would allow ‘greeting, standing up for, salutation and the proper duties between monks and nuns according to seniority.” He replies that this is impossible and furthermore replies: “Monks, one should not carry out greeting, rising up for salutation and proper duties towards women. Whoever should carry out(one of these), there is an offence of wrong-doing.” The Buddha then continues to teach Pajapati the dhamma so that she may live “alone, aloof, zealous, ardent, self-resolute.” The same chapter X in the Cullavagga continues to give accounts of the Discipline and way of living of the bhikkhuni and the stories leading to the reasons for how the Patimokkha should be recited, how ‘formal acts’ should be carried out, the relationship between bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, penalties, support by lay people and gossip, ordination procedures, seating, use of toiletries, pregnant nuns ordained and much more. All aspects of the daily life of the bhikkhunis are covered and reasons and examples are given for all aspects of the discipline. I don’t pretend to understand all the reasons for all the Buddha’s decisions, but certainly by reading and considering more from the texts I’ve always come to have more and more confidence in those aspects which may not seem ‘logical’ to us. I don’t see any difference either in human nature as we read in these accounts, then and now. It also seems women were just as concerned about ‘equality’ issues and access to the dhamma, of course. Sarah ======= 17879 From: Sarah Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 0:54am Subject: Vinaya 1 Dear All, There was some discussion before about how much of the Vinaya (in English) was on line. As far as I know, part or all of the ‘Vinaya Texts’ (Sacred Bks of the East series) but none of the’Book of Discipline’ (PTS series ) is on line. Let me give more detail which I found helpful and it may be relevant for other threads to avoid any confusion: The ‘Vinaya Texts’ was produced in the 1880s in 3 volumes and is a partial translation by Oldenberg and Rhys Davids of the Vinaya. Peter gave some links before, but this is one: http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/sbe13/ The ‘Book of Discipline’ (Vinaya Pitaka) is a translation by I.B.Horner to bring ‘the Vinaya into line’ as ‘a complete, as against partial translation into English’ starting in the 1930s. None of it is on line that I know of. Not only the extent of translation is quite different but also the order and other aspects which confused me when I was looking at links before: Quotes from the introduction to Book of Discipline by I.B.Horner: “Oldenberg began his edition of the text of the Vinaya Pitaka with the section known as the Mahavagga. This together with the Culavagga to which he proceeded, constitutes the Khandhakas. He placed the Suttavihbanga after these, and ended with the admittedly later Parivara. But properly speaking, the Pali Vinaya begins with the Suttavibhanga...... “According to Rhys Davids and Oldenberg, the oldest portion of the Vinaya is the Patimokkha, or list of 227 rules, or courses of training to be observed. As this seems to be indisputably the case, it is only fitting that the Suttavibhanga should preceed the Khandhakas. For the Suttavibhanga is that portion of the Vinaya which contains the Patimokkha. “In their Vinaya Texts, Rhys Davids and Oldenberg open with the Patimokkha. Buddhaghosa in his Commentary, the Samantapasadika, begins with the Suttavibhanga in extenso. I therefore follow the same plan, and mention it chiefly to indicate that my Vol 1 does not correspond to Oldenberg’s vol 1....... “The chief difference between the presentation of the Suttavibhanga in Vinaya Texts and The Book of the Discipline is that, in the former the Suttavibhanga is cut down to comprise nothing more than the Patimokkha rules themselves, all auxiliary material being omitted, while the latter, when finished, will contain, with very few exceptions, an unabridged translation of the entire Suttavibhanga. The Vinaya, the Discipline, especially that portion of it called Suttavibhanga, appoints and decrees a definite standard of outward morality, comprised in courses of training laid down for the proper behaviour of monks and nuns. On the surface the Suttavibhanga is not much more than an attempt to restrain unsuitable behaviour; but in reality it also arrives, though in many cases by a long process of exclusion, the kind of positive conduct to be pursued by the monk who wishes his life to be externally blameless, so far as his relations with his fellow monks, with the Order as a whole, and with the laity are concerned....... “The word Suttavibhanga means analysis or classification (vibhanga) of a sutta, a term here applied to each rule or course of training included in the Patimokkha. The literal meaning of sutta (sutra) is of course string or thread, and as such also appears in the Vinaya...” ***** The next parts I’ve marked are concerned with an introduction to the 227 rules. I’ll try to add further quotes another time. Sarah ====== 17880 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 4:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis Hi David " The Buddha was not a God. I think it would be a mistake not to > realize that he was effected at times by his times. And I think it > would be a further mistake not to allow Buddhism to grow. If you > don't you have a spirituality that is no different from that of > fundimentalist Christian or Islam. It is the heart of the Buddhas > teaching that counts." These rules are not set by any venerables but by Buddha himself and furthermore if my memory did not fail me. It is the VEN Mahakasayapa who leads the first council of the Sangha who said that the rules are all to be followed. Buddhis is growing on which direction??? Is it on the direction of human inclination and social norm that influence on Buddhism. When Buddha set rules, it meant to past beyond time and space. I dont even treat Buddhism as a religion and how much less I think Buddha is a god. I treat him with great respect like a teacher. If we wish to change any rule, then we must be qualify, to be at least an Arahant bc we do not know the implication of such a change. If not, the closest we have are the three treasures and the rules set on it. This is hard to sallow bc human norms are that we should suit things, we should be dynamic to changes so that Buddhism can grow. If Buddhism will to grow on the expense of the original teaching, I would rather see it being dissolve from this Samasara world. It pains me when our influence is more influential on Buddhism rather than Buddhism on us. kind regards KC 17881 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 5:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Foundation Bulletin,Dhamma Issues no 1 Nina Thanks very much for making this material available. I can see it's going to cover some very interesting points. I can also see it's going to need time to take in! Jon PS I agree with your comments in an earlier post, that for some these very detailed points will have no appeal, and they should just skip it. --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Foundation Bulletin, > Dhamma Issues, no 1. > > Preface > > In the Board Meetings of the Dhamma Study and Support Foundation > different > subjects of Dhamma are discussed. The sources which are used are > the > Tipitaka, the Commentaries and subcommentaries. These discussions > are > profound and also Pali experts contribute to them. The conclusions > are > published in booklets. > Since I find this material important I like to make it available to > a wider > public. Therefore I have selected some of the topics of discussion > and > translated them from Thai into English. > I have added in footnotes some explanations of the subjects under > discussion > for the sake of those who are not familiar with the terms used. > > Nina van Gorkom 17882 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 5:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis Hi Peter, (James and all) I dont think you said any unskill speech, there is no need for apology. In my opinion, you are brave by sharing your opinion with the group here. Some of us here talk a bit seriously at times and jokingly at times. Some like detail analysis and investigation, hence gives an impression that they are scholars and not doers. Some like to talk about Buddhist practise. Some like to discuss the same topics for many months. Hence some will find it dry and others will, find pple like me who is not good at explanation very assertive. This what made this group so interesting, this is a place where pple share their opinion in Buddhism freely which includes the experiences in practise that they have encountered. As Christmas is coming, I like to use this opportunity to thanks the moderators, Sarah and Jon for their execellent work in moderating this group, who provide a conducive environment for us to learn and share. Also not forgetting pple who contributes their opinion and sharing their knowledge freely and willingly, pple like Nina, Kom, Howard, Christine, Larry,Ken H, Stephen and not to forget the Roberts (by the way where are the other two Roberts(Ep and K). And also to all the pple here, a merry Christmas and a very happy New Year and enjoy the holidays as it is the time of giving :)Cheers Also to new pple that I just come across like James, Peter and David Wait, one last person, the "serious" and intellectual Suan who seems to disappear kind rgds KC P.S. Sorry if I miss out anyone --- "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi Kenneth > > Apologies for using unskillful speech, no disrespect intended. I > will endeavour to show better sense in the future. 17883 From: nidive Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 5:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] processes of citta also in Abhidhamma. Dear Nina, > You see, the nucleus of the process is there. It does not matter > that names are different, they have their own place in the order > of the process, which is citta niyama: certainty, definiteness. It > is like a natural law. It could not be altered, it is amazing when > we come to think of it. Thank you for your message. I had read robmoult's message about the 'process' being not described in the Abhidhamma. Not being an expert in the Abhidhamma, I was pretty confused by that message. I thought that robmoult was such an expert, and took his word for it, and became confused. Thank you for clarifying that. NEO Swee Boon 17884 From: azita gill Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 6:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] subtle points [and a little note for James] --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Subtle points: > Dear friends, > I am starting a new series, a translation of the > Foundation Bulletin. dearest Nina, your energy and skills astound me. I find it hard to get out of bed somedays!!! it was wonderful seeing you and Lodewick in Bkk. and of course all the others also. on my last full day in Bkk., I lunched with Sukin, Num [who both kindly paid for our delicious food], Rob, Betty, Ivan, Elle,and Pina. After lunch, Rob had the great idea to hire the executive room on the 27th. floor for the next 1-2 hours for more dhamma discussion. I can't remember all we talked about [I really need to write things down}, but I recall all of us standing at the very large window looking out over Bkk. and debating whether it was intrinsically a pleasant or unpleasant visible object. It became very clear to me, that it is of no use trying to decide whether somethings pleasant/unpleasant bec. that object has fallen away already, what's more important is our Kusala/Akusala reactions to the object. BTW, when I write the word 'object' I can almost hear the way you say it. I'm beginning to see also why Khanti can be a parami; A.Sujin often speaks of patience and how important it is. Patience , courage and good cheer [which means laughing yer head off, James, we aren't 'saints' yet, and you haven't met Ivan, he'll make you laugh] > Azita. > 17885 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 7:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dualism/Non-Dualism Hi Christine, Dualism arise bc there is attachment, when there is attachment there is grasping, then to becoming then to birth....suffering Then what is the cause of dualism, it lobha(attachment), and the cause of lobha is moha. That is why there is the logic of Non dualism, to me it can be equate as panna . How to get it, you know them already (the four noble truth, Eight Noble Path) :) I hope this helps Cheers and rgds KC --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, > > 'Talking' with Buddhists of other traditions on the Internet, and > even 'listening' to those who see themselves as Theravada, it seems > > to me Dualism/Non-Dualism is a confusion. > > My understanding of Non-Dualism is that it asserts that the ground > of > being is One. All separations or dualities are formed symbolically > by > Mind. I don't understand how this isn't just another way of > ensuring > there is an eternal self, albeit a Super Self - the dew-drop > slipping > into the shining sea. > > Does the Canon clarify what the Buddha taught in this respect? > What > is the Theravada perspective? > > metta, > Christine 17887 From: chase8383 Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 7:34am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis Hi KC First, thank you for your response. You said: "If we wish to change any rule, then we must be qualify, to be at least an Arahant bc we do not know the implication of such a change. If not, the closest we have are the three treasures and the rules set on it. This is hard to sallow bc human norms are that we should suit things, we should be dynamic to changes so that Buddhism can grow. If Buddhism will to grow on the expense of the original teaching, I would rather see it being dissolve from this Samasara world. It pains me when our influence is more influential on Buddhism rather than Buddhism on us." Ok, there is lot here. This is a huge topic and I don't pretend to have the answers. I can reply in a manner that reflects my experiences with Buddhism though, which is all any of us can do. I say that because Buddhism is above all else, experiential. Buddhism is not about the rules, or the words, set forth by the Buddha. It is not about form. It isn't even about the Buddha himself. It is about mind. It is about the training of the mind, through means. The rules and teachings are the means, but they are not the mind itself. They reside outside the mind. They are rafts used to cross certain streams or rivers. Once you have crossed those rivers, or streams, they are to be left for others to use, and not carried on your back as you continue down the path. Some of the rivers that were present during the Buddha's time and place are not like the rivers we have to cross today. Some of the Buddha's rafts are specially designed to carry you across the rivers he meet on his trek. When we pick up one of the Buddha's rafts, we should test it, to see if it will carry us across the river we are facing. Or to see if it is a raft left for a different river. The Buddha's greatness lay in the fact that by testing over and over again himself, he found the raft that will carry us across the ocean of samsara. That is the raft we should use most often. We shouldn't confuse the rafts he built for the tributaries leading to and from the ocean, for the raft he built to carry us across that ocean. With the utmost respect, David 17888 From: nidive Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 7:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Do brahmas experience vipaka? Dear Nina, Thank you for your explanation. Can you also explain why, according to the Abhidhamma, is it that