43000 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sat Mar 5, 2005 0:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Ken, To hear this makes me a little sad, because I care: You wrote: {It is too late to do anything about it - it has already gone. Conditioned realities last less than a billionth of a second and so the idea of doing something about them can only be rooted in ignorance (if I may put it that way). To put it another way: I am glad to know that my lot (dukkha) has a cause and a cessation and that there is a path leading to its cessation, but any desire to do something about it would be a part of the cause, not a part of the path.} Three points: 1) Conditioned realities are cyclic, they are bound to arise again and again, sometimes in different forms (and they can last from less than a billionth of a second to eons). 2) Do you remember how the Buddha became enlightened, and what he said to himself? That was full of desire, a desire so strong that it conquered Mara. What do you think drives Right Effort? What do you think is Right Intention (both effort and intention imply desire, or there would be no need of effort -- which implies a goal -- and no need of intent -- which implies purpose? 3) Yes Desire is the cause, so it must be part of the solution. What your answer should have been: to develop the wisdom, practice the morality, and have the concentration to stop the arising of ... ****** Before I wrote: {To think one thing (e.g., wholesomeness), but in reality, think another (e.g., unwholesomeness) means what? People deceive themselves, or are unaware of the menial activities that give rise to thoughts and thereby are made unaware of most thoughts. What do you think?} You replied with: {I think of it in terms of "near enemies." Ignorant worldlings commonly mistake certain unwholesome states for certain wholesome ones. So the former are called the "near enemies" of the latter.} What are the causes of this mistaken states? ***** I do-not mean that an academic understanding of the Buddha's teaching is not enough and there needs to be an actual practice of the teaching. Though that is an excellent point. When taking an academic or scientific approach to something you are force to try to look at all sides (both pros and cons), and offer improvements. ***** You said: "Reality is not relative" I must ask, is gravity real, is the sun real, is the arising of events real, is ignorance real, is suffering real, is birth real, is mind real, are the sense gates real, was the Buddha real, is the Abidharmma real, ... (I could go on forever)? and, are all these things conditioned (caused) by something ? Now, if you think what ever you perceive threw the 6 senses are unreal, then why are you ....? Don't make the mistake of falling back into the concept of Ultimate Reality/Truth. That destroys your Abidharmic view. In that view, there is no arising, only the unconditioned. For this reason Buddhism has Two, there is also the conditioned, therefore relative. Charles PS: I rarely find discussions difficult, it only happens when people are scared to express their point of view, or they are so closed that they do not want to hear another point of view. ----- Original Message ----- From: kenhowardau Hi Charles, You wrote: --------------- > Before I proceed, at some point I meant to tell you that you seem to have a fairly good understand of the processes (leading to "emptiness") of the mind at work. Assuming this is what you mean by the Abhidhammic view, this is really good, quite redressing, but soon you will have to move up to the level of a Masters (being more ackedemic/scientific) -- What are the flaws, weaknesses, and mistakes of this view? and how can it be improve upon ) --- later, you don't have to now. ---------------- I'm not sure what you mean by this. Do you mean that an academic understanding of the Buddha's teaching is not enough and there needs to be an actual practice of the teaching? I would agree with that, but you seem to be saying something different. I'm sure your meaning will be made clear to me eventually. No hurry. :-) ------------------------ C: > Now for the current post: You Wrote: {"Yes, that's true, although it could also be false, depending on how you look at it. That's the problem with conventional reality: everything is relative, nothing entirely true and nothing entirely false. Fear, shame, clarity and calm can each be seen at different times, and by different people, sometimes as good qualities and sometimes as bad."} Perfect!!! This shows a good grasp of the relative-ness of reality. We can call this a conventional view, a view (awareness) from the 6 senses and samsara. > --------------- I'm glad we seem to agree, but I am wary of your term, "the relativeness of reality." Reality is not relative - only our conventional understanding (so called) can make it seem that way. Although I know next to nothing about Tibetan Buddhism, I think some traditions believe that Nibbana is real and that conditioned reality is unreal. If that is your point of view then you are going to find discussions on DSG very difficult. But not impossible! :-) ---------------- C: > You Wrote: {The Abhidhamma, however, explains that volitional consciousness can only be kusala or akusala - personal opinion has no effect on it. We might think we have wholesome mental factors (e.g, hiri (moral shame), otappa (moral dread), citta-pasaddhi (tranquility of consciousness)) but, in reality, have unwholesome mental factors (e.g., dosa (aversion), kukkucca (worry) and akusala- somanassa (pleasant feeling accompanied by attachment)).} - - - - To think one thing (e.g., wholesomeness), but in reality, think another (e.g., unwholesomeness) means what? People deceive themselves, or are unaware of the menial activities that give rise to thoughts and thereby are made unaware of most thoughts. What do you think? ------------- I think of it in terms of "near enemies." Ignorant worldlings commonly mistake certain unwholesome states for certain wholesome ones. So the former are called the "near enemies" of the latter. ------------- C: > You Wrote: {In the case in point, I'm sure you are right: the calmer, clearer mind I claimed to have more often these days is almost always akusala, rooted in attachment. And, as you say, that kind of calm precedes a storm. But such is the worldlings' lot. :-)} So, what are you going to do about it? or Are you just going to accept it as your lot? ------------- It is too late to do anything about it - it has already gone. Conditioned realities last less than a billionth of a second and so the idea of doing something about them can only be rooted in ignorance (if I may put it that way). To put it another way: I am glad to know that my lot (dukkha) has a cause and a cessation and that there is a path leading to its cessation, but any desire to do something about it would be a part of the cause, not a part of the path. Ken H 43001 From: connie Date: Sat Mar 5, 2005 0:30pm Subject: Re: The Aunt Dear Nina, N: Suppose the aunt would be reborn in the niece's womb, what is so bad about that? It is human birth and this is a happy rebirth. One has the chance to learn Dhamma. C: Only that the niece was already supposed to be one month pregnant at the time the aunt's citta was out house-hunting or whatever it was doing. Maybe it was just concerned about the niece and checking up on her. Maybe the aunt misunderstood and if the citta really was preparing to move on, it would've just moved along looking for a new host or waited to come back to the niece until there was room at the inn. Or maybe that kind of double occupancy accounts for conjoined twins. I sure don't know. I agree that human birth can be great as long as one can learn Dhamma; otherwise, it can be worse than just a waste of time, pleasant or otherwise. peace, connie 43002 From: connie Date: Sat Mar 5, 2005 0:30pm Subject: Re: The Citta Hi, James, I'm glad your computer's fixed. I didn't like thinking of you sitting in all that smoke and, I imagined, pointless chatter. :) Nanavira the Sotapanna!! Are you purposely finding the most controversial support you can? No denying he held a rather dim view of a certain "mass of dead matter choking the Suttas", ignorance of which "may be counted a positive advantage as leaving less to be unlearned". My thanks to Bhikkhu Bodhi's "A Critical Examination of ~Naa.naviira Thera's 'A Note on Pa.ticcasamuppaada'" for the convenient quotes. Just so you know I've read both sides. Again, we're back to 'who ya gonna believe?'; which descriptions of reality or interpretations and commentaries on them are we going to compare our own understandings with? Ignorance automatically makes our thinking suspect. Some more so than other's, but that's my conceit. I think you've been fairly kind about saying you don't have the patience to explain the bio's "citta" to me, but when there isn't some kind of agreement about what words point to/describe, there isn't much point in arguing about them, either. I'm happy to go on thinking the bio points to another baby atta growing up and going home to re-unite as one with the eternal mommy and daddy atta version of how things are. Maybe I'll even come to accept it and start praying for my own speedy deliverance. Oh, wait, that's fairly close to how I used to think and act. Anyway, I'm glad you answered. I'm wondering how much of the commmentarial tradition you dismiss. Not all of it, I'm sure, remembering your answer about whether what I think of as a chair has anything to do with nimitta. According to Ven. Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary, the use of nimitta (mark, sign; image; target, object; cause, condition) as: 1. the "'Mental (reflex-) image', obtained in meditation"; and 2. the signs of (previous) kamma and (the future) destiny; are Commentarial. Sutta usage is: 3. 'outward appearance'; 4. "'Object': the six objects, ie, visual, etc."; and 5. ...'condition of existence'. The whole entry's at: www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/n_r/nimitta.htm BTW, just so I'm not ignoring your quote, akaalika to me is primarily concerned with the timeless and unchanging nature of the truths/path each Sammasambuddha rediscovers and serves as a warning against altering them to suit myself. Better I stumble around not knowing and questioning myself than to underestimate my ignorance any more than I have to. peace, connie 43003 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sat Mar 5, 2005 0:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ultimate (Abhidhamma) view / Ken Boy, You have got me reading long threads, and writing them. I usually skip all the posts I can't see on a single screen. I have been studying and practicing Buddhism since the early 70's. This makes me an old Buddhist. I studied to the extent that I planned to become a monk and also a Lama (under totally different traditions). When I took refuge, it was under monks and nuns of three different traditions (Theravadan, Zen, and Tantric). Now, I have always understood your points. My mistake was in trying to get you, and a lot of others, to stop mixing the Ultimate and the Relative. Even to Theravadas there is the difference I speak of. That is who helped me to understand the difference. But I see now it is too ingrained into the way you think, so it is me that needs to change. One of the problems is that Dharma teaches about both, the relative and the absolute. This duality is one of the milestones of the middle path. The absolute borders on anilism while the relative borders on externalism. You should look into the teachings of the Buddha's contemporaries, it will clarify a lot of the Buddha's teachings. Think about this, In the instant something arises is it an illusion? and are its causes illusion also? If so then you are wrong about the existence of cittas, cetasikas, rupas and Nibbana -- they are then illusions also. Charles ----- Original Message ----- From: kenhowardau Hi Charles, ------- C: > I have to ask, do you understand the meaning/symbolism of the term Ultimate Truth as it is in Buddhism? It is the state of reality that is devoid of all temporal and transitional things. This would even include the 5 aggregates, etc... Some say it transcends thought. > -------- Unfortunately, "Buddhism" means different things to different people. Leaving aside the word 'truth' I understand 'ultimate reality' to refer to the conditioned mental and physical realities (nama and rupa) and to the one unconditioned reality, Nibbana. ------------- C: > So you should be very careful when using it, the term Ultimate or Absolute, especially to old Buddhists. -------------- Please explain "old Buddhists." ------------------------ C: > You Wrote: ... about the need to discuss Abhidhamma in a normal manner rather than in terms of "one hand clapping" or by "silence" or any other "mysterious" means. - - - - - - - - - I understand this, however when you start to discuss the non- existence of self or ego, etc. this borders on Absolute truth and not the Abhidhamic view. The Abhidhamic view relates more to presenting what the thing we call "Self" really is, a linking of both, independent and dependent processes that gives the illusion of "one process," and need. > ------------------------- That is not the way I understand it. The Abhidhamma is the teaching of absolute reality. So is the rest of the Dhamma, but the Abhidhamma avoids references to people and places. It is the Dhamma expressed in terms of cittas, cetasikas, rupas and Nibbana. -------------------- C: > When I wrote: ... read the Tao of Physics. You replied: I did try to read it when I was that way inclined. I am sure it is a sidetrack leading away from the Buddha's teaching. - - - - - - - - - This tells me that you are more of a student of Buddhism (well, abhidarma really) than a seeker of truth. This is ok except when you become blind, deaf, dumb to Truth. --------------------- If time would stand still for a few decades, then I might look at modern, creative interpretations of the Dhamma. As it is, however, there is more in the original, ancient texts than I am ever likely to get around to. And those texts must come first, surely. ------------------ <. . .> C: > Read "Gentle Bridges" by the Dahli Lama. This a group of books (the might use other names too) that Cognitive psychologists sit down with Buddhist (i.e., Tibetan Buddhist) to compare notes. There are a lot of Cognitive psychologists that are also Buddhist. This is just one example. -------------------- Thanks, but I only have time for the Theravada teaching. -------------------- <. . .