a sotapanna has only at most 7 remaining rebirths? Regards, NEO Swee Boon 17889 From: nidive Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 8:32am Subject: Music produces mental feelings. Why? Dear Everybody, Why does music produce mental feelings? Even though what I hear is a sound at a time, yet when many sounds at a time conjoin together in some musical fashion, there arises pleasant mental feelings; there arises imagination... For example, I am now listening to Kitaro's Silk Road Fantasy. Why does this piece of music conjures up a feeling of "ancient", of "time long past"...? For example, I am now listening to Tchaikovsky's Chinese Dance. Why does this piece of music conjures up a feeling of "comedy"...? For example, I am now listening to Kitaro's Koi. Why does this piece of music conjures up a feeling of "love"...? Why are sounds so powerful to bring out mental feelings? I do not discern the cause of these pleasant mental feelings, even though I know I am only hearing one sound at a time that will not make sense if taken apart from the rest. Regards, NEO Swee Boon 17890 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:18am Subject: Perfections, Ch 7, Patience,no 3 Perfections, Ch 7, Patience,no 3 There can be patience even with regard to uttering useless speech. Before we are going to speak we should consider whether what we want to say is beneficial or not. If it is not beneficial there should be patience and we should refrain from that speech, because it is not helpful for anybody. Sati-sampajañña performs its function in such matters and we should investigate whether it has further developed. We read in the Commentary to the ³Basket of Conduct² (Miscellaneous Sayings): The perfection of patience should be considered next: Patience is the unimpeded weapon of the good in the development of noble qualities, for it dispels anger, the opposite of all such qualities, without residue. It is the adornment of those capable of vanquishing the foe; the strength of recluses and brahmins; a stream of water extinguishing the fire of anger; the basis for acquiring a good reputation; a mantra for quelling the poisonous speech of evil people; the supreme source of constancy in those established in restraint. Patience is an ocean on account of its depth; a shore bounding the great ocean of hatred; a panel closing off the door to the plane of misery; a staircase ascending to the worlds of the gods and Brahmas; the ground for the habitation of all noble qualities; the supreme purification of body, speech and mind. As we read, patience is ³the unimpeded weapon of the good²: akusala can be destroyed when one is righteous. When there is patience there is no disturbance, because khanti, patience, cannot harm righteous people. ³Patience is the unimpeded weapon of the good in the development of noble qualities, for it dispels anger, the opposite of all such qualities, without residue², as we read. If we are able to be patient, anger cannot arise, there cannot be wrong speech, not even the slightest amount. We shall not utter angry words.As we read, patience is ³the adornment of those capable of vanquishing the foe.² We may well adorn ourselves profusely with things that beautify, but if our action and speech are evil, we are not beautiful. The absence of anger, patience, is the adornment of those capable of conquering others; with this kind of adornment one is beautiful and does not need other kinds of adornment. However, if there is no patience, one¹s action and speech are ugly. Patience is ³the strength of recluses and brahmins². It is the attainment of strength (bala sampadå) of the tranquil person. A tranquil or calm person does not have any disturbance or trouble with regard to anybody, and thus calm which is freedom from akusala is the strength of recluses and brahmins. Patience is ³a stream of water extinguishing the fire of anger.² If we are angry, anger can be overcome by the perfection of patience. At such a moment we accumulate conditions to refrain more easily from akusala, and this can become our natural habit. Patience is ³the basis for acquiring a good reputation, a mantra for quelling the poisonous speech of evil people.² When we are angry and we utter evil speech, we ourselves are evil people. Whoever utters evil speech is an evil person. Patience is a mantra, a medicin against poison, namely speech of an evil person. Patience is ³the supreme source of constancy in those established in restraint.² Patience is the nature of those with supreme paññå. In order to develop paññå it is necessary to have endless patience: patience to listen to the Dhamma and to consider it in all details so as to understand the deep meaning of the teachings and their benefit. In that way we shall know that listening is not enough, that we should also apply the teachings. If someone wishes to have paññå he should first of all have endurance and accumulate the perfection of patience. ³Patience is an ocean on account of its depth.² Patience is profound. Akusala arises more often than kusala. When sati-sampajañña arises, someone realizes the moment of akusala citta, and he has patience to refrain from it, be it lobha, dosa, jealousy, avarice or conceit. This shows that patience is profound. If someone has no understanding, he cannot develop the perfection of patience. The perfection of patience and sati-sampajañña are very subtle and refined, they are conditions for refraining from akusala. Patience is ³a shore bounding the great ocean of hatred; a panel closing off the door to the plane of misery.² Many people are afraid of unhappy planes and they perform kusala so that they will not be born there. However, if one does not want to be reborn in an unhappy plane, he should be patient and refrain from akusala, because patience is ³a panel closing off the door to the plane of misery.² Patience is ³a staircase ascending to the worlds of the gods and Brahmas; the ground for the habitation of all noble qualities; the supreme purification of body, speech and mind.² We should consider again and again whether we have further developed patience in each situation of our life. When we train ourselves often in good qualities, sobhana cetasikas, when we develop them, they can become our nature. Some people are by nature more patient than others, and this shows that they have developed patience. 17891 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:18am Subject: Bhaddekaratta sutta Dear Christine, thank you for putting up this sutta, I have a lot to consider, especially as regards the moment which is just past and to which we cling. A. Sujin referred to this sutta at our first session in Kraeng Kacang. I may use it later on. Nina. 17892 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 5:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis Hi David Yes, you are correct to say that Buddhism is experiential, it is very personal, it grows and nurture as an individual nurture. It gives you control of your life. It gives you freedom. That whats make Buddhism apart and attractive and at times I would say "seductive". Buddhism is about training of the mind. In fact most philisophy and religion talks about training of mind to a certain extent. However, Buddhism has rules, it needed to define certain paradigm to suit its practise, its support for the 4 Noble Truth. Without these rules pple will either do what they think its correct or be confused on what is the training of the mind. We cannot suit rules to our whim and fancy, or not teaching will be modify and again modify down the generations and the original intention will be lost. And that is how I believe Buddhism is going to disappear from the earth and it has already started since the early 1900s where pple make their own rules and interpretation of what is Buddhism. Just imagine that now there are some monks in Singapore are getting paid being monks. This is not rumour, this is a fact. Some even drive better cars than the ordinary citizens. Pple always base it on the pretext that it is the donation from the lay pple. So are the rules being bend to suit individual or the rules that monks should not have any possession other than the robes and bowls that they needed applies. Rules are set by Buddha for very good reasons. Rules are not meant to be broken or bend, if it does, that is what happening to Buddhism now. Becoming very superstitious rather than an institution of education on the way of life. (no offence to any venerables here) I like rafts and I like the ocean more. These rafts are based on foundation of wood, nails etc. The wood, nails are like rules, methods, concepts of Buddhism. Just like paddling the raft, there are rules or ways to do it, or not we are wasting our energy trying to get across. We can take many test to go to the other side, but Buddha has already tested many times and informs us the method and rules that best suit us (Eight Noble Path). The gist is why waste energy to test on our own, why reinvent the wheel? Furthermore, many great venerables have tested the Eight Noble Path and find their way across. kind rgds KC 17893 From: Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 6:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 27, Comm Hi all, I think this section again states that we should experience each of the four main objects of satipatthana (body, feeling, consciousness, and dhammas) as separate distinct phenomena and most importantly notice that they are anicca, dukkha, anatta. I have found that in my rush to judgement I often overlook the feeling of vipaka and concentrate on the like, dislke, don't know etc. of javana. Like, dislike, don't know and their opposites are not feelings but the feelings of pleasant, unpleasant, neutral are associated with them. Beauty and ugliness, for example, are equivalent to like and dislike and are associated with pleasant and unpleasant feeling. The actual visual consciousness is resultant (vipaka) and is associated with neutral feeling. One could experience feeling as something in itself and notice that it is impermanent, undesirable, and not self. Likewise with the consciousnesses of like, dislike etc. In the sentence: "By the repetition of the word, the limiting of the object by isolating it, is shown through the pointing out of only a doer of feeling-contemplation in the property called feeling, as there is no contemplating of the body, or consciousness or mental objects in feeling but only the contemplating of feeling." the phrase "only a doer of feeling-contemplation" not only limits the range of one's focus but also limits one's intentions and ambitions, it seems to me. One thought that frequently arises in me is "okay, I've done that, what else should I do?" The"what else" is just the next moment of body, feeling, citta, or dhamma anupassana (look-see). Larry 17894 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 8:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 27, Comm, remarks. op 18-12-2002 05:55 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > [Tika] The word "feelings" is repeated to limit (or unambiguously > determine) the object by isolating it [anissato vavatthanam], for the > analysis of the apparently compact [ghana vinibbhoga] and for such other > purposes, in order to prevent any straying from the contemplation on > feelings to some other object. Erratic contemplation takes place because > of the connection of the other non-material aggregates with feelings, > and because of the dependence of non-material things like feelings on > material form in the five-constituent-existence [pañca vokara bhava] > or the sensuous plane of becoming [kama bhava]. Nina: This is very meaningful, because it is so difficult to know exactly feeling as pure nama, not mixed in with rupa or other namas. Usually we just think about feeling, instead of being aware exactly of its characteristic. We think of our aversion, our unpleasant feeling, no awareness. > [T] By the repetition of the word, the limiting of the object by > isolating it, is shown through the pointing out of only a doer of > feeling-contemplation in the property called feeling, as there is no > contemplating of the body, or consciousness or mental objects in feeling > but only the contemplating of feeling. > "This yogavacara (the Buddha's disciple who is > endeavoring for spiritual insight) contemplates just feelings and not > any other thing, Nina: yogaavacara: this word was discussed in Thailand: yoga: skill in samatha and vipassana. Aavacara: frequenting or traveling, namely to different objects.The way of teaching here is by way of puggala desana, teaching by way of persons. But actually, Yogaavacara refers to the citta which develops samatha and vipassana. As stated above: the yogaavacara contemplates just feelings and not any other thing. This means: at that moment. It all refers to just a moment. Next moment the citta contemplates rupa, or any other reality. Nina. 17895 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 8:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Foundation Bulletin,Dhamma Issues, remark Hi Larry, This is hard to understand. Citta has as only function to clearly know an object, it does not feel, it does not remember, it has no aversion or attachment. The cetasikas arise in addition to citta, each with their own function and quality. We know this in theory, but through insight we can more fully understand this. Now we learn to understand the difference between nama and rupa, and when we understand what nama is, also the difference between citta and cetasika can be realized. Without satipatthana, awareness of nama and rupa now, we cannot appreciate the Abhidhamma, we consider it only as theory. Now I cannot explain much more about this. I appreciate very much what Rob K wrote recently: end quote Nina. op 18-12-2002 06:44 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > > "Conclusion regarding the second issue: Cetasika must be an external > åyatana and it cannot be an internal åyatana. > The reason: Citta is an internal åyatana (manåyatana or mind-base), > whereas cetasikas are different from citta, they are accompanying citta, > and thus, they are external åyatanas" > > I thought external meant object but a cetasika accompanying a citta > isn't the object of that citta, is it? 17896 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 8:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] just chatting Dear Azita, Yes, it was wonderful to be with you all. We had a good time together did't we? And plenty of laughter. I like this post of yours, and your discussion about visible object. I had plenty of different vipakas, including computer breakdown. But something else : Lodewijk's sister (his only one alive) just died. Mentally she was already in very bad shape, could hardly recognize. We have the funeral service in a church and Lodewijk (piano), a nephew (cello) and I (tenor recorder) have to play Frescobaldi. I have to remember that music can be a kind of giving. They want the service in Christmas sphere and will light advents candlesin between speeches and music (Christine will like this!). Lodewijk finds that this helps to make it less sad. I just heard on a recorded radio program of A.Sujin about mindfulness of death: when aware of this moment now, you are not negligent, but observe marana sati: just think of the moment. It comes down to the moment always, not the situation. I have to work things out and may take a long, long time, it is difficult to find the time. My father needs a lot of attention these days: birthday luncheon, all the feastdays. How I need khanti for such occasions. You should remind me. How was your meeting with Ken H? That weekend? Nina. op 18-12-2002 15:00 schreef azita gill op gazita2002@y...: > I'm beginning to see also why Khanti can be a > parami; A.Sujin often speaks of patience and how > important it is. > Patience , courage and good cheer. 