> C: > When you talk about realization beyond the illusion of permanence, satisfactoriness and self, you are confusing self with Atman or the eternal soul/essence. This has been one of the points I have been trying to get a lot of you all to see. -------------------- Whether it is an eternal soul or just something that persists from one fleeting moment of consciousness to another, it is the same thing - illusion. Ken H 43004 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Mar 5, 2005 1:27pm Subject: Re: The Citta Hi Connie, Connie: I'm glad your computer's fixed. I didn't like thinking of you sitting in all that smoke and, I imagined, pointless chatter. James: Thanks! I know what you mean. Actually, I feel very lucky to not know Arabic. When people ask me if I want to learn Arabic I tell them that I would rather not. They look at me somewhat confused and I tell them 'Not knowing what people are talking about cuts down on noise pollution.' ;-) Connie: :) Nanavira the Sotapanna!! James: Hmmm? This must be an epitaph I am unfamiliar with. Would you care to explain? Connie: Are you purposely finding the most controversial support you can? James: Hehehe, No. Okay, this is going to sound bizarre to you but I came across this quote using my psychic ability. Actually, to let you in on a little secret, I often do that in these Internet discussions. I put my mind to an item that needs to be discussed or explained; wonder where I might find support for what I want to say; and then I suddenly feel the inspiration to look at a certain page in a certain web site (or book), even when I have never read that page/book before. Amazingly, that is how I find most of my stuff. People reading my posts might think I pour over Buddhist writings for days and days but that isn't the case at all- I usually find what I want rather quickly. Regarding this book by this particular bhikkhu, I think you know more about him than I do! LOL! I only read a few parts of this particular book until I found what I felt must be there. I have never read his work before (I swear!). I don't even know if he has other works. I am also not sure what Bhikkhh Bodhi has had to say about him in regards to Dependent Origination; not that I think B.B. has the ultimate understanding in regards to that subject either---but could you provide the link? Don't make me get psychic on you! ;-)) Connie: I think you've been fairly kind about saying you don't have the patience to explain the bio's "citta" to me, but when there isn't some kind of agreement about what words point to/describe, there isn't much point in arguing about them, either. James: Actually, there is hardly ever much point to arguing; but regarding my `patience to explain the bio's citta' you are correct to an extent- I don't feel that I can adequately explain it for you. When I put my mind to yours, I see that you want a definitive, black-and-white explanation for the citta which matches what you find in your Abhidhamma studies. Sorry, but that isn't possible. I believe that the citta defies explanation in that way. You may find this to be a cop out and that is okay. I could use some language to explain what I am thinking of but I know that you wouldn't understand or appreciate it- so I won't bother. That is where you are at the moment and where I am. We are at different places (not higher/lower, just different). Connie: I'm happy to go on thinking the bio points to another baby atta growing up and going home to re-unite as one with the eternal mommy and daddy atta version of how things are. Maybe I'll even come to accept it and start praying for my own speedy deliverance. Oh, wait, that's fairly close to how I used to think and act. James: So Cutesy Connie- really, doesn't suit you. You are so open-minded and intelligent; condescension is the weapon of knaves and fools. Connie: I'm wondering how much of the commmentarial tradition you dismiss. Not all of it, I'm sure,… James: I don't know how much of it I dismiss either…I haven't read all of it! ;-)) Connie: BTW, just so I'm not ignoring your quote, akaalika to me is primarily concerned with the timeless and unchanging nature of the truths/path each Sammasambuddha rediscovers and serves as a warning against altering them to suit myself. James: Okay, thanks for sharing but I am not sure what this has to do with the quote I provided. Connie: Better I stumble around not knowing and questioning myself than to underestimate my ignorance any more than I have to. James: I agree!! Here's to being fellow stumbleers!!!!!!!!! ;-) Metta, James 43005 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Sat Mar 5, 2005 2:27pm Subject: Re: The Citta Hi James, > James: > you in on a little secret, I often do that in these Internet > discussions. I put my mind to an item that needs to be discussed I have my own psychic abilities too: Google toolsbar :P - kel 43006 From: ianand520 Date: Sat Mar 5, 2005 2:30pm Subject: Hello One and All I came upon your humble group while surfing for information on the Abhidhamma. Briefly, I have been a student of comparative religions most of my adult life, beginning in my early university days. When I first came upon some reading material about Buddhism, I was most impressed. I have also studied Hinduism and Taoism. Early on it became apparent to me that the Eastern philosophies seemed to offer more in the way of individual development methodology, and thus I have been a lifelong student and practitioner of these disciplines. My formal practice in meditation began some 24 1/2 years ago when I became associated with a contemplative monastic order which I later joined, becoming a monk. I spent nine years in association with this order and learned much about myself as well as many of the pitfalls of the spiritual path. Upon leaving, I began a personal study of the various meditation methods and techniques, having been weened on Kriya Yoga as taught by Paramahansa Yogananda (though not through SRF). At various times, I've studied and practiced Tibetan Dzogchen meditation, Mahayana Zen and Chan zazen, Taoist mystical yoga, Transcendental Meditation, Ramana Maharshi's Vichara, and a few of the oddball new age meditations like the Merkaba as illustrated by Drunvalo Melchizedek. Of all the techniques that I have studied and practiced, the one I personally like best and recommend to others is the Buddha's own Vipassana/Samatha method as espoused by the Theravada tradition. It is the easiest to learn, the least infected by personal manerisms, both simple in its implimentation and yet comprehensive in its breadth. When combined with following the Noble Eightfold Path, there is no rival to equal the efficiency of its ability to transform the individual. A few years ago, when I was on a personal 1 1/2 year self-imposed retreat intensive, in addition to books on the Buddha's discourses (the Majjhima Nikaya, the Digha Nikaya, the Anguttara Nikaya as well as A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma) I came upon Nina van Gorkum's book on the web, _Abhidhamma in Daily Life_, as I was searching for material on the study of the Abhidhamma. I went through each chapter meticulously, as it seemed to offer an excellent and more accessible overview of the study. Here I found many golden nuggets of wisdom and practice. As a result of these experiences, I have become a researcher in the realm of consciousness, not just a "reader" or theoretical scholar of sorts, but a practitioner. My personal practice has expanded ten fold, one hundred fold over what it had been. In the same spirit as Bhadantacariya Buddhaghosa's _Visuddhimagga_, which through the years has helped to accelerate and assist many on their path to liberation, I am convinced that there exists a method (or way of describing it) of equal importance in the present era which will help to speed up that acceleration even more for those willing to undergo its process. For Sarah's benefit (as well as others on this forum who would like to know) I live in the desert southwestern United States in Arizona. As explained above, I have been and remain a monastic, not a householder in Buddhist practitioner terminology. I look forward to a stimulating exchange of ideas and epiphanies on the Dhamma with the practitioners on the forum. In Metta and with blessings to all those Noble Ones here, I remain yours in service, Ian Andrews 43007 From: connie Date: Sat Mar 5, 2005 5:31pm Subject: Re: The Citta Hi again, James, Connie: :) Nanavira the Sotapanna!! James: Hmmm? This must be an epitaph I am unfamiliar with. Would you care to explain? Connie: Are you purposely finding the most controversial support you can? James: Hehehe, No. Okay, this is going to sound bizarre to you but I came across this quote using my psychic ability. Connie: No, my mother's a bit 'bizarre' and dad's mom always knew things she wasn't supposed to as far as I was concerned. Your ability's got a great sense of humour, though. I was sure you'd picked Nanavira because he was supposed to be sotapanna. If I remember correctly, the letter he spoke of it in wasn't supposed to be read until after he'd died... which I think was by suicide because he had some medical problems that interfered with his meditation and any further progress. === James: [snip] I am also not sure what Bhikkhh Bodhi has had to say about him in regards to Dependent Origination; not that I think B.B. has the ultimate understanding in regards to that subject either---but could you provide the link? Don't make me get psychic on you! ;-)) Connie: Please not that! I don't want you to know who you remind me of that makes me think I like you. The link I've got for the BBodhi paper died some time ago, but I can send you the file if you like. I think the only thing I changed was the format... Normyn(?) font to Velthuis and Word to txt. === James: Actually, there is hardly ever much point to arguing; but regarding my `patience to explain the bio's citta' you are correct to an extent- I don't feel that I can adequately explain it for you. When I put my mind to yours, I see that you want a definitive, black-and-white explanation for the citta which matches what you find in your Abhidhamma studies. Sorry, but that isn't possible. I believe that the citta defies explanation in that way. You may find this to be a cop out and that is okay. I could use some language to explain what I am thinking of but I know that you wouldn't understand or appreciate it- so I won't bother. That is where you are at the moment and where I am. We are at different places (not higher/lower, just different). Connie: What? You've already psyched me? Is nothing sacred? No, not a cop out, though Sarah might think we both are. And you're right, I should've said 'discuss' rather than 'argue'. ==== Connie: I'm happy to go on thinking the bio points to another baby atta growing up and going home to re-unite as one with the eternal mommy and daddy atta version of how things are. Maybe I'll even come to accept it and start praying for my own speedy deliverance. Oh, wait, that's fairly close to how I used to think and act. James: So Cutesy Connie- really, doesn't suit you. You are so open-minded and intelligent; condescension is the weapon of knaves and fools. Connie: Sorry, I could've phrased it better, but that's how it sounds to me and I really am stubbornly stuck on thinking that that's wrong. It's part of what bothers me about what my Maha- and Vajra-yana friends insist on. Kinda like the ex-smoker syndrome. And of course you already know some people would say it's condescending to tell them you already know they wouldn't understand or appreciate what you have to say. I happen to believe you're right in this case, but that's me. === Connie: BTW, just so I'm not ignoring your quote, akaalika to me is primarily concerned with the timeless and unchanging nature of the truths/path each Sammasambuddha rediscovers and serves as a warning against altering them to suit myself. James: Okay, thanks for sharing but I am not sure what this has to do with the quote I provided. Connie: Well, you know, a bit of snideness about changing the meanings of "my" black and white words, but mainly, you didn't say and I, being rather dense at times, didn't see what your quoting Nanavira about the cittaviithi in the context of DO had to do with answering the "what is 'citta'" question. For the biggest part of "Clearing the Path", Nanavira talks about DO and he felt the traditional 3-life representation of that was wrong. As a given in the A.Mun bio, citta is permanent, so why just repeat that? Going on, Nanavira wrote, "the Dhamma is sanditthika and akaalika, that it is immediately visible and without involving time (see in particular Majjhima iv,8 ). Now it is evident that the twelve items, avijjaa to jaraamarana, cannot, if the traditional interpretation is correct, all be seen at once; for they are spread over three successive existences." Is that your point, that the citta is outside of time? I have to smile at his phrasing when he continues. "It is needless to press this point further: either the reader will already have recognized that this is, for him, a valid objection to the traditional interpretation, or he will not. And if he has not already seen this as an objection, no amount of argument will open his eyes. It is a matter of one's fundamental attitude to one's own existence -- is there, or is there not, a present problem or, rather, anxiety that can only be resolved in the present?" This existential, present life dukkha and the question of what 'birth of a being' is are a couple of the points BBodhi discusses in defense of the traditional view. He does not, btw, reject everything Nanavira had to say. And no, I don't just automatically believe him, either. peace, connie 43008 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Mar 5, 2005 10:08pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 138 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(h) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** There are many degrees of nekkhamma and not only monks should cultivate it, but laypeople as well. Actually, all kusala dhammas are nekkhamma (1). When we perform dåna, observe síla or apply ourselves to mental development, we are at such moments not absorbed in sense-pleasures, there is reununciation. We can experience that when there is loving kindness or compassion we do not think of ourselves; thus, there is a degree of detachment. If we see the disadvantages of being selfish, of thinking of our own pleasure and comfort, there are more conditions for being attentive to others. Detachment from the concept of self is still a higher degree of renunciation which can be achieved through the development of right understanding of realities. Both monks and laypeople should cultivate this kind of renunciation. When the concept of self has been eradicated, stinginess has been eradicated as well, and thus, there are more conditions for generosity. Moreover, síla will be purer, there will be no more conditions for transgressing the five precepts. *** 1) Vibhaòga, Book of Analysis, 3, Analysis of the Elements, §182. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43009 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 5, 2005 11:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello One and All Dear Ian, Thank you for sharing your experiences and your background. I appreciate it that you are interested in the Abhidhamma and I welcome an exchage of ideas with you. I never tire to have exchanges on Abhidhamma and Vipassana. If you are interested at the Visuddhimagga, Larry guides us through the whole book, beginning with Ch XIV. I go along reading its Tiika and adding points. Next time we shall study lobha, dosa and moha! We go very slowly, and this is good. We have to consider the Dhamma quietly and take our time. Considering and discussing are the right conditions for developing understanding. It will always be more slowly than we would wish, but the wishing is very tricky. It is actually lobha which counteracts the process of development. I am really looking forward to your input. It is always a favorable condition for considering the Dhamma again and again. It never is enough. Nina. op 05-03-2005 23:30 schreef ianand520 op ianand52@h...: > I came upon your humble group while surfing for information on the > Abhidhamma. 43010 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 0:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello One and All Hi, Ian Welcome to DSG from me. This is a very impressive 'spiritual CV' ;-)). Thanks for telling us about your background and different experiences, how you gradually became more focussed on Buddhism and finally Theravada, culminating in your discovery of CMA, Vis and Nina's ADL. I think many of us have followed a similar path but in a slightly more compressed time frame ;-)). I'm sure we will all benefit from your wide experience. Please feel free to chip in on any thread or put up your own thoughts/questions for discussion. Jon ianand520 wrote: >I came upon your humble group while surfing for information on the >Abhidhamma. > >Briefly, I have been a student of comparative religions most of my >adult life, beginning in my early university days. When I first came >upon some reading material about Buddhism, I was most impressed. I >have also studied Hinduism and Taoism. Early on it became apparent to >me that the Eastern philosophies seemed to offer more in the way of >individual development methodology, and thus I have been a lifelong >student and practitioner of these disciplines. > >My formal practice in meditation began some 24 1/2 years ago ... > 43011 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 0:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga XIV, 141 and Tiika Hi, Nina (and Hugo in a PS at the end) For some reason I found the references to remembering/remembrance as an aspect of sati more meaningful when reading this post of yours, than on previous times when I've read similar material. To be honest, I had always thought the description of the function, etc of sati a bit 'tame' compared to the very important role it obviously plays. But as I read in this post about the function of sati being not to forget (regarding kusala), and its proximate cause being firm remembrance conditioned by repeated listening and considering, and your explanation regarding these aspects, (and together with the description in the rest of the passage), it seemed to make good sense in a way it never had before. So many thanks for the opportunity. Jon PS Hugo, one of the threads we left over for future discussion was the subject of the indicators of the proper development of insight. I would like to put a marker here regarding the situation where parts of the texts that were obscure or not particularly meaningful come to have meaning and relevance to one's understanding of the development of insight. Of course, this could be a purely intellectual thing, but it can also be more than that I think, if the new-found appreciation is something that relates to the application of the teachings, in the sense of both confirming and being confirmed by one's experience. nina wrote: >Visuddhimagga XIV, 141 and Tiika > >Intro: >Sati, mindfulness, is a sobhana cetasika, arising with each sobhana citta. >It remembers, is non-forgetful of what is wholesome. The Text uses the word >sara.na, remembering, but this cetasika is different from saññaa, >recognition or remembrance, which arises with each citta. > >Text Vis.: 141. (x) By its means they remember (saranti), or it itself >remembers, >or it is just remembering (sara.na), thus it is 'mindfulness' (sati). > >N: As to the words, they remember (saranti), this refers to the accompanying >dhammas that are conditioned by sati. Just as the Vis. states in the case of >saddhaa: by means of it they have faith. >The Tiika explains that the accompanying dhammas are conditioned by the >predominant influence of sati. When there is such condition it is said in >conventional language (vohaaro) that a person Œremembers¹. >N: He remembers, is non-forgetful of what is wholesome. > >Text Vis. : It has the characteristic of not wobbling. [64] > >Note 64 (from the Tiika). 'Apilaapana' ("not wobbling") is the steadying of >an object, the remembering and not forgetting it, keeping it as immovable as >a >stone instead of letting it go bobbing about like a pumpkin in water'. > >Text Vis. : Its function is not to forget. > >... > 43012 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 0:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proliferations of Perceptions and Memories Hi, Howard upasaka@a... wrote: >>My understanding would be that it is the moments of thinking >>consciousness, and/or the associated mental factors, that are >>accumulated, rather than the thoughts as such. >> >> >===================== > Well, I don't care much what the items passed along are called. But >something must be passed along, because remembering is a sankharic operation (or >a sequence of operations) that works on *something*. > Yes, I think it's fairly safe to say that what we call remembering is in fact a series of operations. As I would see it, the present object is marked and there is then a series of thinking processes that compares that marking with previous similar moments of marking of an object (these are available for recall because all moments of consciousness are somehow accumulated). Jon 43013 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 0:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' Questions. my father. Hi, Azita gazita2002 wrote: > I noticed the mother did not cry and she told me as we sat >together, that her daughter was happy and it was just us that were >left behing that were sad. I told her that when I see the newborns >at the hospital, I sometimes think that the most certain thing about >their lives is that they will die one day and I felt quite >comfortable saying that to her cos I sensed that she understood that - > and she acknowledged that fact. > > I suppose it's difficult to know another person's cittas, but from your description this sounds like a person who has a good innate sense of the nature of this existence, and of attachment as a cause for grief (rather than someone who is just putting on a brave face or taking comfort in the articles of her belief). Ironically, in conventional terms she may be mistaken as being a person who lacks feeling, or even is uncaring. Your account is a good illustration of how a right perception of the way things are can be a refuge in times of trouble. No 'Can't find a way out' for this lady (so no need to look up, etc;-)). Thanks for the story. Jon 43014 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 0:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Can't find your way out?......look.... James Just building on your approach ... >If you can't find your way out, it means YOU'RE asking the wrong >questions. > > ... how about: If you can't find your way out, it's because there is no YOUR way out. Jon 43015 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 0:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Predominant roots? Hi, Kel I've been following your discussion with interest. I don't wish to buy into the Ledi Sayadaw debate ;-)), but I do have a comment on your original post where, if I remember correctly, you put forward the proposition that insight development could be based on a single chosen dhamma (such as vedana). I'm wondering if this is really what the Ven. Sayadaw is saying in the passage you have quoted. I think he assigns special significance to kaya-gata-sati, but does not go as far in this passage as your earlier statement. Jon kelvin_lwin wrote: >Hi Sarah, > > Tell you what, I'm just going to quote Ledi sayadaw with excerpts >from his Dipani. You can find the full link below: > > http://www.ubakhin.com/ledi/manual6b.htm > > Of the four [satipatthana], if mindfulness or attention is firmly >established on a part of the body, such as on out-breath and in- >breath, it is tantamount to attention being firmly established **on >all things**. This is because the ability to place one's attention >on any object at one's will has been acquired. > >... > > 43016 From: Joop Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 1:09am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Thread (249) / old kamma used up:Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Waters Illusion" wrote: >... > I wrote an essay about my experience being a buddhist...it's > supposedly to be published in Dec. 2005. It's called Bluejean > Buddha Vol.2: Voices of Young Buddhists. > If you want, I can send it to you... Dear Maya (and Sarah) I'm back, and in good health. As Sarah told, an attachment to a DSG-message is not possible. I really like to read your essay. Please send it as a attachment to a email to me jwromeijn@y... And perhaps you can send pages of it as DSG-messages, as Sarah proposed. Or an abstract that is suitable for a DSG-discussion ? To give also some information about myself after asking you so much. I'm a dutchman, and more or less converted myself to a buddhist after my retirement (as a social scientist). For a big part I'm Theravadin but parts of their orthodoxy don't attract me, and I like many Mahayana texts ( about compassion and about emptiness). I have written an article about 'western buddhism', I prefer the term 'global buddhism', special in the situation in the Netherlands and how I hope this 'modern tradition' will be. It will be published in a dutch journal this spring or summer; but I think you cannot read dutch. A abstract of an old draft (I send to Nina) of it was in my DSG message # 41261 Metta Joop 43017 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 1:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Hi, Htoo Hope you don't mind if I butt in here ;-)) >In a book written by Professor Mehn Tin Mon learning literature is >simless and I think he wrote something about learing and those 8 >mahakusala cittas. > >You may argue those cittas which arise while learning are lobha muula >cittas. > >Do you think that all cittas that arise while learning is akusala >cittas [lobha here]. > >Reading or learning invlove javana cittas. > > I don't think we can say that cittas that arise while doing this or that are kusala. The most we can say is that certain kinds of action are likely to involve a degree of kusala. But the reality of the particular case may be different. Kusala is of 3 kinds only: dana, sila or bhavana; or of 10 kinds as the punna-kiriya-vatthu. In the case of school learning, I see no reason the think that this should be kusala any more than any other ordinary, everyday activity. >Regarding javana cittas, if they are not kiriya javana they have to >be akusala or kusala. So they at each moment or at each vithi vara >will have only one alternative of akusala and kusala. > >Did Newton have akusala cittas when he discovered the gravity because >of deep thought? > > Well, I would just say that there is no necessary connection between 'deep thought' (a form of concentration) and the arising of kusala citta. Of the 7 jhaana factors (factors that conduce to concentration on a given subject matter), most are cetasikas that arise with both kusala and akusala cittas, and one is an exclusively aksuala cetasika. There are of course many references to concentration in the suttas and other texts, but I would see those references as being to concentration of the kusala kind, and not as supporting the idea that concentration tends to be kusala. Jon 43018 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 2:32am Subject: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Charles, ------------------ C: > To hear this makes me a little sad, because I care: ------------------ Thank you, but I wasn't meaning to paint a picture of despair. There are only fleeting, conditioned dhammas - there is no self that suffers. --------------------------- C: > You wrote: {It is too late to do anything about it - it has already gone. Conditioned realities last less than a billionth of a second and so the idea of doing something about them can only be rooted in ignorance (if I may put it that way). To put it another way: I am glad to know that my lot (dukkha) has a cause and a cessation and that there is a path leading to its cessation, but any desire to do something about it would be a part of the cause, not a part of the path.} C: > Three points: 1) Conditioned realities are cyclic, they are bound to arise again and again, sometimes in different forms (and they can last from less than a billionth of a second to eons). 2) Do you remember how the Buddha became enlightened, and what he said to himself? That was full of desire, a desire so strong that it conquered Mara. What do you think drives Right Effort? What do you think is Right Intention (both effort and intention imply desire, or there would be no need of effort -- which implies a goal -- and no need of intent -- which implies purpose? 3) Yes Desire is the cause, so it must be part of the solution. -------------------------------- 1) Yes, until ignorance has been totally destroyed, dhammas will be conditioned to appear. 2) & 3) Lobha cannot be one of the cetasikas that lead to enlightenment. Only wholesome cetasikas do that. However, lobha is one of the "near enemies" that are commonly mistaken for wholesome. Any aspirations for enlightenment that I might think I have will be mostly lobha (e.g., the unwholesome desire to be admired as a great sage). ----------------- C: > What your answer should have been: to develop the wisdom, practice the morality, and have the concentration to stop the arising of ... ------------------ Yes, I understand that, but desire will not bring those things about. The forerunner on this path is 'right understanding.' ------------------ KH: > > Ignorant worldlings commonly mistake certain unwholesome states for certain wholesome ones. So the former are called the "near enemies" of the latter.} C: > What are the causes of this mistaken states? ------------------ I suppose ignorance is the main cause. Right understanding is acquired only after a long and gradual process. There has to be an enormous amount of Dhamma study, wise consideration, discussion and insight. ------------------ C: > I must ask, is gravity real, is the sun real, is the arising of events real, is ignorance real, is suffering real, is birth real, is mind real, are the sense gates real, was the Buddha real, is the Abidharmma real, ... (I could go on forever)? and, are all these things conditioned (caused) by something ? ------------------- Some of those are just concepts, but others describe absolute realities. Ignorance, suffering, birth, mind and sense gates, for example, refer to realities, but we must remember that realities last less than a billionth of a second. So we would be wrong to think that (say) a family tragedy was the reality, dukkha (suffering), or that our failure to know the names of all the rupas was the reality, moha (ignorance). Realities can be summed up as 6 cittas and 52 cetasikas (which combine in 89 different ways) as well as 28 rupas and one Nibbana. All else is concept - the product of the thinking mind. The sun, for example is only the sun because we give that name to a certain area in space where nuclear reactions etc are known to be occurring. In reality, there is visible object, or there is heat etc., but they are momentary rupas, not sun. And there is thinking about and remembering about sun, but they are only namas. ---------------- C: > Now, if you think what ever you perceive threw the 6 senses are unreal, then why are you ....? ---------------- I am trying to say that only some things are unreal. Everything perceived at the five sense doors and many things perceived at the mind door are real. Illusions appear only at the mind door. The trouble is, only panna understands the difference between illusion and reality, and so, without panna, we mistake thinking for experiencing. ----------------- C: > Don't make the mistake of falling back into the concept of Ultimate Reality/Truth. That destroys your Abidharmic view. In that view, there is no arising, only the unconditioned. For this reason Buddhism has Two, there is also the conditioned, therefore relative. ------------------ Our communication problem must be due to the different schools we are coming from: Theravada doesn't stress mindfulness of the unconditioned the way you have. Ken H PS: I've just had a look at your reply on our other thread: I am an "old Buddhist too!" I started in 1976 (when I was 25). 