17897 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 8:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] sotapanna Dear Swee Boon, Only the arahat has no more rebirth. As we consider the anagami: no return to this plane, the sakadagami, once returner, and the sotapanna has more rebirths than the persons who attained higher stages of enlightenment. I cannot say anything about the number seven, but is it important? He cannot have an unhappy rebirth and is sure to once attain arahatship. Is that not what is most important? Nina. op 18-12-2002 16:54 schreef nidive op nidive@y...: > > Can you also explain why, according to the Abhidhamma, is it that a > sotapanna has only at most 7 remaining rebirths? 17898 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 9:19pm Subject: Re: Dualism/Non-Dualism Dear Howard, Stephen, Larry, TG, and KC, Just a quick note to say thanks for your posts. I am a little slow in replying due to following up Sutta references, but the major delay has been reading and reflecting on Bhikkhu Nanananda's "The Magic of the Mind" (Howard to blame :-)). This led to re-reading Howard, Jon and RobEp's discussion on the Kalakarama Sutta on dsg some months back. I hope eventually to find my way out of the Kalakarama Magic Show and back to the dualism/non-dualism discussionwith any comments and questions. Howard (or anyone) - do you have the last page of The Magic of the Mind? I can't download past this bit: "It is the understanding of the principle of relativity behind the concept of truth. The realization that anyone placed in a similar situation would behave as that crowd, had a mellowing effect on your sense of ". Is there an agreed definition of either non-dualism and dualism? It reminds me a little like a discussion using the term 'breakfast' as if there is a common agreement that the word breakfast has only one meaning. (This is a reflection from someone who is used to a sweet fruit, yoghurt, cold milk and cereal breakfast and was offered on her last day in Hong Kong a hot aromatic fish and vegetable stew with steamed rice.) Surely how we regard 'breakfast', what we think 'it' is, will strongly affect 'how'and 'where' we go about finding/gaining 'it'. And, in the context of the Buddha's teachings, whether or not he taught a Non-dualism, a Dualism, or neither, will surely affect our Buddhist life and practice. (not to mention subjects like 'sakkaya-ditthi.). metta, Christine 17899 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] just chatting Hi Nina, My condolences to you and Lodewijk at this sad time. Music certainly is a gift, especially with the dignity and respect it shows for the departed dear one, and to the the congregation of relatives and friends at the funeral ceremony. Your music will be a balm applied to grieving hearts. Many people are inarticulate when experiencing the suffering that the intrusion of death brings. Music speaks in a language which is understood without the necessity for words. I think it is one of the most appropriate gifts of all. You may find a little bit about our weekend at Cooran in these Posts: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/17504 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/17627 Azita was still in Thailand on that weekend, but we hope she (and anyone else interested) will be there for the next SEQdsg (i.e. South East Queensland dhammastudy group) get together. metta, Christine --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Azita, > Yes, it was wonderful to be with you all. We had a good time together did't > we? And plenty of laughter. I like this post of yours, and your discussion > about visible object. > I had plenty of different vipakas, including computer breakdown. But > something else : Lodewijk's sister (his only one alive) just died. Mentally > she was already in very bad shape, could hardly recognize. We have the > funeral service in a church and Lodewijk (piano), a nephew (cello) and I > (tenor recorder) have to play Frescobaldi. I have to remember that music can > be a kind of giving. They want the service in Christmas sphere and will > light advents candlesin between speeches and music (Christine will like > this!). Lodewijk finds that this helps to make it less sad. > I just heard on a recorded radio program of A.Sujin about mindfulness of > death: when aware of this moment now, you are not negligent, but observe > marana sati: just think of the moment. It comes down to the moment always, > not the situation. I have to work things out and may take a long, long time, > it is difficult to find the time. My father needs a lot of attention these > days: birthday luncheon, all the feastdays. How I need khanti for such > occasions. You should remind me. > How was your meeting with Ken H? That weekend? > Nina. > > op 18-12-2002 15:00 schreef azita gill op gazita2002@y...: > > > I'm beginning to see also why Khanti can be a > > parami; A.Sujin often speaks of patience and how > > important it is. > > Patience , courage and good cheer. 17900 From: chase8383 Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 3:57am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis Hi KC Well I'd like to respond to your post. However, after continually being threatened about having my liberty to post removed if I don't conform, I can't. It seems that there are certain members I'm not allowed to speak to. It seems there are certain Buddhist thoughts I'm not allowed to express. It seems there is a fear I won't be respectful of the monks in here. It seems that I'm some kind of lose cannon on the deck of the good ship Theravada. Being an American, I have a lot trouble with this kind of restriction. Being a Buddhist, I weep. Be spacious, David 17901 From: Date: Wed Dec 18, 2002 11:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dualism/Non-Dualism Hi, Christine - In a message dated 12/19/02 12:20:36 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > > Dear Howard, Stephen, Larry, TG, and KC, > > Just a quick note to say thanks for your posts. I am a little slow > in replying due to following up Sutta references, but the major delay > has been reading and reflecting on Bhikkhu Nanananda's "The Magic of > the Mind" (Howard to blame :-)). This led to re-reading Howard, Jon > and RobEp's discussion on the Kalakarama Sutta on dsg some months > back. I hope eventually to find my way out of the Kalakarama Magic > Show and back to the dualism/non-dualism discussionwith any comments > and questions. > > Howard (or anyone) - do you have the last page of The Magic of the > Mind? I can't download past this bit: > > "It is the understanding of the principle of relativity behind the > concept of truth. The realization that anyone placed in a similar > situation would behave as that crowd, had a mellowing effect on your > sense of ". > > ============================ I wasn't aware that the book was available for downloading. How nice! I have a hard copy (in soft cover ;-), but not handy at the moment.When it's handier - soon, I'll type what's missing if it is not too extensive. If I should take too long in getting to this (I'm just about to start grading final exams), and if no one else replies with the info first, please do not hesitate to remind me. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17902 From: Jaran Jainhuknan Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 5:10am Subject: RE: Foundation Bulletin,Dhamma Issues no 1 Hi Nina (and All): It was nice to see you and Lodewijk in Thailand. I had a lot of fun seeing you all. Thank you for the translation and the reminder at the end of you post. Without the remider, many probably try to figure out what are you trying to tell us, and forget that ayatanas become clear(er) at each moment of satipatthana (maybe at this moment). I was still quite puzzled when it is concluded the sense-bases remain ayatanas throughout the sense-door process. How can they still be "meeting points" when the seeing conciousness (for example) has fallen away--not "meeting" with the visible-object anymore? I am sure you and Num and others have discussed this before, but can you do it again please. :-) Best Regards, jaran 17903 From: Jaran Jainhuknan Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 5:33am Subject: Re: just chatting Hi Nina and Lodewijk: Sorry to hear about the loss. As I heard A. Sujin (and probably Rob K) said once, when someone was sad because of the death of a loved one, that they're already reborn, we should be happy for that. With Sympathy, jaran 17904 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 5:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some interesting comments on Ethical View vs. Scientific View Dear Rob M & All, You discuss the value and authenticity of commentarial material and in particular, the value of details in the Abhidammattha Sangaha which are not found in the Tipitaka. ..... You wrote: "I have incredible admiration for Acariya Anuruddha. Not only was he able to condense seven thick volumes of the Abhidhamma into fifty pages, but he also added a significant new material (citta-process) not found in the original. I believe that "paramattha dhamma", another critical term in the Abhidhammatthasangaha, is also not found in the Suttas nor in the original seven volumes of the Abhidhamma. Citta-vithi, paramattha may have appeared in commentarial literature prior to Anuruddha, but my point is that they are not in the Tipitaka." ***** Rob K and Nina have discussed the question of terminology. The entire Tipitaka consists of the teaching of paramattha dhammas (ultimate dhammas) and the distinction between these and the world of conceptual truths that we are so used to taking for ‘real’ or ‘ultimate’. Terminology also differs in various parts of the Suttanta and according to whether the Buddha or one of his disciples is speaking, I believe. I understand the Abhidhammatthasangaha to be based entirely on Tipitaka textual sources (mostly the Abhidhamma), but including the ancient commentaries down to and including the Visuddhimagga, especially its last chapter. It is for this reason that it has traditionally been used as the ‘first textbook in Abhidhamma Studies’ in monasteries, as B.Bodhi refers to it. The ancient commentaries themselves -- including the Abhidhamma commentaries -- mainly written by Buddhaghosa did not contain any new or original ideas, but were based on the old Sihala commentaries available at the time. Let me pick up on some details from earlier posts on this theme to include here with a few additional comments: ***** Buddhaghosa himself makes it clear in the Samantapasadika, the commentary to the Vinaya, that, as with all his commentaries, they are a compilation of the Sihala commentaries which were first recited under Mahinda. In his own words "it is a navasangahitaava.n.nanaa,(a re-compiled commentary)". If his statement were not correct, it would have been pointed out, especially as there is evidence to show that they were available for some time after Buddhaghosa’s work was written. According to Buddhaghosa, the origin of the Mahavihara commentarial tradition goes back to the time of the First Council. The commentaries were, he writes: "...rehearsed at the very outset, for the purpose of elucidating the meaning, by the 500 (who were) endowed with self-mastery, and were likewise rehearsed even afterwards were subsequently brought to the island of the Sihalas by Maha-Mahinda (who was) endowed with self-mastery...". I believe these comments would at apply for at least the basis of the Abhidhamma commentaries too. For earlier posts discussing the origins of the Abhidhamma as rehearsed at the First Council, see: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/12658 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/17027 ..... We can clearly see that commentarial material has in fact been integrated into the Suttanta itself since the First Council, In his introduction to the translation of the Bahiranidana, Jayawickrama says: "According to the prologues of many of Buddhaghosa’s Commentaries, the origin of this tradition (that of commentarial tradition)goes back to the time of the first council. The stanzas Nos 6, 7 of the prologues (DA, MA, SA, AA, DhsA etc) state: "Whatever commentaries were rehearsed at the very outset, for the purpose of elucidating the meaning, by the five hundred (who were) endowed with self-mastery, and were likewise rehearsed even afterwards were subsequently brought to the island of the Siiha.laa by Mahaa-Mahinda (who was) endowed with self-mastery, and were made to remain in the Siiha.la language for the benefit of the inhabitants of the island." ..... Sometimes the Buddha preached ‘a sermon in concise form’ and then one of the chief disciples would explain in greater detail. Malalasekera writes in 'The Pali Literature of Ceylon'; "When later the text of the canon came to be compiled, arranged, and edited, some of the expositions found their way into the Pitakas and were given a permanent place therein. Thus we have the Sangiti-suttanta of the Digha Nikaya, ascribed to Sariputta and forming a complete catechism of terms and passages of exegetical nature. Such was also the Sacca-vibhanga (an exposition of the four Noble Truths) of the Majjhima, which later found its proper place in the second book of the Abhidhamma-Pitaka, and also the Madhu-pindika-sutta of Maha-Kaccayana, included in the Majjhima Nikaya. It sometimes happened that for a proper understanding of the text, explanations of a commentarial nature were quite essential; and in such cases the commentary was naturally incorporated into the text and formed part of the text itself.......Then there is the Niddesa, a whole book of commentary on texts now included in the Sutta-nipata; and there are passages clearly of a commentarial nature scattered throughout the Nikayas." ***** Often in the suttas too, we read many references to the Buddha’s Teachings as explained by his key disciples such as in the Nakulipita where the words were elaborated by Sariputta. In the Atthasalini, it gives the following example from DN: " ‘Bhikkhus, learned is Mahakaccana, profoundly wise is Mahakaccana. If you had asked me the same question, I would have answered exactly as he has done.’ Thus since the time when the Teacher gave his approval, the whole suttanta became the word of the Buddha. And it is the same with the suttas expounded by Ananda and others." ..... Rob, you wrote: "Our focus in studying the citta-process should not be so much in the memorizing of the names of the cittas, the cetasikas which appear with each citta, etc. but focusing more on the fact that there is seeing but there is no seer (the citta process is empty). In my Abhidhamma class, I will continue to teach the citta vithi and the list of cetasikas in each citta; but I will constantly remind the students of why we are studying this stuff. This is part of my effort to minimize pananca." ..... I think this is wise and whether any of us agree or not on the origins hardly matters. We need to keep the purpose of our studies in mind all the time. The value of the commentaries or Abhidhamma details is in helping to clarify the phenomena in life and be a condition for awareness and wisdom to grow. In particular, the value is in assisting the comprehension of phenomena as conditioned elements which are anatta. The purpose is not to be an expert on detail, but without many of these details, it's questionable whether the rest of the teachings could be understood as I see it. Look forward to more of your reflections. I appreciate your deeper consideration of the Abhidhamma details as they apply in daily life and 'practice' of the teachings. Sarah ======= 17905 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 5:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] I'd got my first Pali Dictionary Paul Congratulations. I'm sure you'll find it useful for your studies. Jon PS I'd be interested to know where you saw the Pali-English and English-Pali dictionaries. Are there bookshops in Hong Kong that stock that kind of stuff? --- "ajahn_paul " wrote: > Hi all, > > Just want to share with all of u that i'd got my first Pali > dictionary. this is the only one i can find in Hong Kong, its a > Pali- > English-Chinese-Sanskrit, well, its not a good one, but its the > only > one with Chinese! (There is another 2, one is Pali-English, the > other > one is English-Pali, i think those r good! ^^) > > I'd tried to look for a Pali-Chinese Dictionary on internet,,,, > yes, > i'd found one, but not enough for me. In Southern Buddhism, im > just > one of the satrkids! hehehehe > > btw, i think its a good start! ^^ 17906 From: ajahn_paul Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 8:11am Subject: Re: I'd got my first Pali Dictionary Hi Jon, there is a book store at G/F, 241-243 Sai Yee St., Mongkok. (MTR- Prince Edward Station), they got many english buddhism books there. --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Paul > > Congratulations. I'm sure you'll find it useful for your studies. > > Jon > > PS I'd be interested to know where you saw the Pali-English and > English-Pali dictionaries. Are there bookshops in Hong Kong that > stock that kind of stuff? > 17907 From: nidive Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 8:18am Subject: Re: Commentaries are papanca-like? Dear RobertK > While some ruaps are conditioned by citta (consciousness) others, > such as the rupas that make up rocks or trees are conditioned by > utu, not citta. Hence, I believe Citta is not a necessary > condition for all rupas to arise. Let us say that all cittas suddenly disappear from this entire samsara. Would rupa still stand on its own, independent of cittas? Taken from ADL, The 'Visuddhimagga' (XVIII, 34) explains: Furthermore, nama has no efficient power, it cannot occur by its own efficient power... It does not eat, it does not drink, it does not speak, it does not adopt postures. And rupa is without efficient power; it cannot occur by its own efficient power. For it has no desire to eat, it has no desire to drink, it has no desire to speak, it has no desire to adopt postures. But rather it is when supported by rupa that nama occurs; and it is when supported by nama that rupa occurs. When nama has the desire to eat, the desire to drink, the desire to speak, the desire to adopt a posture, it is rupa that eats, drinks, speaks and adopts a posture.... Furthermore (XVIII, 36) we read: And just as men depend upon A boat for traversing the sea, So does the mental body need The matter-body for occurrence. And as the boat depends upon The men for traversing the sea, So does the matter-body need The mental body for occurrence. Depending each upon the other The boat and men go on the sea. And so do mind and matter both Depend the one upon the other. If rupa can occur independently of nama (citta & cetasikas), and nama can occur independently of rupa, 'samsara' cannot be called 'samsara'. The cessation of nama comes the cessation of rupa. The cessation of rupa comes the cessation of nama. This is how I understand the Law of Dependent Origination. Regards, NEO Swee Boon 17908 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 10:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 27, Comm, remarks Hi Larry, op 19-12-2002 03:13 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > > I think this section again states that we should experience each of the > four main objects of satipatthana (body, feeling, consciousness, and > dhammas) as separate distinct phenomena and most importantly notice that > they are anicca, dukkha, anatta. Nina: We cannot realize these three characteristics yet, don't rush. When feeling (any feeling) appears, we can begin to understand it as nama, a reality which experiences. Since the first stage of insight has not been reached, how could we penetrate the three characteristics, that comes at later stages. L: I have found that in my rush to > judgement I often overlook the feeling of vipaka and concentrate on the > like, dislke, don't know etc. of javana. N: I overlook too! L:Like, dislike, don't know and > their opposites are not feelings but the feelings of pleasant, > unpleasant, neutral are associated with them. Beauty and ugliness, for > example, are equivalent to like and dislike and are associated with > pleasant and unpleasant feeling. N: I would think that beauty and ugliness are attributes of the object that is experienced. L:The actual visual consciousness is > resultant (vipaka) and is associated with neutral feeling. One could > experience feeling as something in itself and notice that it is > impermanent, undesirable, and not self. Likewise with the > consciousnesses of like, dislike etc. >N: Again: don't rush. L: In the sentence: > > "By the repetition of the word, the limiting of the object by isolating > it, is shown through the pointing out of only a doer of > feeling-contemplation in the property called feeling, as there is no > contemplating of the body, or consciousness or mental objects in feeling > but only the contemplating of feeling." N: The doer:: eva: only , anupassanaa: contemplation (anu: I checked in Thailand: it can be following, or: again and again). kaarassa: of a doer. Here again the real meaning: the citta which develops satipatthana, with awareness of feeling. L: One thought that frequently arises in me is "okay, I've > done that, what else should I do?" The"what else" is just the next > moment of body, feeling, citta, or dhamma anupassana (look-see). N: Very well said, Larry. Just the moment, and then there is the next moment. Who can control what object citta frequents next? In Bangkok we had two hours on the satipatthana sutta, so inspiring. Many questions. After that, two hours of Board meeting: during one hour it was discussed whether only the first hour should be spent with questions and the second hour with the text. The first hour could become longer and then less time for the text. A. Sujin said: the questions are most important, because if people do not understand satipatthana now, they cannot understand the text. It does not matter if the second part dedicated to the text becomes shorter, one can take a year with only a few parts of the texts. This was a long discussion but it brought home to me that important principles were being discussed. We should not understand just the names of realities, but the characteristics which appear now. So many of my Thai friends not only know more and more Pali (Pali lesson starts at 8 on Sunday at the Foundation) but they understand that it is understanding of the reality now that matters, not theoretical understanding. I really had piti and paamojja.m (delight) being with them. It bolstered my confidence. Larry, I thought of you during the Board meeting. It is so important you bring up all your questions. With appreciation, Nina. 17909 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 10:07am Subject: Buddha, the perfected one, the fully enlightened one He is the Buddha, the Perfected one, the Fully Enlightened one Dear friends, This is a short meditation on the recollection of the Buddha's excellent qualities, which is a subject suitable for daily life. But more than before, I realize that without satipatthana the understanding of his excellent qualities is only on the theoretical level. We may repeat words, but our understanding cannot be very profound. The sotapanna has through insight, developed by means of satipatthana, eradicated all doubts as to the Triple Gem. He has an unshakable confidence in the Buddha and his teachings. As for us, beginners, panna is still weak, it is mostly theoretical understanding. We may well doubt about the Buddha, about his panna by which he was awakened and which could completely eradicate defilements. We cannot fathom the Buddha's wisdom, compassion and purity. We cannot grasp what it means that the Buddha was completely without defilements, we may have doubts about this. We may doubt about his teaching of anatta, doubt about what is the Buddha's word and what has been added later on. However, we can begin to prove to ourselves the truth of his teachings. Like and dislike arise in our lives. We can prove that aversion and dislike are conditioned by clinging: things are not the way we would like them to be. Like and dislike are also conditioned by ignorance: not knowing realities as they are. Conceit arises: we cling to the importance of self, we find ourselves better than others. There can also be moments of generosity, these are completely different from akusala. We learn: kusala is kusala, it has its own characteristic that cannot be changed. Akusala is akusala. We learn that different realities arise each because of their own conditions, that there is no person who can control their arising. As we go along studying and considering the teachings, confidence grows. How could we understand the realities of our life without the Buddha's teachings? How could we ever have known about realities such as conceit? We shall have less doubt about the scriptures and commentaries: what matters to us is: how relevant are they to our life now. Do they help us to understand reality at this moment or not. We truly have to verify this. The Dhamma is subtle and deep, it takes endless patience to develop understanding, but this is the way to leave all doubts far behind, so that our confidence gradually grows. I was reminded by A. Sujin:< Do not forget that there are realities appearing all the time.> It truly impresses me to be reminded by a wise friend who has understanding of realities. It helps me to have more confidence. We can have confidence that the Buddha is the Perfected One, the Fully Enlightened One. Nina. 17910 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 11:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 27, Comm, remarks > > I think this section again states that we should experience each of the > > four main objects of satipatthana (body, feeling, consciousness, and > > dhammas) as separate distinct phenomena and most importantly notice that > > they are anicca, dukkha, anatta. > Nina: We cannot realize these three characteristics yet, don't rush. Hi Nina, How are these three characteristics to be realized? Metta, Victor 17911 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 0:14pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhunis Hello David, KC (and all), I like the expression "a loose cannon on the decks of the good ship Theravada". Another one I like is "the newest gunslinger in town". :- ) I really hope you will allow your exasperation to evaporate - it usually does I find - we can then all continue to have the benefit of your understanding and experience in life and the Dhamma. I find one can say anything on this List, IF it one is able to show it can be supported by the Buddha's Teachings in the three baskets of the Tipitaka, and IF it works within List rules, just involves developing a basic 'skilful means' really. This enables a small part of the multitudinous Yahoo Groups to be available for Theravada Discussion and not be swamped by other buddhist traditions, other religions, straight philosophy, or fuzzy speculative thought and personal opinion. I am a member of many other Lists, but I experience this list as a safe, nurturing, constructive space because of the firm, reasonable structure in place. [We are all Buddhists, though we may not all be Americans. Does this matter? We all come from nations and cultures where freedom of expression is valued and defended.] KC, I think elements of this article may relate to your recent discussion with David. (Thanks Rahula for this site.) http://www.webcastmy.com.my/bodhivision/Symbiosis1.html metta, Christine --- "chase8383 " wrote: > Hi KC 17912 From: Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 0:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dualism/Non-Dualism Hi Christine, you wrote: Howard (or anyone) - do you have the last page of The Magic of the Mind? I can't download past this bit: "It is the understanding of the principle of relativity behind the concept of truth. The realization that anyone placed in a similar situation would behave as that crowd, had a mellowing effect on your sense of ". L: sense of judgement. This comes on page 17 of an 88 page book. Larry 17913 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 2:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View (a big post) Hi Larry (and All), I have time for one post; so I will make it a big one! I hope that others will correct me if I am leading you astray :-) --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > I agree the javana/vipaka relationship doesn't appear to support the > idea "good intentions produce good results". However, I think it should > support this idea because that is how I understand buddhist ethics and > kamma. Maybe I have it wrong. How do you understand Buddhist ethics and > kamma (I'm assuming they go together)? ===== I would express Buddhist ethics and kamma as, "intentions condition appropriate results". This covers both "good" and "bad" without having to use those problematic terms. I consider "good" and "bad" to be problematic because there is no clear basis on which to define a result as being "good" or "bad". Intentions can be clearly categorized based on roots, but results (vipaka) are rootless. To me, "intentions condition appropriate results" means that results arise (in part) due to past intentions. In other words, my current situation is not random. There were things which caused the current situation to be the way it is. Some of those things were my past intentions. Some of those things were simply conditions; conditions which allowed the "seeds" from my past intentions to arise. I like to use a seed analogy. A plant (result) exists because of a seed and conditions (rain, sun, soil, etc.). The seed is only a seed; the seed did not cause the rain, sun, soil, etc. to arise. Conditions arose because it was their nature to arise. They would have arisen whether the seed was present or not. The nature of the plant is totally dependent on the seed. Mango seeds can only produce mango plants. This is where the concept of "appropriate" comes in. Not every seed becomes a plant. The vast majority of seeds expire without ever becoming plants. What is it that determines if a seed becomes a plant? The right combination of conditions (rain, sun, soil, etc.) has to be present for a seed to become a plant. Here is a summary: - Intentions create "seeds" - "Seeds" may or may not become results; it depends on conditions; those conditions are the environment in which the "seeds exist" - If a "seed" does become a result, then the result will always be based on the type of "seed" (i.e. results are appropriate) ===== > > I'm starting to think the resultant javana idea won't work, so here's > another: kusala intentions produce pleasant vedana results. Also, is > there mind door javana and mind door vipaka, or is kamma only a reaction > to rupa? ===== I would not try to link vedana and kusala. Lobha-mula cittas can have either pleasant or indifferent feeling. Akusala vipaka cittas can have either pleasant or indifferent feeling. Kusala vipaka cittas can have either pleasant or indifferent feeling. You raise a very good question about "mind door javana" and "mind door vipaka". My reply to this is going to be a long one. Abhidhamma texts spend almost all their focus on the sense-door citta-process (the one with 17 cittas). In reality, the sense-door citta-process is much, much less common that the mind-door citta- process. In reality, the sense-door citta-process creates extremely weak kamma, whereas the mind-door citta-process can create extremely strong kamma. Let's start with a sense-door citta-process though the eye door. What is the object of this process? It is a