43019 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 5:18am Subject: Re: The Citta Hi Kel, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kelvin_lwin" wrote: > > Hi James, > > > James: > > you in on a little secret, I often do that in these Internet > > discussions. I put my mind to an item that needs to be discussed > > I have my own psychic abilities too: Google toolsbar :P > > - kel ;-)) I don't know about psychic, but at times Google is pretty psycho! ;-) Metta, James 43020 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 5:28am Subject: Re: Hello One and All Hi Ian, Ian: For Sarah's benefit (as well as others on this forum who would like to know) I live in the desert southwestern United States in Arizona. As explained above, I have been and remain a monastic, not a householder in Buddhist practitioner terminology. James: Welcome to DSG. I am from Phoenix, Arizona and am now living in Cairo, Egypt. In what part of Arizona do you reside? You say that you're a monastic? Do you mean a Buddhist monk? If you are a monastic, to what temple do you belong? Are you familiar with Wat Promkunaram? I am a disciple of that temple and helped to lead some meditation retreats. If you see Phra Wichit say Hi for me! ;-) Metta, James 43021 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 5:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo Hi, Htoo Butting in here also ;-)) >What is in my mind is that 'if javana cittas are not kiriya cittas, >they do have kamma effect'. > >But your thoughts are that if there is no kamma patha there is no >rebirth related to that akusala. > >I sense both are talking on the same subject. > >When I approach 'kamma' while writing Dhamma Thread I will discuss it. > > I look forward to this. I find this a difficult area. My (tentative) understanding is that javana cittas that are kusala or akusala may have effect in one of 3 ways-- - they condition rebirth (that is, if the cetana is kamma patha) - they condition only vipaka citta through the 5 sense-doors (that is, if some but not all of the factors of kamma patha are present) - they do not condition vipaka (that is, none of the factors of kamma patha are present) but are accumulated as part of the anusaya (and so may in due course be of a strength such that they condition rebirth or vipaka of the 5 sense-doors). I'd be interested to know whether this is how you understand it too. Jon 43022 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 5:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Eight Conditions for the Arising of Panna/ Vera Sutta Hi, Tep and Sarah It seems that there are 2 (or more) different sets of 4 factors (or tetrads) called 'sotapattiyanga' and having slightly different connotations. Bhikkhu Bodhi in the introduction to the Sotapatti-samyutta of his translation of SN describes the difference like this: <> As I understand it, the 4 factors quoted by Sarah below would fall into the latter category (qualities that must be actualized to attain stream-entry), while the 4 factors mentioned by Tep below would fall into the former category (qualities possessed by a stream-enterer), under the BB classification. I don't know if this helps at all. Jon Tep Sastri wrote: >Dear Sarah - > >S: S: I don't quite see how you read it as specifically >showing `what lay-persons should do in order to become Sotapanna'. >Surely it is describing the benefits or fruit of being a sotapanna >such as the stilling of fear (on account of having no self- >view),four factors of stream entry starting with association with >the wise (usually sappurisa sa.msevo)- associating or resorting to >the right views of the ariyans, hearing true dhamma >(saddhammasavana.m), wise attention (yoniso manasikaaro), practice >in accordance with Dhamma (dhammaanudhammapa.tipatti). > >T: The four factors of stream-entry(Sotapatti) as stated in AN X.92 >(Vera Sutta) are more precise with respect to `what lay-persons >should do in order to become Sotapanna'. Please review the following >excerpt and kindly respond at your convenient time. Thank you much. > >"And which are the four factors of stream-entry with which he is >endowed? > >"There is the case where the disciple of the noble ones is endowed >with unwavering faith in the Awakened One: ... > >"He is endowed with unwavering faith in the Dhamma: ... > >"He is endowed with unwavering faith in the Sangha: ... > >"He is endowed with virtues that are appealing to the noble ones: ... > >[Excerpt from AN X.92, Vera Sutta]. > > 43023 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 5:57am Subject: Re: The Citta Hi Connie, Connie: I was sure you'd picked Nanavira because he was supposed to be sotapanna. If I remember correctly, the letter he spoke of it in wasn't supposed to be read until after he'd died... which I think was by suicide because he had some medical problems that interfered with his meditation and any further progress. James: Hmmm…that's interesting. So, he was a self-proclaimed sotapanna and a bit of a drama queen so you naturally think I have a psychic connection to him. Are you trying to tell me something? LOL! Connie: The link I've got for the BBodhi paper died some time ago, but I can send you the file if you like. James: Sure, please do: buddhatrue@y... Connie: Sorry, I could've phrased it better, but that's how it sounds to me and I really am stubbornly stuck on thinking that that's wrong. It's part of what bothers me about what my Maha- and Vajra-yana friends insist on. Kinda like the ex-smoker syndrome. James: This is just attachment to a viewpoint: You're right and they're wrong. Attachment to viewpoints can cause great stress and suffering. Connie: Is that your point, that the citta is outside of time? James: No, I quoted that extra bit because it explained how the viewpoint of cittas as distinct mental states was extrapolated into viewpoints regarding the attainments of the paths and fruits. Unfortunately, these viewpoints, specifically as they regard sotapanna, are at odds with the suttas. Connie: I have to smile at his phrasing when he continues. "It is needless to press this point further: either the reader will already have recognized that this is, for him, a valid objection to the traditional interpretation, or he will not. And if he has not already seen this as an objection, no amount of argument will open his eyes. It is a matter of one's fundamental attitude to one's own existence -- is there, or is there not, a present problem or, rather, anxiety that can only be resolved in the present?" James: I agree with Nanavira Thera on this point and don't agree with Buddhaghosa's interpretation of D.O. into three lifetimes- but I'm sure that doesn't surprise you. Metta, James 43024 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 6:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Howard I hope you are having a relaxing break from the helter skelter of life as an active poster on dsg ;-)). This is a reply to the last of your outstanding posts to me in this thread that has been running for some time now. My apologies for the length, but I have gone into some detail in my answers below, hoping to resolve as much as possible of the mis-communication that prevailed earlier in the thread, and knowing that you will not be rushing back with a quick response. > What I say is that the experienced sense-door dhamma ('felt hardness') >is a bodily sensation, and that if there is an external hardness that meets >an arising consciousness, that external hardness and the internal bodily >sensation are not the same. > You have still not told us the basis (logical deduction, direct experience, reading of the texts, etc.) for the idea of there being some form of hardness other than the hardness actually experienced. I recall that in an earlier post in this thread you claimed that the rupas spoken of in the Abhidhamma were 'external' and 'assumed' (i.e., not actually experienced), while yours were directly experienced and 'internal'/'felt' (which you explained by saying they are derived from the external ones), but I have no idea what the basis of that inference is. If this is an idea you have gained from the writings of a particular writer/group of writers, then you may like to check the sources that are quoted there, to see if they support the thesis. (My own observation: it sounds like something said by someone who has their own view of things to promote -- first, characterise the opposing view in a way that suits one's thesis ...) (I know you gave us the analogy of the nerve pathways and brain, but that is a description of how you see things to be, and not why you consider them to be like that.) A further point that arises in connection with your comments about 'external rupas' is how you see this as being compatible with your insistence on not assuming the existence of something that is 'unexperienced and therefore in principle unverifiable'. Your 'external rupas' are by definition unexperienced by you. > I understand the impingement to be the co-arising of sense door, >sensation, and consciousness, and I believe that co-occurrence is observed through >the mind door. But I also can understand the alternative view of a rupa >arising [the matter of "where" is probably a red herring], a sense door opening, >consciousness resulting, and the three literally coming together. But the more I >think about that scenario, the more and more complex the matters of timing and >occurrence seem to me, and the less and less likely the scenario appears. >That is my take on the matter. I may just not be up to the task of seeing this >matter as it should be seen. Whatever! ;-) > > While it's understandable that you would want to come to a conclusive view one way or the other, I wonder whether this is a practicable expectation to have. Surely such matters are beyond us at this stage of our development. To hold a firm view that is contrary to the ancient commentaries, on the basis of a reading of selected parts of the suttas, seems to me to be placing an unrealistically high reliance on one's own intellectual capability. > I *do* allow the possibility. I merely say that it is unconfirmable. >Sensations are directly experienced. Proposed external rupas, while not at all >absurd, are presumed to be directly experienced, but that is not known as a >fact. I simply find great difficulties with that proposal, and I am not prepared >to jump onto that particular bandwagon. > From my perspective, it is you who keeps bringing up the subject of 'proposed external rupas'! ;-)) Let me explain what I mean. My question was: "On what basis (logical deduction, direct experience, reading of the texts, etc.) do you not allow the possibility that the experienced hardness (your 'felt hardness') is the hardness that impinges on the body-door (i.e., instead of being 'derived from' that hardness/impingement)?" The question asks about your own statement and declared position, so if you see 'proposed external rupas' in the question it comes from that source alone. I'm afraid you cannot answer the question by saying you are not prepared to contemplate so-called 'proposed external rupas', because it is you who has raised the 'internal and felt' vs. 'external and not directly experienced' dichotomy, as part of your assertion that there is a difference between your version and what is found in the Abhidhamma. So I think my question still has not been answered ;-)) As a further comment, it seems to me that in creating this dichotomy you are postulating the existence of a 'world out there', namely, the world of the 'external but not directly hardness' from which the 'internal and felt hardness' is derived. > I do not believe that it is your position that there are >never unobserved, but still existent, rupas. Perhaps you don't mean that? > Well as I see it the question of whether or not there are so-called 'never unobserved, but still existent, rupas' is irrelevant to the discussion. Our discussion concerns only the rupa that is the present sense-door object, and in particular the precise moment of its arising vis-a-vis that of the experiencing consciousness. (If you still see the question of 'never unobserved, but still existent, rupas' coming into the picture here, I'm afraid you'll have to explain the connection.) > You say that I can use the definition I wish, but then you don't use >that definition. If I talk about A while you talk about B but assume we are >talking about the same thing, it makes for an odd conversation. ;-) > I beg to differ ;-)) I am using your definition of rupa, and I am saying that even accepting that definition there is still the question of when that rupa arose. To explain, you start your definition by saying: "When I speak of a rupa, I mean a physical experience - a specific instance of content of consciousness..." OK, so far so good. Rupa to you is 'just that which is object of consciousness'. But then you go on to say: "... Rupas in my sense, by their very nature, never occur except as content of experience." This is no longer a definition, but an assertion about what has just been defined. The assertion is that that which is object of consciousness can have no subsistence except as object of consciousness. Well, as I see it, that is the very question we are trying to resolve! It cannot be answered by 'defining' things to be the way you would like the answer to be ;-)) (And we have already agreed that things can co-occur, that is to say, may be co-arisen, without having arisen at precisely the same time.) So I am accepting the definition part of your statement and am asking for an explanation of the basis (logical deduction, direct experience, reading of the texts, etc.) on the rest of it, where you say that what is the object of consciousness (your definition of 'rupa') can have no subsistence outside it's being the object of consciousness. Finally, there is one other part of your post I have commented on before but not had your response on. You say that your perspective is that 'there is no content without consciousness', and you have defined 'content' to mean only that which is currently being experienced by consciousness. To me that leaves a statement that says nothing of any substance, but I may be missing something. I look forward to hearing from you again after your break. Jon 43025 From: Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 7:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proliferations of Perceptions and Memories Hi, Jon - In a message dated 3/6/2005 3:20:37 AM Eastern Standard Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > >Hi, Howard > >upasaka@a... wrote: > >>>My understanding would be that it is the moments of thinking >>>consciousness, and/or the associated mental factors, that are >>>accumulated, rather than the thoughts as such. >>> >>> >>===================== >> Well, I don't care much what the items passed along are called. But >>something must be passed along, because remembering is a sankharic operation (or >>a sequence of operations) that works on *something*. >> > >Yes, I think it's fairly safe to say that what we call remembering is in >fact a series of operations. As I would see it, the present object is >marked and there is then a series of thinking processes that compares >that marking with previous similar moments of marking of an object >(these are available for recall because all moments of consciousness are >somehow accumulated). ------------------------- Howard: Yes, I see the matter much as you do. But I think it is exactly the business of (the exact nature of) what is "accumulated" (or, better perhaps, what is "re-created and modified") that is not so clear. ------------------------- > >Jon ========================= With metta, Howard 43026 From: connie Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 7:34am Subject: Re: The Citta Hi, James, Connie: I was sure you'd picked Nanavira because he was supposed to be sotapanna. If I remember correctly, the letter he spoke of it in wasn't supposed to be read until after he'd died... which I think was by suicide because he had some medical problems that interfered with his meditation and any further progress. James: Hmmm…that's interesting. So, he was a self-proclaimed sotapanna and a bit of a drama queen so you naturally think I have a psychic connection to him. Are you trying to tell me something? LOL! Connie: I think we're all drama queens, keeping our own story lines going, stuck in our views and their consequences. The links I saw between Nanavira and A.Mun were their supposed ariyan status and their non-traditional (Thera) interpretations of certain things. But, yeah, I guess that fits you, too. I know people who'd say we're Bodhisattas and base their arguments on how I see the nature of the citta being presented in the A.Mun bio. BBodhi's answer to "Clearing the Path" is in the mail. James: No, I quoted that extra bit because it explained how the viewpoint of cittas as distinct mental states was extrapolated into viewpoints regarding the attainments of the paths and fruits. Unfortunately, these viewpoints, specifically as they regard sotapanna, are at odds with the suttas. Connie: LOL... ok, so it had nothing to do with my question but was just furthering your own agenda. Which is what? Confirming A.Mun's arahant status? Why wasn't he a Bodhisatta? peace, connie 43027 From: Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 8:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Jon - I don't like to save up posts for answering later, so I will give a brief reply now, but I would hope to hold off on further discussion at this time. Some remarks follow below in context In a message dated 3/6/2005 9:16:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > >Hi, Howard > >I hope you are having a relaxing break from the helter skelter of life >as an active poster on dsg ;-)). > >This is a reply to the last of your outstanding posts to me in this >thread that has been running for some time now. My apologies for the >length, but I have gone into some detail in my answers below, hoping to >resolve as much as possible of the mis-communication that prevailed >earlier in the thread, and knowing that you will not be rushing back >with a quick response. > >> What I say is that the experienced sense-door dhamma ('felt hardness') >>is a bodily sensation, and that if there is an external hardness that meets >>an arising consciousness, that external hardness and the internal bodily >>sensation are not the same. >> > >You have still not told us the basis (logical deduction, direct >experience, reading of the texts, etc.) for the idea of there being some >form of hardness other than the hardness actually experienced. I recall >that in an earlier post in this thread you claimed that the rupas spoken >of in the Abhidhamma were 'external' and 'assumed' (i.e., not actually >experienced), while yours were directly experienced and >'internal'/'felt' (which you explained by saying they are derived from >the external ones), but I have no idea what the basis of that inference is. ------------------------- Howard: Jon, I believe we share the view that there is only one object (e.g., hardness) that is experienced. The difference is in what we take that to be. You, as I understand it, take it to be some thing or event that arises and ceases on its own and that may or may not be experirnced by an arising act of consciousness. I, on the other hand, consider the dhamma to be an experiential phenomenon/event that occurs only as an element of experience. For you, the experirncing of the dhamma is a literal coming together of three separate phenomena: the dhamma (which can exist unexperienced), the sense door (which arises only in dependence on a waiting object), and the sense consciousness (which arises only in dependence on the other two being already in effect). I, on the other hand, see a co-arising and mutual dependency of the three, but with the type of consciousness dependent on the type of sense object and door. Again, to me, all rupas are experiential. If the notion of group of rupas is correct - I never saw that in any sutta (Is it in the Abhidhamma per se?) - I would still consider the entire group to arise in a mindstate, but with only one rupa in the group reaching the threshhold required for "registering" as an object of consciousness, and with the others occurring subliminally. (Again, Jon, I'm replying with all this just to try to let you understand my perspective. I'm not looking for an extended conversation on the topic at this time.) For the record, I see your "independent-rupa perspective" to be a perfectly reasonable one and even having much appeal. It simply is not my perspective at this time. --------------------------- > >If this is an idea you have gained from the writings of a particular >writer/group of writers, then you may like to check the sources that are >quoted there, to see if they support the thesis. (My own observation: >it sounds like something said by someone who has their own view of >things to promote -- first, characterise the opposing view in a way that >suits one's thesis ...) > >(I know you gave us the analogy of the nerve pathways and brain, but >that is a description of how you see things to be, and not why you >consider them to be like that.) -------------------------- My main reason for my perspective, aside from aesthetic preference, is pragmatic, because I have no basis for knowing the existence of unobserved rupas. --------------------------- > >A further point that arises in connection with your comments about >'external rupas' is how you see this as being compatible with your >insistence on not assuming the existence of something that is >'unexperienced and therefore in principle unverifiable'. Your 'external >rupas' are by definition unexperienced by you. > >> I understand the impingement to be the co-arising of sense door, >>sensation, and consciousness, and I believe that co-occurrence is observed through >>the mind door. But I also can understand the alternative view of a rupa >>arising [the matter of "where" is probably a red herring], a sense door opening, >>consciousness resulting, and the three literally coming together. But the more I >>think about that scenario, the more and more complex the matters of timing and >>occurrence seem to me, and the less and less likely the scenario appears. >>That is my take on the matter. I may just not be up to the task of seeing this >>matter as it should be seen. Whatever! ;-) >> >> > >While it's understandable that you would want to come to a conclusive >view one way or the other, I wonder whether this is a practicable >expectation to have. Surely such matters are beyond us at this stage of >our development. ----------------------------- Howard: I agree. My perspective is tentstive. In fact, I have been paying increased attention to other perspectives recently, and with increasing appreciation. ----------------------------- To hold a firm view that is contrary to the ancient >commentaries, on the basis of a reading of selected parts of the suttas, >seems to me to be placing an unrealistically high reliance on one's own >intellectual capability. ---------------------------- Howard: To hold a firm view makes no sense, ancient commentaries or not. But for the record, I dismiss truth by authority as a valid means of knowledge. I accept what I believe to be the Buddha word because I have come to directly see its truth and value in my life. ---------------------------- > >> I *do* allow the possibility. I merely say that it is unconfirmable. >>Sensations are directly experienced. Proposed external rupas, while not at all >>absurd, are presumed to be directly experienced, but that is not known as a >>fact. I simply find great difficulties with that proposal, and I am not prepared >>to jump onto that particular bandwagon. >> > > From my perspective, it is you who keeps bringing up the subject of >'proposed external rupas'! ;-)) ---------------------------- Howard: What I mean by an external rupa is a rupa that exists but may or may not be experienced. That is all I mean, and I do believe they are what you believe in. ---------------------------- Let me explain what I mean. > >My question was: "On what basis (logical deduction, direct experience, >reading of the texts, etc.) do you not allow the possibility that the >experienced hardness (your 'felt hardness') is the hardness that >impinges on the body-door (i.e., instead of being 'derived from' that >hardness/impingement)?" > >The question asks about your own statement and declared position, so if >you see 'proposed external rupas' in the question it comes from that >source alone. > > I'm afraid you cannot answer the question by saying you are not >prepared to contemplate so-called 'proposed external rupas', because it >is you who has raised the 'internal and felt' vs. 'external and not >directly experienced' dichotomy, as part of your assertion that there is >a difference between your version and what is found in the Abhidhamma. > >So I think my question still has not been answered ;-)) > >As a further comment, it seems to me that in creating this dichotomy you >are postulating the existence of a 'world out there', namely, the world >of the 'external but not directly hardness' from which the 'internal and >felt hardness' is derived. ------------------------- Howard: Please see above what I mean by "external rupa". -------------------------- > >> I do not believe that it is your position that there are >>never unobserved, but still existent, rupas. Perhaps you don't mean that? >> > >Well as I see it the question of whether or not there are so-called >'never unobserved, but still existent, rupas' is irrelevant to the >discussion. Our discussion concerns only the rupa that is the present >sense-door object, and in particular the precise moment of its arising >vis-a-vis that of the experiencing consciousness. (If you still see the >question of 'never unobserved, but still existent, rupas' coming into >the picture here, I'm afraid you'll have to explain the connection.) --------------------------- Howard: Done. -------------------------- > >> You say that I can use the definition I wish, but then you don't use >>that definition. If I talk about A while you talk about B but assume we are >>talking about the same thing, it makes for an odd conversation. ;-) >> > >I beg to differ ;-)) I am using your definition of rupa, and I am >saying that even accepting that definition there is still the question >of when that rupa arose. > >To explain, you start your definition by saying: "When I speak of a >rupa, I mean a physical experience - a specific instance of content of >consciousness..." OK, so far so good. Rupa to you is 'just that which >is object of consciousness'. > >But then you go on to say: "... Rupas in my sense, by their very >nature, never occur except as content of experience." This is no longer >a definition, but an assertion about what has just been defined. The >assertion is that that which is object of consciousness can have no >subsistence except as object of consciousness. > >Well, as I see it, that is the very question we are trying to resolve! >It cannot be answered by 'defining' things to be the way you would like >the answer to be ;-)) (And we have already agreed that things can >co-occur, that is to say, may be co-arisen, without having arisen at >precisely the same time.) > >So I am accepting the definition part of your statement and am asking >for an explanation of the basis (logical deduction, direct experience, >reading of the texts, etc.) on the rest of it, where you say that what >is the object of consciousness (your definition of 'rupa') can have no >subsistence outside it's being the object of consciousness. > >Finally, there is one other part of your post I have commented on before >but not had your response on. You say that your perspective is that >'there is no content without consciousness', and you have defined >'content' to mean only that which is currently being experienced by >consciousness. To me that leaves a statement that says nothing of any >substance, but I may be missing something. > >I look forward to hearing from you again after your break. > >Jon ============================= More in the future, Jon. (But not too soon, please. :-) With metta, Howard 43028 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 9:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Ken, You wrote: PS: I've just had a look at your reply on our other thread: I am an "old Buddhist too!" I started in 1976 (when I was 25). I am glad you caught this, it is totally wrong, and the numbers don't add up. I was born 1960, and I started studying in 10th grade (that is really how I remember it, everything else is due to a calculation from that) I must have been 14 or 15. My history teacher got me on this trip about understanding myself and life. **** I wrote before: Don't make the mistake of falling back into the concept of Ultimate Reality/Truth. That destroys your Abidharmic view. In that view, there is no arising, only the unconditioned. For this reason Buddhism has Two, there is also the conditioned, therefore relative. - - - - - - - You replied with: Our communication problem must be due to the different schools we are coming from: Theravada doesn't stress mindfulness of the unconditioned the way you have. . . . . . . . . This is part of the source/basis of your communication problem. The other part is that I have been trying to change you view -- unsuccessfully I might add :-) anyway back to the point :-D The Theravada school does teach the unconditioned the way I explained (they don't really stress the unconditioned because it is the end, not the journey). Your focus is the Abidharma, which is a very small part of the Theravadan tradition, This also goes for may other schools of Buddhism. What has happen is people get part of a picture or they forget the other parts and also a mistranslation has taken place (the Idea of no-essence/soul/atman becoming no-self) also (the point of no-thing you can own/control completely becoming no-self). **** I see now I can't respond to from the bottom up, so, to the beginning *** You wrote: ... I wasn't meaning to paint a picture of despair. There are only fleeting, conditioned dhammas - there is no self that suffers. - - - - - I understood that, however you point out that, at times there is suffering. The question was about those times. **** Before I wrote: Three points: 1) Conditioned realities are cyclic, they are bound to arise again and again, sometimes in different forms (and they can last from less than a billionth of a second to eons). 2) Do you remember how the Buddha became enlightened, and what he said to himself? That was full of desire, a desire so strong that it conquered Mara. What do you think drives Right Effort? What do you think is Right Intention? Both effort and intention imply desire, or there would be no need of effort -- which implies a goal -- and no need of intent -- which implies purpose. 3) Yes Desire is the cause, so it must be part of the solution. You replied: {1) Yes, until ignorance has been totally destroyed, dhammas will be conditioned to appear. 2) & 3) Lobha cannot be one of the cetasikas that lead to enlightenment. Only wholesome cetasikas do that. However, lobha is one of the "near enemies" that are commonly mistaken for wholesome. Any aspirations for enlightenment that I might think I have will be mostly lobha (e.g., the unwholesome desire to be admired as a great sage).} You are going to have to drop the pali and sanscrit when writing to me, I don't understand it and you run the risk of saying something that I have a totally different understanding of. Plus real comprehension is shown when you can explain things in words that the receiver can understand. Point 2 of my original post presented a few of questions, I thought you liked questions; if so then you forgot to try and answer them. (Never be scared to admit or face truth, when you are it usually means that you are full of self in a bad way.) However, if the answers are Desire I understand you avoidance. ***** I wrote: What your answer should have been: to develop the wisdom, practice the morality, and have the concentration to stop the arising of ... You replied with: Yes, I understand that, but desire will not bring those things about. The forerunner on this path is 'right understanding.' How do these things arise (wisdom, morality, and concentration) are you born with them? If there is no desire for them, will they come by magic, especially morality and concentration? The three of these have to be worked on. When you get to the point where there should be even without desire for them, you are already there. That is the only reason. To most learned Buddhist, the path is graded. It implies a development process. If you do not desire to be free from ignorance you will always be in ignorance; unless it floats away on its own; Do you believe that? Do you believe no matter how bad a person wants to remain in ignorance they will lose it and become wise? *********** At some point you wrote: {... Ignorant worldlings commonly mistake certain unwholesome states for certain wholesome ones. So the former are called the "near enemies" of the latter.} . . . . I replied with: What are the causes of this mistaken states? . . . . . You replied with: I suppose ignorance is the main cause. Right understanding is acquired only after a long and gradual process. There has to be an enormous amount of Dhamma study, wise consideration, discussion and insight. . . . . . . I have to say: Ignorance is a good answer, but it is only the surface. For a more accurate answer you have to look deeper into the mind. Understanding is not the issue here, it is more a question of what are the processes that case this mistake to arise. I know this is a tough question but to me, this is when we talk Abidharma. ***** I asked a bunch of question about what is real and I asked if these things are conditioned (caused) by something. You replied with: {Some of those are just concepts, but others describe absolute realities. Ignorance, suffering, birth, mind and sense gates, for example, refer to realities, but we must remember that realities last less than a billionth of a second. So we would be wrong to think that (say) a family tragedy was the reality, dukkha (suffering), or that our failure to know the names of all the rupas was the reality, moha (ignorance). Realities can be summed up as 6 cittas and 52 cetasikas (which combine in 89 different ways) as well as 28 rupas and one Nibbana. All else is concept - the product of the thinking mind. The sun, for example is only the sun because we give that name to a certain area in space where nuclear reactions etc are known to be occurring. In reality, there is visible object, or there is heat etc., but they are momentary rupas, not sun. And there is thinking about and remembering about sun, but they are only namas.