visible object; a small dot (think of the dots of a TV screen). How strong is the kamma created by this one dot? Pretty weak! Let's add in a few dots from more sense-door citta-processes. More weak kamma. With a collection of dots, we are now starting to "construct" a whole picture. Constructing a whole picture is done by a series of mind-door processes. These mind-door processes also create weak kamma as the volition (cetana) involved is weak. Once the whole picture is complete, there are a series of mind-door citta-processes which perceive colour and shading (still weak volition). With a whole picture, complete with colour and shading in place, the next set of thought processes conceive a shape. Another set of mind-door thought processes are involved as we name the object (it is a "flower"). The naming or "designation" process is still "weak". The next set of mind-door citta-processes are involved with "judgement"; (it is a "rose"), a refining of the naming process. The naming is further refined in the next step of mind-door citta-processes called the "classification" stage; (it is a "red rose"). So far in this example, we have had one set of sense-door citta- processes (collecting the dots) and six sets of mind-door citta- processes (construction, perception, conception, designation, classification, judgement). All of these citta-processes have created "weak" kamma because of the limited strength of the volition involved. I believe that in the Madhupindika Sutta (Majjhima Nikaya 18), the Buddha classified these stages as "contact", "feeling", "perceiving" and "thinking about". The next stage is the critical one. The next stage is the point at which kamma (volition) becomes strong. The way that I see it, so far the mind has been "expanding outward"; the next stage is when the mind starts "expanding upwards on the base it has created". As the mind "expands upwards", volition gets stacked on top of volition and the cumulative effect becomes very powerful; it creates strong kamma. The next stage is "mental proliferation" (papanca). In the example above, the mind jumps from "red rose" to "red roses are associated with romances", "I remember giving a red rose", "I like red roses", "My wife would like to have this red rose" and so on. In summary, sense-door citta-processes make up a very small percentage of our citta-processes and contribute an even smaller percentage to our accumulations and kammic seeds. Mind-door citta- processes are far more important, both in terms of quantity and kammic impact. In other words, there are a huge number of "mind door javana" compared to the number of "sense door javana". You asked about "mind door javana" and "mind door vipaka". Let's look more carefully at the mind-door citta-process. In the mind-door citta-process, there is no past bhavanga citta. The role of the past bhavanga citta in the sense-door citta-process is to give enough time for the rupa to impact the stream of bhavanga. For a "very great object", this takes only one citta (one past bhavanga citta), but for "great object", "slight object" and "very slight object", it takes more time for the rupa to impact the stream of bhavanga. But since the rupa and the sense-door citta-process must expire together and the rupa lasts for 17 citta-moments, the sense-door citta- process for "great object" cuts off the registration cittas, the citta-process for the "slight object" cuts off the registration and the javana cittas and the citta-process for the "very slight object" cuts off all except two instants of vibrating bhavanga. In the case of the mind-door citta-process, there is no need for a past bhavanga because the object is already in the mind. The mind- door citta-process starts with a vibrating bhavanga followed by an arresting bhavanga. Bhavanga cittas are technically vipaka cittas, but their object is the kamma, sign of kamma or sign of destiny at the time of rebirth. In other words, they are not vipaka from any "current" object. Following the arresting bhavanga citta is the mind-door adverting citta, which is the same as the determining citta in the sense-door citta process. As you may recall, this citta is functional (kiriya), not vipaka. The object of the mind-door adverting citta is the "current" object (i.e. the concept in the mind). The mind-door adverting citta is followed by the javana cittas (which create kamma). In the case of a "clear" object, the javana cittas are followed by two registration cittas, whereas in the case of an obscure object, there are no registration cittas. As you can see, the mind-door citta-process does not have the vipaka cittas that the sense-door citta process has (i.e. no sense- consciousness citta, no receiving citta and no investigating citta). It may have registration cittas (which are vipaka), but there is no "mind door vipaka" as you have called it in your message. The mind-door citta-process doesn't need vipaka cittas (except for registration cittas). Remember the one set of sense-door citta-processes (weak kamma) followed by six sets of mind-door citta processes (weak kamma) followed by a very large number of mind-door citta processes involved in papanca (strong kamma)? Vipaka only plays a role in the first set (the sense-door citta processes); after that, it is a chain reaction of mind-door processes. In every citta-process (sense- door and mind-door), it is our accumulations which condition the appropriate javana cittas to arise. We are truly creatures of habit. We might almost go so far as to say that we are "controlled" by our own habits. With effort, we can weaken old habits and create new habits. The sotapanna magga citta eradicates those accumulations that could lead us to rebirth in the four woeful states. Larry, I suggest that if you want to pinpoint the factor that has the dominant influence on our lives, it is not vipaka, it is not conditions, it is OUR ACCUMULATIONS. ====== > Also, I've loosened up my ideas on what vipaka means. Today's weather > probably wasn't due to a specific javana series in my past, but, due to > a javana citta at the end of my past life I was born in this time and > place and with this genetic make-up. Due to the combination of genes and > culture I lived this long and ended up in this place and experienced > today's weather. That is one way of explaining how today's weather is > the result of a javana citta. Also, of course, my choice to drive a car > and use coal produced electricity played a part in global warming and > contributed to today's weather. However, since today's weather was > pleasant, I must have done something right in the past. Knowing a tiny > bit how painful pain can be, I will try to keep a sharp eye out for > akusala cittas. Even though I am equipped with a powerful and > sophisticated philosophy it is all someone else's wisdom as is the idea > kusala cittas produce pleasant vedana. So, I just have to follow my > accumulations:))) ====== Sorry Larry, today's weather has nothing to do with javana cittas. If you get wet in the rain, the rain was simply the environment and has no relationship to your current or past cittas or kamma. The rain is simply the environment which has its own causes (warm fronts, cold fronts, etc.). The fact that you are getting wet in the rain is conditioned by two things: 1. There is rain (the environment) 2. You are standing outside (your vipaka) Think about it. Why are you standing outside? It is because you chose to go outside. In a simplistic sense, the kammic impact of your choice to go outside created the vipaka of being outside in the rain. ======= > > One slight misunderstanding in your reply. There is a rupa outside a > sense door and a rupa inside a sense door. I am contending they are > different kinds of phenomena. I asked Howard if I could call the rupa > inside a sense door a consciousness, but he said no. So in my email to > you I called it a "whatever-it-is". When a rupa touches the sensitive > matter of a sense door, it seems to me this sensitive matter converts > that input into something that can relate to bhavanga and all the other > cittas. This whatever-it-is is not the same stuff as what is outside the > sense door touching the sensitive matter. In addition to that, we have > no real experience of rupa until sense consciousness arises. This sense > consciousness is what we know directly as rupa and it is a different > phenomenon from the rupa outside the sense door and the whatever- it-is. > So basically, there are three rupas. Howard seemed to think the sense > consciousness rupa would be overlaid with concepts but I don't think > concepts come into the picture in a major way until the accumulations > arise. I'm betting on sanna as being chiefly responsible for concepts > and accumulations in general. ======== I believe that there is only one "rupa". It is the physical phenomena that is contacted during the sense-door consciousness citta. Physical phenomena which does not get touched by sense-door consciousness (i.e. the tree that falls in the forest with none to hear) does not qualify to be rupa (according to my phenomenologist perspective). The sense-door consciousness has a base of eye/ear/nose/etc. while all other cittas have a heart base. The eye- door consciousness has an eye-base and contacts the visible object. The visible object rupa is not contacted by any of the other cittas in the citta-process; the other cittas work with a mental impression of the visible object rupa. The five-door adverting citta has "something out there" as an object. The sense-door consciousness citta has the visible object rupa as object (i.e. through the eye- door). The subsequent cittas have "the mental impression of the visible object rupa" as object. I agree with you that concepts come later (not during the sense-door citta-process). This was explained in detail above; constructions, perceptions, conceptions, designations, classifications, judgements and papanca can all be called concepts. Concepts are not paramattha dhammas. Concepts only come into play as objects of mind-door citta- processes. =========== > > I like your 4 part kamma progression: > > 1. Good intentions -> "seed for future vipaka" (not inherently good > or bad) > 2. Good intentions -> good accumulations > 3. Conditions + "seed for future vipaka" -> current situation > 4. Current situation + good accumulations -> good intentions > > L: My only qualm is that we have to say "current situation" is neither > good nor bad. We can at least say current situation is pleasant, > unpleasant, or neutral, and we can also say current situation is dukkha. > Is that enough to satisfy a moral imperative? ========== Sorry Larry, I have to stick with, "current situation is neither good nor bad". As mentioned above, labelling our current situation as pleasant / unpleasant / neutral is irrelevant to the ethical issues. Saying that our current situation is dukkha is true by definition (it doesn't clarify anything). Metta, Rob M :-) 17914 From: Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 4:37pm Subject: Way 28, Comm. "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html Consciousness is only mundane; and mundane, too, are mental objects. This statement will be made evident in the analytically expository portion [niddesavara]. [Tika} In the way mentioned above should the repetition of words in the contemplation of consciousness and mental objects be explained, too. [T] "Only mundane", as connected with the examining of mundane objects of thought in the light of impermanence, suffering and soullessness [sammasana carassa adhippetatta]. To be sure, in whatever way feeling is to be exclusively contemplated, here, the contemplating in that very way is the meaning of the word: "Contemplating feelings in the feelings" [kevalam panidha yatha vedana anupassitabba tatha anupassanto vedanasu vedananupassiti veditabbo]. In the contemplation of consciousness and mental objects too this is the method. "How should feeling be contemplated upon?", it is asked, further. Pleasurable feeling because it is the stuff of suffering as suffering. Painful feeling because it is the condition of bringing out trouble and so forth, as a thorn. And the neither pleasurable nor painful feeling, because of non-mastery or dependence and so forth, as transiency. [T] By the passage, beginning with the words "To be sure, in whatsoever way," the commentator points to the limit of the object (excluding thereby discursive thinking that strays from the reality). Accordingly, the Master said: Who sees pleasure as suffering, Who sees pain as a thorn, Who sees as a thing that is fleeting, The neutral peace that's shorn Of pleasure and pain; that bhikkhu will, Rightly, know; and live, become still.[18] [T] "Who sees pleasure as suffering" = Who sees feelings by way of the suffering natural to change, with the eye of wisdom. [T] "Who sees pain as a thorn" = Who sees painful feeling as damage causing, piercing in, and as a thing hard to drive out. [T] "The neutral peace" = The feeling of indifference is peaceful, owing to the absence of grossness as in states of pain and pleasure; and by way of a restful nature. [T] Who sees feelings with the thought that they are impermanent by reason of their becoming non-existent after having come to be, owing to their being characterised by the qualities of arising and passing away, owing to their temporariness, and owing to their being in a state of constant negation, is he who sees the neutral peace of the neither pleasurable nor painful feelings as fleeting, and is indeed the bhikkhu who will rightly know and live, become still. [T]Rightly = Correctly. [T] Know = know feelings as they are. 18. Samyutta Nikaya, iv, page 207, P.T.S. Edition. 