} . . . . . Since you agree that some of them are real, you need to think about whether those things you consider real have causes. The rest are labels, like the sun, and you seem to agree that a certain area in space where nuclear reactions etc., is real too. Now if that is real, are labels real? oh, if not then how is it that they can be used? Now here is a point we seem to disagree: you say -- "realities last less than a billionth of a second." I say -- "realities can last from less than a billionth of a second to eons." I have to ask, do you believe the 5 realms are real or a figment of imagination? Charles PS: yes there is change but that does-not make things less real. 43029 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 9:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ken - part 3 - ultimate (Abhidhamma) view Hi Ken This one almost slip by me. But now that I have read it, it is difficult to reply to but any way. I ask: How are the Buddha's rules fundamentally different from other people's rules? I liked your answer: ... 'the Buddha taught satipatthana, and every word of his teaching should be understood in terms of satipatthana.' ... So satipatthana is a moment of insight into the nature of conditioned reality. but this needs to be explained farther. What you wrote below is quite confusing. **** I asked: How is it that a conventional understanding of rules and precepts is not a way out of samsara? . . . . . . You replied with: {A conventional understanding of the precepts can lead to the performance of kusala kamma. In fact, most types of kusala kamma can be performed without any knowledge of the Buddha's teaching, and they nevertheless lead to rebirth in happy realms of existence. Ultimately, however, all existence (happy or unhappy) is nothing more than the presently arising five aggregates of clinging (the five khandhas), and it is these five aggregates that the Buddha described as samsara. Only satipatthana leads to Path-consciousness (enlightenment), and only Path-consciousness leads to final release from samsara (final extinction of the aggregates).} . . . . You are partially right. Here is a simpler explanation: precepts are a training method to help end the creation of bad karma, that alone is not enough. Precept keeping does require concentration and are conducive to the development of wisdom; however it does-not give the practitioner wisdom, and it only tests ones concentration (this could lead to improvement or a the opposite). Charles ----- Original Message ----- From: kenhowardau Hi Charles, C: > What is satipatthana? -------------------- I agree this has to be defined because various Dhamma students use the word in various ways. Satipatthana is the four bases of mindfulness. A moment of right mindfulness is often given the name, 'a moment of satipatthana,' or just, 'satipatthana.' It is a moment when a conditioned dhamma that has appeared at one of the six doors becomes the object of right understanding, right thought, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration. So satipatthana is a moment of insight into the nature of conditioned reality. It is not to be confused with a moment of insight into the nature of unconditioned reality (Nibbana). They are both vipassana, but the former tends to be called satipatthana, or mundane path consciousness, and the latter tends to be called enlightenment or supramundane Path-consciousness (Magga-citta). ---------------------------- C: > How is it that a conventional understanding of rules and precepts is not a way out of samsara? ---------------------------- A conventional understanding of the precepts can lead to the performance of kusala kamma. In fact, most types of kusala kamma can be performed without any knowledge of the Buddha's teaching, and they nevertheless lead to rebirth in happy realms of existence. Ultimately, however, all existence (happy or unhappy) is nothing more than the presently arising five aggregates of clinging (the five khandhas), and it is these five aggregates that the Buddha described as samsara. Only satipatthana leads to Path-consciousness (enlightenment), and only Path-consciousness leads to final release from samsara (final extinction of the aggregates). ----------------------------------- C: > I do not understand what you mean by "... precepts are kept at specific moments of consciousness when a virati cetasika (abstention from either wrong-speech, wrong-deed or wrong-livelihood) is present." ----------------------------------- If we are to see every word of the Buddha's teaching in terms of satipatthana, then precept keeping is certainly to be seen that way. So, which conditioned dhammas arise (either in sense-door or mind- door processes) when there is precept keeping? How do they differ from dhammas that arise at other kusala moments? The presence of virati cetasika is one difference that stands out. Virati is the mental factor that abstains from an opportunity to perform seriously wrong action (akusala kamma-patha). I am not saying this kind of knowledge equals the practice of satipatthana: it is only an intellectual understanding of the dhammas that arise. When panna (right understanding), sati (right mindfulness) and the other right factors arise to take any one of those dhammas as their object, then there is a moment of satipatthana. ----------------------------------- C: > Monks from two totally different traditions said to me that the keeping precepts is essential all the time, and without this practice, one would run the risk of being dishonored or worst-- disrobed. ------------------------------------- A monk's way of life involves abiding by the rules of training, and there are specific reasons for this that do not apply to the lay- follower's way of life. However, a monk must understand the difference between accepting the rules of training and practising the Buddha's teaching - satipatthana. Only satipatthana leads to enlightenment. Rule keeping has other benefits. (Several DSG members have explained the mechanics of rule keeping, but I haven't really understood them as yet.) -------------------- C: > I have learned to see precepts the way they (the orders of monks and nuns) do and there is no great mystery in it. -------------------- No, there is no great mystery in conventional reality - even a child can understand most of it. But the reality described by the Buddha is totally composed of paramattha dhammas. That, ultimate, reality is truly profound and incredibly hard to see. --------------------------- C: > Sometimes while seeking mystery we overlook the obvious, sometimes. I try not to do that; that is the kind of man I am. ----------------------------- Then you are in good company here at DSG. By studying Dhamma, we can have a sane, well-balanced understanding of the world. There is no need to seek 'mysterious' 'out of this world' experiences. Ken H 43030 From: mnease Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 9:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(e) Hi Sarah and Nina, This sutta's an old favorite of mine, thanks for this excerpt. I've also been interested lately in the role of vitakka in insight. I'm curious about the detail below: ----- Original Message ----- From: "sarah abbott" To: "dsg" Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 9:58 PM Subject: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(e) > "This thought of sense-pleasures has arisen in me, but...it is destructive of intuitive wisdom..." and so on. What is the Paali for 'intuitive wisdom' and how are these thoughts destructive of it? If 'intuitive wisdom' referred to insight, I would have thought that this would accumulate and condition subsequent cittas regardless of thinking. Is there anything in the commentaries pertinent to this? Thanks in advance. mike p.s. I'd like also to thank Ken O. for his recent stressings of the importance of hetu-paccaya. This concept (as opposed to the dhamma) was one of the first attractions to Dhamma for me and now I'm finding it very useful for understanding e.g. parts of pa.ticcasamuppaada. Ken's repeated reminders have been most helpful. 43031 From: Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi again, Jon - One further comment. I had written "My main reason for my perspective, aside from aesthetic preference, is pragmatic, because I have no basis for knowing the existence of unobserved rupas." Now, I anticipate that you might well ask "Well, then, how is it that you accept the idea of a group of rupas arising together (experientially) yet with all but one unobserved?" In reply I would say the following: 1) I don't know this group business to be a fact, but 2) Assuming that it is a fact, I would still consider the entire group to arise, as it were, "on the stage of consciousness", but with only one rupa sufficiently intense to register as objective support for consciousness. In this regard, I also would presume that a Buddha (if not an "ordinary" arahant) would be actually aware of *all* the rupas in a group. I presume this under the assumption that a Buddha would actually *know*, by direct insight, the fact of rupa-groups, and not just by inductive or deductive inference. Jon, it would, of course, be unfair for me to write this and require that the conversation go no further at present. So please feel free to reply! But forgive me please, if I don't then continue the thread further at this time. I don't want to allow myself to drawn back into the intellectual eddy that I got myself into before. I will save any further comments you have for future reply to you. (Don't worry - unfortunately I'm a "DSG junkie"! ;-) With metta, Howard 43032 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 0:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(e) Hi Mike, op 06-03-2005 18:56 schreef mnease op mlnease@z...: > Subject: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, > Sustained thinking/Vicaara(e) > > >> "This thought of sense-pleasures has arisen in me, but...it is destructive > of intuitive wisdom..." and so on. > > What is the Paali for 'intuitive wisdom' and how are these thoughts > destructive of it? If 'intuitive wisdom' referred to insight, I would have > thought that this would accumulate and condition subsequent cittas > regardless of thinking. Is there anything in the commentaries pertinent to > this? N: I looked at the Thai Co and B.B.'s notes. This passage refers to the Buddha when he was a Bodhisatta and commenced the six years of intense striving before his enlightenment. Sense pleasures would obstruct his goal, they do not lead to nibbana. The sutta passage does not state that they cannot be objects of awareness. In fact the Bodhisatta must have been aware of them, how otherwise would he realize their presence? He saw the disadvantage and danger of them. The Co is long. I just see that the Bodhisatta had samaadhi and also taru.na vipassanaa, tender insight. These are the first three stages. He alternated samatha and vipassana. Nina. 43033 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 0:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Four Great Elements as Foundation /feelings change Hi Nina, I don't know pali or Sanskrit at all so it is had to give a good (accurate) comment, but here goes. N: There are different conditions at work for different realities, that makes it complex. C: Complex/compounded C: If by sannaa you mean perception (becoming aware of something), that is the key player. In the USA there is a saying about some people -- They see through rose colored glasses. In this case, altering perception to effect feelings. If I am really happy today, every thing worked out extremely well, I don't mine getting a flat tire on my way home from work. But if the opposite happens, the flat tire might take me over the edge. N: ... Also contact changes all the time. C: this changing is mainly due to cycle of concocting (thinking, racing thoughts, inner gossip) and coming back to the object. Charles ----- Original Message ----- From: Nina van Gorkom Charles: Present feelings effect future feeling to the extent that the contact appears to last. N: Sure, the citta that arises now and that is accompanied by feeling, contact and other cetasikas conditions the subsequent citta and cetasikas arising in one process by contiguity condition. There are different conditions at work for different realities, that makes it complex. Ch: I like to say that the present birth of a feeling has been colored by past feelings. N: Saññaa also plays its part, doesn't it? Ch: For this reason your feelings about an object could change. N: Right. Also contact changes all the time. Nina. 43034 From: Illusion Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 1:05pm Subject: Bluejean Buddha Dear Dhamma Friends, I have written a few essays that will be published on Dec. 2005 in a book titled Bluejean Buddha Vol. 2: Voices of Young Buddhists. May you all benefit from my writing, enjoy! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maya Putra Houston 2560 words to 1285 Growing up in Indonesia for eight years, I was raised as a Buddhist. My mom was my greatest influence; she brought me to Sunday school and taught me most of everything I now know about Buddhism through a series of Jataka Tales, stories of the Buddha's past lives. As a little kid, the Buddha was a role model for me, and when I ran into trouble, I would ask myself, "How would Buddha handle this situation?" As I grew older, I became interested in meditation, especially the technique taught by S.N. Goenka called vipassana. Through vipassana, I have become more aware of myself, my relationships with people, and the environment. I've grown as a Buddhist through the little things that happen in life rather than big moments. A few years ago, I bought an *NSYNC CD at a bargain. One of my friends really liked that album and had a copy of it herself. However, she wasn't satisfied with her CD because it was an illegal copy and couldn't be played on the computer, as mine could. One day, while I wasn't looking, she slipped my enhanced CD into her CD case and put another CD on top so that I couldn't see it. Even though I noticed that she'd done this, I couldn't bring myself to confront her about it. After she left, I checked my CD case and saw that in fact mine was missing. I began to cry, not because I had been duped or for the loss of my CD, but because I felt bad she made such a foolish decision. Had she the courage to ask me, I would have willingly given it to her as I never really fancied *NSYNC to begin with. I decided to call and confront her. She denied the whole thing, claiming that I had wrongly accused her. Not wanting to start a fight, I let it go. The next day she came to my house and gave me a compensation gift. At the door, I told her that I still believed she took my CD and that she could keep it if she'd like. She became angry with me and said that she never wanted anything to do with me, then left. When I opened the gift, I found the counterfeit CD inside. Seeing that this was not mine, I returned it to her with a note saying something like, "Thank you for your generous offer, but I do not want to take what is not rightfully mine. Even though you might not consider me as a friend, I would always consider you to be one." That evening, she knocked on my door with my enhanced CD in hand. She apologized and I forgave her. A few months later, I gave the CD to her as a birthday gift and since then we've never touched that subject again. These little interactions help me grow as a Buddhist. A few years ago, I took two meditation courses. One, which was referred by my aunt, was called anapanasati, the mindfulness of breathing. The other was a healing meditation similar to Goenka's technique. I became so interested in Goenka's meditation courses that I registered myself and my mom for one of his courses as a surprise birthday gift for her. Last year, we had the opportunity to see Goenkaji himself when he came to Houston, as we were part of a welcoming committee. I found the vipassana course very challenging because it required ten days of noble silence and self-observation. I appreciated the fact that the food and accommodation were free and that the courses welcomed everyone, including non-Buddhists. Vipassana has helped me begin to figure out the mysteries of life; it has opened my eyes to the truth in life and all the ignorance that exists in this world. How delightful it is to know Dhamma in this ever-stressful society of ours! I maintain a vipassana practice at least once a day and occasionally sit with a group on Mondays. After having taken the vipassana course, I'm more aware of what I do. For example, I would often question myself, "Why do I get up in the morning only to find myself bound to this unceasing cycle of daily activities?" I am somewhat of an Internet geek and spend an average of ten to twenty hours a week sitting in front of the monitor. Whether chatting, web browsing, or posting messages, the Internet plays a big role in my religious growth. I chat on various servers such as IRC, Yahoo, MSN, AA, and ICQ. Recently, I've been chatting on Buddhist Chat 1 because this is one of the few rooms where people don't use vulgar references. I feel I can develop the intellectual side of Buddhism through dialogue with people. There's one person with whom I discuss sutras and also have become virtual friends. Some of the topics the room discusses are the difference between good and evil, reincarnation (which always provokes controversy), evolution versus religion, and the different techniques of meditation. The participants range in different practices such as Nichiren, Dzogchen, Pure Land, Mahayana, and Theravada. Age groups also vary from teenagers to seniors--usually I'm the youngest. I am also a member of a few Internet clubs, one of which is called "DhammaCakraTra_USA" in Yahoo. This group is dedicated towards Indonesian Buddhists of which currently consists of 97 Indonesians living in the US and of those 26 are Houstonians. Occasionally, we have gatherings when those 26 members including myself pray together and listen to tape lectures. This gives Indonesian Buddhists within the Greater Houston area a chance to expand their Buddhist understanding and hold Dhamma discussions in our own Indonesian language. Buddhism has embedded in me the awareness of conserving nature and the environment. I love getting involved with community service such as taking care of plants, raking leaves, recycling, cleaning up beaches, and making bird houses. I'm currently an active member of the Student Environmental Art Council (SEAC), which is a part of Natural Legacy. In July of 2002, I attended an art and science camp sponsored by SEAC and a few other organizations. At camp, there were tons of mosquitoes swarming around just waiting for the right moment to attack the victim's juicy blood. That summer, the West Nile Virus inflicting mosquitoes were making headlines. Most of my friends would constantly swat the mosquitoes erratically killing most of them, which I found to be somewhat disturbing. In my opinion killing mosquitoes is not a solution because more are bound to come your way and by the time you know it, you'll be slapping yourself endlessly. I was certainly not going to be the one suffering, so I decided it would be best to apply insect repellent. Not only did this guarantee my body to be bug free, but also it was definitely another way to avoid killing them. Instead of swatting them, I would try to generate compassion to one of nature's smaller beings and accept their nature of blood sucking as a way of survival, similar to how humans compete for jobs or status. It might seem irrational to most people to condone their actions when mosquitoes are clearly making your life miserable. Who's to say that mosquitoes are making your life miserable? On the contrary, to some beings (such as swallows, mosquito fishes, and flycatchers) mosquitoes are a delicacy. I believe misery is only found within one's mind because mind and matter are two different things. Buddhism has truly made an impact on my principles and actions in making this world a better place for all beings. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- []\/[]aya []Dutra {ô_ô} "I am nothing but the constituents of the clinging aggregates that is subject to change and unsatisfaction." 43035 From: Illusion Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 1:27pm Subject: Water, Life, and Death Dear Dhamma friends, I'd also like to share with you all my thoughts on life and death...this is something I wrote a year ago. Enjoy! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Recently I have undergone a series of depression for reasons that are beyond me. Perhaps it was from excessive work and stress that's been put upon my shoulders. Or perhaps it's a phase that every teenager goes through at the peak of maturity. Whatever it maybe, I have never been quite the same person since. It has completely changed my outlook on life, goals, and aspirations. I sit here in this dim room feeling so unmotivated, trying to understand who I am, why I'm here, and the purpose of my existence. This recent depression has driven me away from friends and family. I found that water was my only means of comfort--water w/ its tenderness, subtlety, and breath-taking movements. I find real peace and comfort in water, perhaps because of its neutrality--so pure of a substance, untainted. That's just what I need right now, a place to unload w/o having anyone judge me--someone, something, or some means of expression that I could count on; that can be there to absorb whatever I throw at it w/ understanding and sympathy. Water behaves like that very medium. Every time I look at a body of water, I feel at ease...I feel as if my whole being was floating with it taking me wherever it goes. It's so hypnotic and I get lost in its undulating movements. Its never ending tide arises then passes away like time--it waits for no man. However, these are only my guesses of why I'm so attracted to water. Maybe if I could find the real meaning behind it or the real cause of my fascination with water...then maybe I'd be able to rediscover myself. Water, whether in science or religion is considered as the origin of life. Scientists believe that life begins with water. We live in water for the first nine months of our lives. Deep inside our mother's body we are conceived in the watery fluid of the fallopian tube. Similarly, in many religions and dogmas, water symbolizes the original fountain of life, which precedes all form and all creation. Many myths and legends are based on a concept of there being a primeval ocean or watery abyss, which was the source of all life. I have dedicated the last several weeks to looking at the many interpretations of water. At first I asked myself what I thought was the meaning of water. Then I proceed to ask my parents, family, and friends, all of who had very different interpretations. I went a step further on my research and sought out what scholars had to say on the subject. Through these investigations on the interpretations of water, I hope to eventually arrive at an answer to my initial question: What is the purpose of life? LIFE AND DEATH We take water for granted. It's here, there, everywhere; it nourishes us; it feeds us. W/o water plants and animals couldn't survive including ourselves. Yet...what do we do? We waste water...lavishly. We leave the water running: we spend hours and hours bathing; we waste as much as 30 gallons / day washing the dishes by leaving the tap running. One of the major water pollutants are NOT heavy industries, factories, or mills...it is US! We contaminate water with fertilizer (for our lawns), animal/human waste, and toxic chemicals (metals, pesticides, formaldehyde, household chemicals, gasoline, motor oil, battery acid, roadway salt and so on). All this eventually goes down the sewage system and flushed into the bay. If one day the plumbing fails (gets stuffed)and water cease to run from our taps/showers/faucets...we blame not ourselves but at the Water Co. We live in complete misery w/o being able to take showers or flush our toilets or drink from our taps or cook. Then, and only then...do we finally realize how much our lives depend on water. Similarly, we take life for granted too. Our waking days are spent with regrets of what we couldn't do, thoughts of our failures, hatred towards our enemies, lust and greed and desires for objects or persons. Though this might not be true for everyone...but do you not get caught up in work? Do you end your day w/ thoughts of what u should or shouldn't have done...regrets? or plans for tomorrow? But, rarely do we get up in the morning being grateful to live yet another day...or be thankful that today isn't the end of the world; thankful for those people we care about (parents, family, friends). If one day...we find out that we have just one more day to live, what are your thoughts then? What would you do? ONLY then will you be thankful for everything that has come your way. I am thankful for everything that's happened and wouldn't ever change a thing. They are lifelong experiences that I have learnt and tools for improvement in the future. I have my grandfather and a great friend of mine to thank for all these thoughts of wisdom. You see, my grandpa passed away last year and now my friend is suffering from Leukemia. It's hard to watch someone you care about battle against death and due to certain limitations such as distance (& oth. factors), there's nothing that I could do to help except through prayers and good wishes. So friends, do me a favor...go up to your mom/dad/spouse/friends/loved ones and tell them how much u love them...tell them how much u care. With those little acts of compassion, u can make a big difference in their lives. Also, while walking to school or driving to work...or wherever u may be going...stop for a minute and smell the roses. Stop for a minute and notice what's around you...look at the trees and leaves; the birds and the bees...be in the moment...enjoy the moment...and live it like there's no tomorrow. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For other writings (nonbuddhist related) http://artupayam.blogs.friendster.com/ www.geocities.com/vvhite_illusion/poetry.html []\/[]aya []Dutra {ô_ô} "I am nothing but the constituents of the clinging aggregates that is subject to change and unsatisfaction." 43036 From: mnease Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 1:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 - Appliedthinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(e) Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 12:02 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 - Appliedthinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(e) > N: I looked at the Thai Co and B.B.'s notes. This passage refers to the > Buddha when he was a Bodhisatta and commenced the six years of intense > striving before his enlightenment. Sense pleasures would obstruct his goal, > they do not lead to nibbana. Sure, likewise malevolence and harming. I also find it interesting that he was still subject to such thoughts at this point in his life, presumably because the path had not yet arisen sufficiently to eradicate the latent defilements even after all those lifetimes of developing the paramis, bojjhangas etc.. > The sutta passage does not state that they cannot be objects of awareness. No, I didn't think so-- > In fact the Bodhisatta must have been aware of them, how otherwise would he > realize their presence? Of course--this awareness would have been after the fact though, I think--in reviewing. Or do you think these were cases of cittas with awareness taking immediately fallen-away vitakkas as objects? > He saw the disadvantage and danger of them. Clearly-- > The Co is long. I just see that the Bodhisatta had samaadhi and also taru.na > vipassanaa, tender insight. These are the first three stages. He alternated > samatha and vipassana. Thanks again, Nina. mike p.s. Do you know the Paa.li for 'intuitive wisdom' in this context? Is it vipassanaa? 43037 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 2:28pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Bluejean Buddha It's interesting that you say you get together to "pray". I have heard this term used before in Buddhist circles but am not sure how it relates to Buddhism. Could you explain how you pray and to what you pray and what purpose praying servers? Thanks, Evan -----Original Message----- From: Illusion [mailto:artupayam@h...] Sent: Monday, 7 March 2005 8:06 AM To: Win-Win Maung Aung; dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com; journeytonibbana@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Bluejean Buddha ... I am also a member of a few Internet clubs, one of which is called "DhammaCakraTra_USA" in Yahoo. This group is dedicated towards Indonesian Buddhists of which currently consists of 97 Indonesians living in the US and of those 26 are Houstonians. Occasionally, we have gatherings when those 26 members including myself pray together and listen to tape lectures. This gives Indonesian Buddhists within the Greater Houston area a chance to expand their Buddhist understanding and hold Dhamma discussions in our own Indonesian language. 43038 From: robmoult Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 7:57pm Subject: Re: Bluejean Buddha Hi Maya, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Illusion" wrote: > Dear Dhamma Friends, > > I have written a few essays that will be published on Dec. 2005 in a book titled Bluejean Buddha Vol. 2: Voices of Young Buddhists. May you all benefit from my writing, enjoy! ===== I enjoyed your essays. We have some things in common. Before moving to Jakarta 17 years ago, I practiced Zen / Ch'an. In Jakarta, I was introduced to Theravada. I was married in a Vihara in Jakarta (Thai tradition) and we return to that Vihara each time we visit Jakarta (we live in Kuala Lumpur). My wife is Indonesian and we still speak Indonesian at home from time to time. I believe that Nina also lived in Jakarta for a while. Have you been to Brobrodur? It is breathtaking! Metta, Rob M :-) 43039 From: Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 8:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Howard: "I have no basis for knowing the existence of unobserved rupas." Hi Howard and Jon, I have been contemplating this from the point of view of how to discriminate between sense consciousness and sense object for the purpose of distinguishing between nama and rupa _in experience_ for the "Purification of View" as outlined in the Visuddhimagga. The idea is not to only know the names of the various namas and rupas but to identify them in experience, thereby dividing the amorphous glob of experience into many parts, thereby facilitating a glimpse of anatta. It is meant to be an exercise for a relative beginner, say college level, not something reserved for only Buddhas and arahants. The problem is how to consciously distinguish between consciousness and non-consciousness. I think there is no way around reasoning. You can't be conscious of what you are not conscious of. It seems clear to me that abhidhamma's _idea_ is that that color "over there" is rupa and the experience of the color and the space between eye and color is eye consciousness for the color and mind consciousness for the space. But the difference between color and experience of color isn't really analyzed except to say experience of color has color as object. [I have a thought on object here, but maybe we should keep it simple.] Here is an interesting quote from Visuddhimagga: Vism.XV,41. Individually, however, the eye element should be regarded as the surface of a drum, the visible-data element as the drumstick, and the eye-consciousness element as the sound. Likewise, the eye element should be regarded as the surface of a looking-glass, the visible-object element as the face, and the eye-consciousness element as the image of the face. Or else, the eye-element should be regarded as the lower fire-stick, the visible-data element as the upper fire-stick, and the eye-consciousness element as the fire. So too in the case of the ear and so on. Larry: I think one could take either a realist or phenominalist view of this and it probably doesn't make any difference as long as you come up with "many parts" and have confidence in the view. Larry 43040 From: Ian Allan Andrews Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 6:53pm Subject: Re: Hello One and All...Thank you Hello Jonothan and Nina, Thank you both for your warm welcome. I am not certain how much I'll be able to contribute to the discussions on abhidhamma due to my schedule and the time it would take me to translate the terminology (it's been a couple of years since I went over this material and terminology) and ponder what is being pointed out, but I'll endeavor to chime in whenever I see an opportunity to point out something I have noticed that hasn't been pointed out. There are many intelligent people who post to this forum, and most of them seem to have taken the time to figure out what they are talking about. I will, on occasion, avail myself of Jonothan's offer to "put up [my] own thoughts/questions for discussion" as I am interested in the practical aspect of the application of abhidhamma to one's everyday life. Noticing the minutiae of consciousness and catching oneself before making a mistake can be a daunting task. And the abhidhamma is here to help and assist us with this task. This is what I see as the most important aspect of studying the abhidhamma -- its practical application. Although just being able to understand what is being discussed (being able to identify and acknowledge its reality within our consciousness) can be equally as daunting, as thoughts are as fleeting as the breath. Once again, thank you for your gracious welcome. In Metta, Ian --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi, Ian > > Welcome to DSG from me. This is a very impressive 'spiritual CV' ;-)). Thanks for telling us about your background and different experiences, how you gradually became more focussed on Buddhism and finally Theravada, culminating in your discovery of CMA, Vis and Nina's ADL. I think many of us have followed a similar path but in a slightly more compressed time frame ;-)). I'm sure we will all benefit from your wide experience. Please feel free to chip in on any thread or put up your own thoughts/questions for discussion. > > Jon > > ianand520 wrote: > > >I came upon your humble group while surfing for information on the > >Abhidhamma. 