17915 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 4:37pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dualism/Non-Dualism Hi Larry, Victor, and All, Thanks for this info. Larry. My mistake, I was probably trying to look at an extract. No wonder Howard was surprised. This was the link I was using: http://nibbanam.com/MagicOfMind.pdf But, while doing that, I came across something that may be of interest to the Nibbana Corner: Bhikkhu Nanananda said: "Recently we have had an occasion to listen to a series of sermons on Nibbàna and there have been differences of opinion regarding the interpretation of some deep suttas on Nibbàna in those sermons. And so the venerable Great Preceptor suggested to me that it would be useful to this group if I would give a set of sermons on Nibbàna, touching on those controversial points." http://www.beyondthenet.net/ Good audio-visual intro. - Click on any picture. Click on The Noble Quest, and the Nibbana Sermons are in the Left Hand Column. Victor, I was interested to find support here for your definiteness about 'nama' simply meaning 'name'. (Part 1) Bhikkhu Nananda said: "It is obvious that nàma means `name', and in the suttas also, nàma, when used by itself, means `name'. However when we come to the commentaries we find some kind of hesitation to recognize this obvious meaning. Even in the present context, the commentary, Paramatthajotikà, explains the word `name' so as to mean `bending'. It says that all immaterial states are called nàma, in the sense that they bend towards their respective objects and also because the mind has the nature of inclination: ârammaõàbhimukhaü namanato, cittassa ca natihetuto sabbampi aråpaü `nàman'ti vuccati. And this is the standard definition of nàma in Abhidhamma compendiums and commentaries. The idea of bending towards an object is brought in to explain the word nàma. It may be that they thought it too simple an interpretation to explain nàma with reference to `name', particularly because it is a term that has to do with deep insight. However as far as the teachings in the suttas are concerned, nàma still has a great depth even when it is understood in the sense of `name'. " metta, Christine --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > L: sense of judgement. This comes on page 17 of an 88 > page book. > Larry 17916 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 6:22pm Subject: Re: Commentaries are papanca-like? --- "nidive " wrote: > Dear RobertK > > RobertK:> While some ruaps are conditioned by citta (consciousness) others, > > such as the rupas that make up rocks or trees are conditioned by > > utu, not citta. Hence, I believe Citta is not a necessary > > condition for all rupas to arise. > __________________ > Let us say that all cittas suddenly disappear from this entire > samsara. Would rupa still stand on its own, independent of cittas? > If rupa can occur independently of nama (citta & cetasikas), and > nama can occur independently of rupa, 'samsara' cannot be > called 'samsara'. ______________________- Dear Swee boon, According to the texts there are the worlds of arupa brahmas where there is no rupa at all. Samsara is the rise and fall of the khandas . But even upon khanda parinibbana of the arahant where samsara utterly ceases forever there are still the material remains (relics) which are conditioned by utu and which persist for weeks, days, years or centuries. Rupas which make up rocks and trees etc. are not part of the paticcasamuppada. RobertK > > The cessation of nama comes the cessation of rupa. The cessation of > rupa comes the cessation of nama. This is how I understand the Law > of Dependent Origination. > > Regards, > NEO Swee Boon 17917 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 7:45pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dualism/Non-Dualism Hi Christine, Thanks for this interesting passage from Bhikkhu Nananda. I was just browsing Wittgenstein's <> and came across this Remark #116: "When philosophers use a word "knowledge", "being", "object", "I", "proposition", "name" - and try to grasp the essence of the thing, one must always ask oneself: is the word ever actually used in this way in the language game which is its original home? - What we do is to bring words back from their metaphysical to their everyday use." Metta, Victor > Victor, I was interested to find support here for your definiteness > about 'nama' simply meaning 'name'. (Part 1) > Bhikkhu Nananda said: "It is obvious that nàma means `name', and in > the suttas also, nàma, when used by itself, means `name'. However > when we come to the commentaries we find some kind of hesitation to > recognize this obvious meaning. Even in the present context, the > commentary, Paramatthajotikà, explains the word `name' so as to mean > `bending'. It says that all immaterial states are called nàma, in the > sense that they bend towards their respective objects and also > because the mind has the nature of inclination: ârammaõàbhimukhaü > namanato, cittassa ca natihetuto sabbampi aråpaü `nàman'ti vuc cati. > And this is the standard definition of nàma in Abhidhamma com pendiums > and commentaries. The idea of bending towards an object is brought in > to explain the word nàma. It may be that they thought it too simple > an interpretation to explain nàma with reference to `name', > particularly because it is a term that has to do with deep insight. > However as far as the teachings in the suttas are concerned, nàma > still has a great depth even when it is understood in the sense of > `name'. " > > metta, > Christine 17918 From: Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 7:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View (a big post) Hi Rob, If I may say so, "intentions condition appropriate results" sounds a little like a squeamish way of saying good intentions produce good results. At any rate here is the sutta analysis of kamma: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn136.html For an analysis of kamma in citta process I quote from CMA p.172: Sense objects are distinguished into three classes: the undesirable (aniitha), the moderately desirable (iitha, also called itthamajjhatta, desirable neutral), and the extremely desirable (ati-ittha). While the desirable object is thus subdivided into two, all undesirable objects are comprised within a single class called simply "the undesirable." According to the Abhidhamma philosophy, this distinction in the quality of objects pertains to the intrinsic nature of the object itself; it is not a variable determined by the individual temperament and preferences of the experiencer. The Sammohavinodani, the commentary to the Vibhanga, contends that when a person considers a desirable object to be undesirable, or an undesirable object to be desirable, he does so due to a perversion of perception (sannavipallasa).The object itself, however, remains inherently desirable or undesirable independently of the perceiver's preferences. The Sammohavinodani states that the distinction between the intrinsically desirable and undesirable obtains by way of the average being (majjhima-satta): "It is distinguishable according to what is found desirable at one time and undesirable at another time by average (men such as) accountants, government officials, burgesses, land owners and merchants." Whether on a given occasion one experiences an undesirable, a moderately desirable, or an extremely desirable object is governed by one's past kamma. Thus the object experienced provides the opportunity for kamma to ripen in the form of resultant states of consciousness (vipakacitta). The resultant cittas accord with the nature of the object spontaneously, without deliberation, just as a facial reflection in a mirror accords with the features of the face. Through the force of unwholesome kamma one encounters an undesirable object, and thus the resultant cittas in the cognitive process by which that object is cognized will be generated by the maturation of that unwholesome kamma. In this case the sense consciousness, reception, investigation, and registration cittas are necessarily unwholesome resultants (akusalavipaka). The accompanying feeling is always equanimity (upekkha), except in the case of body consciousness, which is accompanied by pain. L: So my ideas of a resultant vipaka or "kusala citta produces pleasant feeling vipaka" were both wrong. A few thoughts on the quotation above, when we recognize (sanna, perception) the beautiful as the beautiful I think that goes beyond vipaka citta and is a javana citta probably with pleasant feeling. If, with insight, we see the conventionally beautiful as ugly (foul in the satipatthana sense) that is not sanna vipallasa but sati, a higher form of understanding than sanna. If we perceive the conventionally beautiful as not self, that is panna (sampajanna), a still higher understanding. Also, I was thinking if I was reborn as an animal, the conventional values that obtain would be the values of that species of animal. Any thoughts? Larry 17919 From: Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 8:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dualism/Non-Dualism Hi Christine, Thanks for the link. Your conjunction of the two topics nibbana and nama reminded me of a thought I had a few days ago. In a poetic sense, maybe we could say nama is verb and rupa is noun. That would mean nibbana is a verb. Larry 17920 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 8:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] RE: Foundation Bulletin,a question Hi Jaran, It was wonderful seeing you, and you know, at Kunying Nopparath's house I had the pleasure seeing your father. op 19-12-2002 14:10 schreef Jaran Jainhuknan op jjn@b...: > > Thank you for the translation and the reminder at the end of you > post. Without the remider, many probably try to figure out what > are you trying to tell us, and forget that ayatanas become > clear(er) at each moment of satipatthana (maybe at this moment). N: Yes, we have to be reminded of this moment, never enough. Jaran: I was still quite puzzled when it is concluded the sense-bases > remain ayatanas throughout the sense-door process. How can they > still be "meeting points" when the seeing conciousness (for > example) has fallen away--not "meeting" with the visible-object > anymore? N: Yes, the other cittas in that process also experience visible object although they are not seeing. There is still meeting of object, sense-organ (which has not fallen away) and the relevant citta. P.S. Thanks for your sympathy with the loss of Lodewijk's sister. Nina 17921 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Dec 19, 2002 8:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] just chatting Dear Christine, thank you for your condolences, and true, it is often easier to speak with music. Nina. op 19-12-2002 07:21 schreef christine_forsyth op cforsyth@v...: > > My condolences to you and Lodewijk at this sad time. Music > certainly is a gift, 17922 From: Sarah Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 1:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Samvega and Pasada Dear Christine, Thank you for all the helpful references you provided and I also like B.Bodhi's translation of the verse from the Bhadekeratta sutta and find it very inspiring. I also enjoyed looking at the ‘urgent’ and ‘rousing’ Suttas and I always find the reminders from ‘Future Dangers’. Now we’re comfortable, healthy and able to listen, discuss and consider. We don’t know what the future will bring. I knew little about the meaning of sa”mvega (sense of urgency) which you've helpfully reminded me about a few times, but nothing about pasaada (clearness, purity -here as in composure, serenity) which is not common at all, as far as I know. I've been doing a little research, so please bear with me. Let me start by adding a few quotes from texts using the terms with some of my own comments (bound to be controversial to some;-)). ==================================================== 1. “How does he encourage the mind on an occasion when it should be encouraged? When his mind is listless owing to sluggishness in the exercise of understanding or to failure to attain the bliss of peace, then he should stimulate it by reviewing the eight grounds for a sense of urgency . These are the four, namely, birth , aging, sickness, and death, with the suffering of the states of loss as the fifth, and also the suffering in the past rooted in the round (of rebirths), the suffering in the future rooted in the round (of rebirths), and the suffering in the present rooted in the search for nutriment. And he creates confidence by recollecting the special qualities of the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha. This is how he encourages the mind on an occasion when it should be encouraged.” Vis iV, 63 ***** Comment: I don’t understand this to refer to any emotional state or feeling of 'anxiety' or 'weariness' or idea of life being “pointless and sometimes unbearable”. Nor do I understand it to refer to any “intense desire for things to be different”. These are reminders to be aware now and to know there is no other time or opportunity. Like you said, “Samvega means a sense of urgency to escape the round of meaningless existence; and pasada, a clarity and serene confidence that allows one to proceed confidently towards the goal without lapsing into despair.” ***** 2. “Confidence has the characteristic of being undisturbed and its manifestation is confiding (clarification).” Foortnote: “ ‘Pasaada - confidence’ means lit. ‘transparency’ or ‘settledness’ (i.e. of water that was muddy and has become clear), and the word pasaadati is used both for the clearing of water and for acquiring confidence. Faith is thus regarded as the settling of the disturbance of doubts and clearing of the mind by resolution or trust.” Netti28, p47 in PTS trans. ***** 3. “The community’s having progressed by the good way is the footing , shared in common, for the Community’s goodness. The excellence of the Master is the footing, shared in common, for instilling confidence in the unconfident and for strengthening the already confident. The state of not having resisted the Patimokkha Rule is the footing, shared in common, for the deterrence of contumacious persons and for the comfort of pious persons.” Netti50, p.76 in PTS transl ***** Comment: I like the way this links up with the discussion in the Vinaya corner and reason for adherence to the Patimokkha rules - “for the deterrence of contumacious persons.....” ***** 4. “Or alternatively he announced the Truth of Suffering first for the purpose of inspiring a sense of urgency in beings who are entangled in the enjoyment of the pleasure of becoming; and next to that the Truth of Origin for the purpose of making it known that (suffering) does not come as something not made and that it is not due to creation by a lord creator, etc but that it is due to this (cause). After that, cessation for the purpose of instilling comfort by showing the escape for those seeking escape from suffering and whose minds are distressed by suffering with its cause; and after that, the path leading to cessation for the purpose of attaining cessation....” Sammohavinodani,Class. of Truths 429 ***** 5. “The monk who knows the urgent need to keep the faculties restrained By fully understanding them will make an end of suffering” Sammohavinodani,Class. of Faculties,591 ***** Comment: restraint of the sense faculties and development of understanding again. This is satipatthana and the real understanding of samvega. We can read other examples in which monks and lay people were ‘impelled by the urgency’ to develop insight and attain arahatship. Of course these examples always need to be understood in the light of no beings, no selves, but confidence and understanding in the value of insight and the 4 right efforts. ***** I read with interest the article by Thanissaro Bhikkhu which you referred us to: ..... Affirming the Truths of the Heart - The Buddist teachings on Samvega & Pasada. Thanissaro Bhikkhu. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/affirming.html ..... I find the references to ‘sources of emotion’ under ‘samvega’ in Nyantiloka’s dictionary and Thanissaro’s discussion of samvega and pasada as ‘two emotions’ to be misleading. Comments like ‘remaining true to his honest emotions’ and ‘the truth of the heart when it aspires to a happiness absolutely pure’ can so easily be understood to justify those feelings you mentioned of anxiety, weariness, pointlessness or intense desire to be different which surely represent lobha, dosa and moha with a lot of thinking in between? Of course there must also be many moments of wise reflection, equanimity, awareness and confidence in the teachings, otherwise we wouldn’t be here and there wouldn’t be any wise reflection at all. However, I’d suggest the ‘sense of urgency’ is a prompting of uplifting, wholesome states, not an “oppressive sense of shock, dismay, and alienation that comes with realizing the futility and meaningless of life as it’s normally lived” as Thanissaro suggests. This sounds more like some kind of thinking with aversion and perhaps the misplaced idea as well that the development of understanding and insight is something separate or apart from life as we live it now, already by conditions. Just as ‘right livelihood’ cannot be defined apart from this very moment of abstention from that which is wrong, neither can ‘the urgent need to keep the sense faculties restrained’quoted above from Sammohavinodani be considered apart from this moment of seeing or hearing, regardless of whether we are Xmas shopping and listening to carols or sitting quietly in a temple. There are always objects for lobha and dosa as we read in the Vinaya and as Rob M just pointed out with his discussion on mind door processes and papanca. So very often, ‘listening to the heart’ or not being a ‘traitor to the heart’ merely means following one’s love for oneself, though I’m sure this isn’t what Thanissaro means to imply. However, I also think it’s misleading when we read any suggestions that noble qualities or in this case ‘the sense of urgency’ can turn into despair or negative states without prevention or ‘dedicated effort’. As Rob has also pointed out, wholesome and unwholesome mental states arising will depend primarily on accumulations but also on various conditioning factors. The wholesome ones never turn into unwholesome ones and always arise in spite of the great accumulations for the other. Thanissaro Bhikkhu’s conclusion that ‘one source of Buddhism’s strength is its ability to keep one foot out of the mainstream’ can also be misleading. Regardless of lifetstyle, I think the strength and lack of any conflict lies in the Truth about realities, the First Noble Truth, which is the same for us all regardless of whether we are in or out of any ‘mainstream’. As you so helpfully reminded us: "Let not a person revive the past Or on the future build his hopes; For the past has been left behind And the future has not been reached. Instead with insight let him see Each presently arisen state;..”MN 131 ***** I'll be glad to hear any of yours or others' comments. I'm aware that I may have taken some of Thanissaro's comments too literally or out of context. I apologise if this is so and don't wish to suggest any disrespect for his interesting article which many may find helpful. Sarah ======= 17923 From: Sarah Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 2:12am Subject: more condolences..... Dear Nina and Lodevijk, We're both sorry to hear about Lodevijk's's sister. Even though, as you said, she was already very sick or mentally weak, I'm sure it's still something of a shock for Lodevijk, being his last sibling and the end of another 'chapter'. What a busy time it must be for you both and how you need all the useful reminders you heard and considered in Thailand. It's fortunate that you had your lovely trip to Cambodia and time in Thailand without any interruption. We both so hope the services go well and that the festivities with your father go as well as possible too......no limit to metta or the other brahma viharas as you discussed;-) "What one grasps thinking, 'this is mine', is left behind by death. Recognizing this fact, let not the wise one who follows the right path turn to acquisitiveness." (Jara Sutta) Best wishes and metta, Sarah (& Jonothan) ================== 17924 From: Beth Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 4:02am Subject: Hello Hello all, I'm very new to Buddhism. I began taking an interest in Buddhism when a local TV forum had various guest in which the topic was related to or about Buddhism. I've since attended some online chats in buddhist rooms (mostly yahoo) and have downloaded the Dhammapada from Access To Insight. I've been meditating in some form for most my life and have been working on awareness for the past few years. I look forward to reading your post. ~peace, Beth 17925 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 5:50am Subject: DSG archives Dear All Thanks to some fine work by Rob M, we now have a complete set of DSG messages, up to message number 17191 (in November), saved in html format on a CD. This means they can be searched using the search function that comes with your Windows/Mac OS system software, and read using your web browser program (I just ran a search for 'samvega' and came up with a dozen or so references). Anyone who would like a copy of the CD mailed to them, please contact me off-list with a postal address. Sarah and I would be very happy to provide the CDs and postage. Many thanks to Rob M for making this possible (and for coming up with such a great way to back up the archives). Jon jonoabb@y... PS Rob K, I know I have your postal address somewhere, but would you mind letting me have it again in case I can't find it ;-)) 17926 From: nidive Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 6:22am Subject: Re: Commentaries are papanca-like? Dear RobertK, > According to the texts there are the worlds of arupa brahmas > where there is no rupa at all. Samsara is the rise and fall of the > khandas . But even upon khanda parinibbana of the arahant where > samsara utterly ceases forever there are still the material > remains (relics) which are conditioned by utu and which persist > for weeks, days, years or centuries. Rupas which make up rocks and > trees etc. are not part of the paticcasamuppada. Why do rupas which make up rocks and trees arise? If it is because of utu, then why does utu arise? Surely utu does not arise on its own. Utu cannot have its own efficient power. I think if we trace it backwards in this manner, we will come to the answer: nama. Because of ignorance (nama), there comes life. When there is life, utu must exist. When utu exists, rocks and trees which support life must come to existence. Rocks and trees come into existence because of 'ignorant beings' and 'ignorant beings' are supported by and are existing because of rocks and trees. If there were no trees and no plant life, there would be no food. If there is no food, 'ignorant beings' (in this case, humans) cannot come into existence. They are interdependent; they are intertwined. How do arupa brahmas arise? Surely arupa brahmas do not have their own efficient power. They depend on jhana vipaka (meaning they must have practised jhana before becoming an arupa brahma). They must have practised and mastered rupa jhanas first before being reborn as arupa brahmas. (Mastery of rupa jhanas being a requisite for practising arupa jhanas.) If we trace it backwards, arupa brahmas cannot come into existence without rupas. While I agree that samsara is the rise and fall of the khandas, I do not agree that samsara has ended upon the parinibbana of any arahat; samsara may have ended for the arahat, but samsara 'at large' is still not ended yet. Samsara may have ended for the Buddha, but samsara is still not ended yet for you and me. If we claim that samsara has ended upon the parinibbana of the Buddha, why are you and I still in samsara? Samsara has not ended yet, and the Buddha said that the end of samsara is not in sight. Therefore, we cannot say that samsara has ended upon the parinibbana of any arahat. Simply because there are still (infinity - 1) beings still in samsara. As for the relics of the Buddha or of the remains of any dead person or being, I believe we live in a very different realm than that of the deva world or brahma world. It is said that when a deva or brahma dies, they leave no trace of any physical remains behind. I believe that, if supposing, all beings were to 'vanish' together at the parinibbana of the Buddha, there would be no trace of any physical relics of the Buddha. If all beings were to 'vanish' at that (or any other) instance, all physical objects and all space near and far and outer, will simply vanish as well. There would be nothing that is matter (including space) and there would be nothing that is mind; ie. matter and mind vanish all together (and I do not mean nothingness, for nothingness is merely a mind object, a concept). Regards, NEO Swee Boon 17927 From: Dion Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 9:47am Subject: DSG: Dion Suppression Group Dear Dion Suppression Gang: First, I am happy to recieve the invitation to join the group. I am a Theravada Buddhist of seven years, a former Thammayut Theravada Monk in Thailand - rains-retreat counts are irrelavent as some monks are in it for the free food, free home...and are exploiters of our "religion/philosophy". I'm against most of the cosmological aspects of Mahayana Buddhism, and even some in Theravada.... I study the Tripitika with diligence, I am ardent and resolute as well in my study/practice. Somethings are to be learned from said activities. Assumptions galore were written in reference to my level of Dhamma understanding and mental development. Remember my initial "outburst" was about egotistical postings…people are demonstrating this again within their assaults upon my words and assumed intellect. Bhante Dhammapiyo, has repeated shown to me he is not worthy of my almsfood. Youthful Folly? I then won't counter with old man jokes - however aged you maybe, ok? And this is not offensive, rather defensive since you assualted me first. You don't now me, and I don't care to know a hypocritical monk. I'm a layman now, I'm allowed to make mistakes. When I was a monk, I rarely made a mistake, once I wasn't watching where I was stepping and stepped on a little trail of ants, I felt horrible about it, and confessed...that is abo= ut it. Before I speak, if not certain I find my answers in the Tripitika before I = speak from ignorance, but maybe you like to shoot off your lips without thinking. Please be a little more respectful as a sacred representative of the Budddhist Sangha, or perhaps you don't take it that seriously? I'm not being offensive to you – You should know what to say and when to say it – and it's a pathetic case when a layman needs to tell you to shape up. To Nina: I meant no offense, I'm sure the new sect of righteously practicing Shortcut Buddhists and their Sangha find it valuable, as do newcomers to Buddha's Dhamma, but I prefer the Tripitika, and I meditate on the difficult points and find other pieces of advice within potentially relating Sutta's. THE POINT I WANT TO TEACH HERE IS NOT TO BE AFRAID OF THE TRIPITIKA. Do you have other publications available, I would be interested in knowing other topics away from the Abhidhamma that you might have written on Buddhism. And I would seriously seek them out and read them as well, as I am not afraid of someone else's insight – might be valuable to agree with someone from time to time. My reference about your Abhidhamma book is that it was nothing new as I had read and studied this all in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha and other books within the Abhidhamma collection. The Dion Suppression Gang might be interested in a Powerpoint presentation I delivered to my university, in relation to what the Buddha = had said about women (including the over-reaction of the Bhikkhuni debate)…but you wouldn't have all the notes or understand my points...so I refer you to your Tripitika…not my notes, but I do a great job of presenting the Buddha's words as his, though my delivery needs some work…I read too much since I don't want to get it wrong. I care. (there it is again – caring: grasping, clinging, desiring…all so wrong of me to do – to care about the Buddha's message…I'm such a failure – but this is not the point of the Dhamma!) I will refrain from further commentary in this forum - a self-censure. I try to keep it too real, too orthodox…old school…non-revisionistic. I think being a Thammayut Theravadan Buddhist, I have acquired this **cough, cough** wrong view, that I am accused of maintaining. I guess I don't want the Buddha's message being destroyed. I guess I can't stand the heat from the kitchen. Actually I can put out all the fire= s from the Dion Suppression Group, but I'm not supposed to be "offensive". Yet, I am troubled buy the ignorance in this group, especially our "esteemed" Bhante…he should clean up his thoughts as well since he is representing something a bit more "better" than the rest of us dirty, unholy laypeople. If there is "assaultual" comments send them straight to my inbox, but I won't post to the group anymore…unfortunately this was not what I had presumed it to be. I'm not exactly certain what I was looking for coming in, but found some things not right with it. I simply wanted to sweep out some "personalisms" and non-teachings from a group supposed to be studying Dhamma, but I can do this in my own solitude confinement. Peace be unto you all. I will dig deeper in my own studies, as I have much more work to do. I will peek in from time to time when I need some relevant answers....but I am silenced once I press the "send" button - direct assaults on me can be sent to my inbox like I said, to refrain others from reading junk posts. I'll respond if there is something valuable to contribute....remember DSG...assults on my posts - send directly to me...not to the forum - be respectful to them - as, so we don't make the same mistakes twice - we must learn from your mistakes, and not repeat them. Agreed Bhante???? Direct to the inbox - but I suspect you have to do your meditations, almsround, ceremonies, evening and morning chants - when do you have time for computer usage? I do not wish to offend and if I did, please look into your own failings, not mine...Bhante, I expected more from you. I'm silent and will post nothing further....Sorry all, I will disrespectfully b= e silent since others are overly-sensitive. Better to say nothing sometimes. So I will say nothing - but my father taught me that, not our Buddha. Oops that was a non-teaching. I wish you people did not learn of me in this manner, I suppose I brought it upon myself by wishing the group to be something I wanted it to be. Some posts are rather "note-worthy" and that is highly valued to me. I wish to continue reading those - as an example - the historical dialogues during the initial= counsel...I don't get an opportunity to read the commentaries much! I like those, and are full of good insight. I'm really a fine individual to = meet and speak to, but some people need to be shown their ignorance from time to time - I know my limitations already and am not afraid to talk about them. I try my best to eradicate my taints, fetters, kilesas...etc. -Dion 17928 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 27, three characteristics Hi Victor, You wrote: > How are these three characteristics to be realized? Nina: By developing right understanding of nama and rupa, so that stages of insight are progressively reached. We need a firm foundation of nama and rupa, what they are, their characteristics. We need energy and courage to be aware over and over again of one object at a time, either a nama or a rupa, so that we can become used to their characteristics. Hardness is not seeing, and when hardness appears, seeing does not appear. Lots of khanti, Victor. Nina 17929 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:20am Subject: Perfections, Patience, Ch 7, no 4 Perfections, Patience, Ch 7, no 4 We read further on in the Commentary: Patience should be further fortified by reflection: "Those who lack patience are afflicted in this world and apply themselves to actions which will lead to their affliction in the life to come." And: "Although this suffering arises through the wrong deeds of others, this body of mine is the field for that suffering, and the action which is its seed was sown by me alone." And: "This suffering will release me from the debt of that kamma." And: "If there were no wrong-doers, how could I accomplish the perfection of patience?" If someone else afflicts or harms us, we should not be angry, but we should realize that this is an opportunity to further develop the perfection of patience so that it becomes accomplished. We read: "Although he is a wrong-doer now, in the past he was my benefactor." And: "A wrong-doer is also a benefactor, for he is the basis for developing patience." "All beings are like my own children. Who becomes angry over the misdeeds of his own children?" If we consider someone we are angry with as our child, can we continue to be angry with him? If we reflect on this we can see that what has been stated in the Commentary is true. We read: "All those phenomena by which wrong was done, and those to whom it was done-- all those, at this very moment, have ceased.² Whoever may have done wrong to us or may have harmed us, his deeds have ceased at that moment, and therefore we should not continue to be angry. At this moment that person does not do wrong to us; we should not think of what is past already and continue to be angry. If we reflect on the truth in the right way, we shall understand that all those phenomena by which wrong was done, and those to whom it was done-- all those, at this very moment, have ceased. We read: ³With whom, then, should you now be angry, and by whom should anger be aroused? When all phenomena are non-self, who can do wrong to whom?" If someone has listened to the Dhamma he has more understanding than those who have not listened. He should realize that it is not proper to be angry because someone else who has no understanding does something wrong. Why should he be angry with someone who lacks understanding? If someone remembers this he accumulates the perfection of patience, he is not angry and he can forgive that person. ***** 17930 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 28, Comm., some Pali Hi Larry, some Pali: op 20-12-2002 01:37 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > > "How should feeling be contemplated upon?", it is asked, further. > Pleasurable feeling because it is the stuff of suffering as suffering. > Painful feeling because it is the condition of bringing out trouble and > so forth, as a thorn. And the neither pleasurable nor painful feeling, > because of non-mastery or dependence and so forth, as transiency. N: The Pali text is different, shorter. Also the order is different here and there. I dislike the word stuff so I looked it up: katha~nca vedanaa anupassitabbaati? How should feeling be contemplated upon? sukhaa taava vedanaa dukkhato, dukkhaa sallato, adukkhamasukhaa aniccato. As far as (taava) feeling is happy, as dukkha (the to is to be translated as ablative: by, or here: as), unhappy feeling as a thorn, neither pleasant nor unpleasant feeling as impermanent. I did not see here non-mastery or dependence, it may be elsewhere, shall look more. Nina. 17931 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:34am Subject: G'day Dion G'day Dion, Sorry to read of your unhappiness. I don't think I replied to your last post, but I remember thinking how different our lives were. Me - just a middle-aged Mum in the Antipodes, who came to the Dhamma only a few years ago and who is struggling to understand and learn - you, a young man with so many wonderful opportunities and experiences already. I would like to welcome you to dsg. I wonder if you could tell me something about the time you were a "Theravada Buddhist of seven years, a former Thammayut Theravada Monk in Thailand". After leading such a fortunate life for seven years it must be hard to be a lay person again. I am not familiar with the Thammayut tradition, apart from knowing of their strict observance of the Vinaya, as you have mentioned. Can you tell me a little more? I think some of us would be interested in the presentation you made on the Bhikkhuni issue - please don't let the fact that some of us, like me, aren't very advanced in our understanding, deter you. I know I read posts and teachings, take what I am able from them, and perhaps, later, read them again and find I understand them in a different way. Understanding grows though we don't notice it happening, and those further along the way can be of great help to those of us who are not as well versed in the Dhamma. with metta, Christine --- "Dion " wrote: 17932 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 0:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 27, three characteristics Hi Nina, Thanks for responding. How does the understanding that hardness is not seeing relate to the understanding that each and every aggregate is impermanent, unsatisfactory, not self? Metta, Victor --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Hi Victor, > > You wrote: > > How are these three characteristics to be realized? > Nina: By developing right understanding of nama and rupa, so that stages of > insight are progressively reached. We need a firm foundation of nama and > rupa, what they are, their characteristics. We need energy and courage to be > aware over and over again of one object at a time, either a nama or a rupa, > so that we can become used to their characteristics. Hardness is not seeing, > and when hardness appears, seeing does not appear. Lots of khanti, Victor. > Nina 17933 From: Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 0:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 28, Comm., some Pali Hi Nina, Thanks for the translations. I think the translator was trying to make the contemplation of each kind of feeling correspond to a particular characteristic. "Non-mastery" definitely suggests anatta, for example. This seems reasonably logical, but as you say, the text isn't quite there to support it. One thought that came to mind by the phrase "pleasure is the stuff of suffering as suffering" is that pleasure is not only impermanent and ungraspable, it is also the ultimate object and cause of all grasping: "dependent on feeling craving arises". But this was just my own thought. As for the three characteristics, I think we could say due to their interconnected logic, the correct recognition of any one of the characteristics will include the other two. "Anatta" is confusing for many people, but I think the correct perception of impermanence will carry one to path insight. Any object of satipatthana could be contemplated as anicca, or dukkha, or anatta, or all three. Larry ----------------------- Way 28: "How should feeling be contemplated upon?", it is asked, further. Pleasurable feeling because it is the stuff of suffering as suffering. Painful feeling because it is the condition of bringing out trouble and so forth, as a thorn. And the neither pleasurable nor painful feeling, because of non-mastery or dependence and so forth, as transiency. 17934 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 1:01pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dualism/Non-Dualism Hi Christine and all, Here are some questions in my mind: 1. How is the word "name" used in everyday life? 2. What does it mean by the word "name" in the context of "my name is Victor" or "my name is Christine"? In Samyutta Nikaya XII.2, Paticca-samuppada-vibhanga Sutta, Analysis of Dependent Co-arising, feeling, perception, intention, contact, and attention is called name. 3. What do feeling, perception, intention, contact, and attention have in common such that they are called name? Metta, Victor > Victor, I was interested to find support here for your definiteness > about 'nama' simply meaning 'name'. (Part 1) > Bhikkhu Nananda said: "It is obvious that nàma means `name', and in > the suttas also, nàma, when used by itself, means `name'. However > when we come to the commentaries we find some kind of hesitation to > recognize this obvious meaning. Even in the present context, the > commentary, Paramatthajotikà, explains the word `name' so as to mean > `bending'. It says that all immaterial states are called nàma, in the > sense that they bend towards their respective objects and also > because the mind has the nature of inclination: ârammaõàbhimukhaü > namanato, cittassa ca natihetuto sabbampi aråpaü `nàman'ti vuc cati. > And this is the standard definition of nàma in Abhidhamma com pendiums > and commentaries. The idea of bending towards an object is brought in > to explain the word nàma. It may be that they thought it too simple > an interpretation to explain nàma with reference to `name', > particularly because it is a term that has to do with deep insight. > However as far as the teachings in the suttas are concerned, nàma > still has a great depth even when it is understood in the sense of > `name'. " > > metta, > Christine 17935 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 1:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 28, Comm., some Pali > characteristic. "Non-mastery" definitely suggests anatta, for example. Hi Larry, Non-mastery in what sense? Is it non-mastery of a skill? Metta, Victor 17936 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 1:19pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dualism/Non-Dualism Hi Victor and all, I'm just on my way out but thought this may be of interest. In the Samyutta Nikaya, p. 130 (B. Bodhi) Book with Verses (Sagathavagga) VII. Weighed Down. 61 (1) 'Name' 203 "What has weighed down everything? What is most extensive? What is the one thing that has All under its control?" 204 "Name has weighed down everything; Nothing is more extensive than name. Name is the one thing that has All under its control." Note 121 says, in part, There is no living being or entity that is free from a name, whether the name be natural or fabricated. Even a tree or stone with no known name is still called "the nameless one". metta, Christine --- "yu_zhonghao " wrote: > Hi Christine and all, > > Here are some questions in my mind: > > 1. How is the word "name" used in everyday life? > 2. What does it mean by the word "name" in the context of "my name > is Victor" or "my name is Christine"? > > In Samyutta Nikaya XII.2, Paticca-samuppada-vibhanga Sutta, Analysis > of Dependent Co-arising, feeling, perception, intention, contact, and > attention is called name. > > 3. What do feeling, perception, intention, contact, and attention > have in common such that they are called name? > > > Metta, > Victor > > > Victor, I was interested to find support here for your definiteness > > about 'nama' simply meaning 'name'. (Part 1) > > Bhikkhu Nananda said: "It is obvious that nàma means `name', and in > > the suttas also, nàma, when used by itself, means `name'. However > > when we come to the commentaries we find some kind of hesitation to > > recognize this obvious meaning. Even in the present context, the > > commentary, Paramatthajotikà, explains the word `name' so as to > mean > > `bending'. It says that all immaterial states are called nàma, in > the > > sense that they bend towards their respective objects and also > > because the mind has the nature of inclination: ârammaõàbhimukhaü > > namanato, cittassa ca natihetuto sabbampi aråpaü `nàman'ti vuc > cati. > > And this is the standard definition of nàma in Abhidhamma com > pendiums > > and commentaries. The idea of bending towards an object is brought > in > > to explain the word nàma. It may be that they thought it too simple > > an interpretation to explain nàma with reference to `name', > > particularly because it is a term that has to do with deep in sight. > > However as far as the teachings in the suttas are concerned, nàma > > still has a great depth even when it is understood in the sense of > > `name'. " > > > > metta, > > Christine 17937 From: Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 1:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 28, Comm., some Pali Hi Victor, Non-mastery in the sense of no control. I recall reading something like "the khandhas are not self because we can't control them." To my mind this isn't entirely logical but I think it is one of the reasons the Buddha gives for something not being a self. Larry -------------------- L: "Non-mastery" definitely suggests anatta, for example. V: Hi Larry, Non-mastery in what sense? Is it non-mastery of a skill? Metta, Victor 17938 From: Uan Chih Liu Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 2:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Howard and Rob M, I want to thank you two for such a lively and thought- provocative interactions. I enjoyed following this thread. Instead of scientific vs. ethical view, however, I would like to think of them as Howard's and Rob M's view, because I tend to believe both views have great significance on ethics. Howard's view helps me to understand how this world comes to be, and helps one tremendously to picture vividly just how and why the wheel is spinning continuously. Rob M's view reminds me that the way to stop the wheel from spinning is focusing on the present moment now. Focusing on the present moment now, for my own experience, however, does include seeing vipaka as how it comes to be (Howard's view), which in turn helps me to focus on the present. The only thing I'm cautious about Howard's view is that the intermixing streams concept may lead one in thinking of a continuation of "a stream" as a continual being or spirit. In actual, there is no origin of the stream, nor continuation of a stream, so each "stream" is no more than the the water drop, isn't it? metta, Wendy 17939 From: Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 9:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi, Wendy - In a message dated 12/20/02 5:21:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, uanchihliu@h... writes: > > Hi Howard and Rob M, > I want to thank you two for such a lively and thought- > provocative interactions. I enjoyed following this thread. > Instead of scientific vs. ethical view, however, I would > like to think of them as Howard's and Rob M's view, > because I tend to believe both views have great significance > on ethics. Howard's view helps me to understand how > this world comes to be, and helps one tremendously to picture > vividly just how and why the wheel is spinning continuously. > Rob M's view reminds me that the way to stop the wheel from > spinning is focusing on the present moment now. Focusing on > the present moment now, for my own experience, however, does > include seeing vipaka as how it comes to be (Howard's view), > which in turn helps me to focus on the present. > > The only thing I'm cautious about Howard's view is that > the intermixing streams concept may lead one in thinking of > a continuation of "a stream" as a continual being or spirit. > In actual, there is no origin of the stream, nor continuation > of a stream, so each "stream" is no more than the the water > drop, isn't it? > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: You are right, Wendy, the stream terminology, interacting or not, is a bit dangerous. These streams themselves are concept-only. Moreover, if the name 'stream' suggests continuing things, then one needs to be very careful. There is just a sequence of empty, conditioned, dependent events; in fact, there are just those events, themselves, and, in fact, each one of them is nothing in-and-of-itself. The moment we use a language term, we have to stop and say, "No, that's not quite the way it actually is!" In fact, we have to eventually stop saying anyhing at all, and just ... *see*! --------------------------------------------------------- > > metta, > Wendy > ============================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17945 From: uanchihliu Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 3:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View (a big post) Hi Rob M, You said > Sorry Larry, today's weather has nothing to do with javana cittas. > If you get wet in the rain, the rain was simply the environment and > has no relationship to your current or past cittas or kamma. The > rain is simply the environment which has its own causes (warm > fronts, cold fronts, etc.). The fact that you are getting wet in the > rain is conditioned by two things: > 1. There is rain (the environment) > 2. You are standing outside (your vipaka) > Here's an example of how I see Howard's view also has great significance on ethics. Without seeing Howard's view, one may indeed see today's weather simply as the environment and has no relationship to one's current or past cittas or kamma when perhaps the weather may be an ecological effect due to little action of each one of us (condition resulted from many seeds as a whole). Without seeing Howard's view, what one considers kusala may be akusala, I feel. metta, Wendy 17947 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 20, 2002 4:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] DSG: Dion Suppression Group --- "Dion " wrote: > > To Nina: ... > ... Do you have other publications > available, I would be interested in knowing other topics away from > the Abhidhamma that you might have written on Buddhism. A fairly complete list of Nina's writings can be found at the following website: http://www.zolag.co.uk/