43041 From: Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 8:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Larry: "You can't be conscious of what you are not conscious of." Hi Howard and Jon, I had a better version of this email but it disappeared. What I meant by the above is that in distinguishing between nama and rupa in experience the problem is that rupa, as such, is not an experience. So one must experience the experience of a non-experience _and_ experience a non-experience separate from experience. Obviously the second part of this is impossible without concept and reason. Also I wanted to say that even the most penetrating experience needs reason to contextualize and make sense of it. Phenominalism can't do without reason any more than realism can, and in some ways phenominalism is more reasonable. But experience has to be the basis of reason. Larry 43042 From: Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 8:40pm Subject: Vism.XIV,143 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 143. (xiii)-(xv) By its mean they are not greedy (na lubbanti), or it itself is not greedy, or it is just the mere not being greedy (alubbhana), thus it is 'non-greed (alobha). The same method applies to 'non-hate' (adosa) and 'non-delusion (amoha) [na dussanti, adussana = adosa, and na muyhanti, amuyhana = amoha (see par. 171,161)]. Of these, 'non-greed' has the characteristic of the mind's lack of desire for an object, or it has the characteristic of non-adherence, like a water drop on a lotus leaf. Its function is to not lay hold, like a liberated bhikkhu. It is manifested as a state of not treating as a shelter, like that of a man who has fallen into filth. 'Non-hate' has the characteristic of lack of savagery, or the characteristic of non-opposing, like a gentle friend. Its function is to remove annoyance, or its function is to remove fever, as sandalwood does. It is manifested as agreeableness, like the full moon. 'Non-delusion' has the characteristic of penetrating [things] according to their individual essences, or it has the characteristic of sure penetration, like the penetration of an arrow shot by a skilful archer. Its function is to illuminate the objective field, like a lamp. It is manifested as non-bewilderment, like a guide in a forest. The three should be regarded as the roots of all that is profitable. 43043 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 8:47pm Subject: reminder time Hi All, Just a couple of reminders. Trimming When replying to another post, please remember to trim any part of the other post that is not necessary for your reply. If the post you are replying to is a recent one, you may assume that other members will have seen it. Salutation etc To avoid confusion, please use a salutation at the beginning of each post, and sign off at the end (preferably with a real name). We appreciate your co-operation. Jon and Sarah PS The full guidelines can be found in the files section. Comments or questions off-list only. Thanks 43044 From: Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 4:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) In a message dated 3/6/2005 8:44:19 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: Also I wanted to say that even the most penetrating experience needs reason to contextualize and make sense of it. Phenominalism can't do without reason any more than realism can, and in some ways phenominalism is more reasonable. But experience has to be the basis of reason. Larry Hi Larry I agree. I think the Buddha might have used an example of an infant ... that would be able to be aware of its experiences but completely ignorant as to what they meant. "Investigation" is one of the seven enlightenment factors. Can't investigate without reasoning. TG 43045 From: mnease Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 9:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Larry, Hope you'll pardon my butting in: ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 8:34 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) > So one must > experience the experience of a non-experience _and_ experience a > non-experience separate from experience. Obviously the second part of > this is impossible without concept and reason. Without 'one' to experience I don't see this as a problem--if I understand it correctly, naama can experience ruupa (as well as naama). I think only the 'experiencer' needs to be subtracted from the equation for this to make sense. I'm all for concept and reason in their place but their place is not in satipa.t.thaana I think. Concept and reason can occur (usually do I think) afterward and can be very valuable if consistent with dhamma. > Also I wanted to say that even the most penetrating experience needs > reason to contextualize and make sense of it. Yes, to make conceptual sense--a good thing I think--but not to make vipassanaa. Unless I'm mistaken, insight just penetrates a reality. The concept and context come afterwards. > Phenominalism can't do > without reason any more than realism can, and in some ways phenominalism > is more reasonable. But experience has to be the basis of reason. Of profitable reason certainly. In my case, nearly all reason is based on thoughts, imaginings, counterfeits of experience. Just me of course... mike 43046 From: Andrew Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 9:11pm Subject: Re: Water, Life, and Death Dear Maya I can see that you enjoy writing and you do it so well. Keep up the good work! In this piece, you were wondering about your fascination with water. Have you solved it yet? If not, may I take a guess myself? I shall snip out bits of your story but only for the sake of convenience ... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Illusion" wrote: > Recently I have undergone a series of depression for reasons that are beyond me. ... I found that water was my only means of comfort-- ... Every time I look at a body of water, I feel at ease...I feel as if my whole being was floating with it taking me wherever it goes. ... Maybe if I could find the real meaning behind it or the real cause of my fascination with water...then maybe I'd be able to rediscover myself. > > "I am nothing but the constituents of the clinging aggregates that is subject to change and unsatisfaction." Well, Maya, here's my theory ... I think the source of your fascination with water may be found in the little quotation at the very end of your email: the Buddha's teaching of anatta (no-self)! When we truly realise that there is no permanent, lasting and directing self, we see the world very differently. It's as if "we" are just aggregates bobbing along in flowing water, having no control over where we flow to. You mentioned that you had been depressed. That, of course, happens to all of us in this dukkha-ridden human existence. The Dhamma points out that living in a sphere where we experience both happy and unhappy can be much more advantageous than living in an ever happy god realm. I used to think that this was just human Buddhist conceit ... when you study anthropology, you come to learn that every culture holds itself out as unique or special or god-chosen or whatever. So I used to think that the Buddhist idea of the human realm being a fortunate rebirth location was just Buddhists wanting to feel special, too. On the contrary, my experience is that the very few "glimpses" I have had of anatta were during times of stress and upset (which the gods don't suffer). It was then that I was able to see more clearly that "I" actually had no control over my mind, that "I" was a swirling mass of waves and currents. Much as I struggled, telling myself "Let my mind stop these thoughts and become happy", it didn't happen. Another way of saying this is that the cetasika cetana is really just a slave to the present conditions! The Abhidhamma books tell us that cetana is like a head carpenter who gets the other carpenters (cetasikas) to do their work and that's true. But, in the end, cetana NOW is a slave to present conditions. For this reason, I think it is a mistake to believe that we *can* direct the waves and currents in the present moment and explain this supposed ability by saying "that's my cetana at work!" Wrong. That's conditions at work. Many times when we are happy and calm, it *looks like* "we" are practising mindfulness or metta or whatever. That we are directing the flow of our consciousness. But that's only an illusion. A water illusion? Our hope is to understand, not to direct. Have I solved your mystery, Maya? Maybe I'm way off the mark. But it was fun trying. Keep writing!! Best wishes Andrew T 43047 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Mar 6, 2005 10:38pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 139 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(i) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** Vicåra Vicåra can be translated as sustained thinking, discursive thinking or sustained application. We read in the Visuddhimagga (IV, 88) the following definition: * "… Sustained thinking (vicaraùa) is sustained thought (vicåra); continued sustenance (anusañcaraùa), is what is meant. It has the characteristic of continued pressure on (occupation with) the object. Its function is to keep conascent (mental) states (occupied) with that. It is manifested as keeping consciousness anchored (on that object)." * The Atthasåliní (Book One, Part IV, Chapter I, 114) defines vicåra in a similar way. Vicåra is not the same reality as vitakka. Vitakka directs the citta to the object and vicåra keeps the citta occupied with the object, “anchored” on it. However, we should remember that both vitakka and vicåra perform their functions only for the duration of one citta and then fall away immediately, together with the citta. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43048 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 7, 2005 0:16am Subject: Re: Thanks for your contributions, see you later. Hi Hugo, I hope you don't mind, but I'm replying to part of your kind note(sent off-list)on DSG and sending you a copy in case you're not following. --- Hugo wrote: > BTW, you and I agree more than what it seems at first glance, but > let's talk about that later. ... S: Please put that at the top of your 'Next Life on DSG agenda' - it's always good to hear about the agreements;-). .... > A friend from DSG pointed me to this book: > http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/cittanupassana5.pdf > > I am half way through it, and it is AMAZINGLY similar (actually > identical) to what I have been doing, the feelings I have felt, the > experiences I have had, and the conclusions and "tips" I have obtained > from my own experience. > > It seems as if I had read it before doing what I do, but I didn't, > that's why I am so shocked (but with joy). ... S: One reason I'm replying on list is because others may like to take a look as you recommend it so highly. (I might even persuade some kind person like Connie to pick me a couple of extracts in due course, or perhaps you will add them in your posts later). ... > It is easy and quick to read, and you will love it as it contains > "your favourite mantra" and many of "your phrases", but also it > contains a better description of "my approach" and "my phrases", so I > think it would be good if you read it as to understand what I am > trying to explain and why I think you and I agree more than disagree. > I think just reading the first part is enough, I haven't read the > second part yet. ... S: Sounds good if it's full of 'my favourite mantra';-). I'll wait for an extract or two or maybe take a look sometime, adding it to the list. Thx also for your last post to me on the list #42942. I must have learnt a little about psychic connections from James, because I just knew you weren't wanting a reply;-). Of course, getting in the last word on DSG is never easy!! My main objection to what you wrote for your reflection during this period was the following: I had repeated something along the lines of my favourite mantra and you then replied: "I know, but we can't forget in what situation we are now and that we need to work from where we are, so we need to take provisions to make the current situation good enough so we can work on the final result." It's like you are saying, yes, I agree with the teachings BUT, self still needs to do its job and there are still all these situations no matter how much we talk about dhammas. Also, it may seem that we've 'perceived namas coming and going', but isn't this just thinking about them coming and going? Btw, there have been several posts written to you directly or indirectly since you started your sabbatical. I have them noted, so if you haven't been following and you want me to give you the numbers off-list, let me know. One was Jon's yest on Vism and one was Ken H's 'Popeye' post with a few other one-liners in between;-). I know your break is not from dhamma, only from discussion, so hope it's a rewarding spell. Metta, Sarah ======= 43049 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 7, 2005 1:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Eight Conditions for the Arising of Panna/ Vera Sutta Hi Tep, (Jon & Nina), Thank you (and also Jon & Nina) for your helpful messages. I still don¡¦t have the sutta (Vera sutta) in front of me and couldn¡¦t follow the reference ANX,92 to find it in the PTS transl of AN. (pls give me a link anytime if you can do so easily as the titles are often different in translations). --- Tep Sastri wrote: > There are some significant variations in what you call the "four > factors of stream-entry". The variations are seen in SN LV.30, SN > LV.31, SN LV.32, SN LV.33 and AN X.92. ¡K S: As Nina said, I think they are complimentary and as Jon said, they may all be referred to as ¡¥sotapattiyanga¡¦ but have slightly different connotations. I liked BB¡¦s note which suggested the set you quoted refer to the factors possessed by the stream-enterer and the factors I gave before refer to the ¡¥qualities that must be actualised¡¦ for attainment of stream-entry. ¡K > S: I don't quite see how you read it as specifically > showing `what lay-persons should do in order to become Sotapanna'. > Surely it is describing the benefits or fruit of being a sotapanna > such as the stilling of fear (on account of having no self- > view),four factors of stream entry starting with association with > the wise (usually sappurisa sa.msevo)- associating or resorting to > the right views of the ariyans, hearing true dhamma > (saddhammasavana.m), wise attention (yoniso manasikaaro), practice > in accordance with Dhamma (dhammaanudhammapa.tipatti). ¡K S: Thank you for the correction. I should have given the standard definition of the factors which the sotapanna is endowed with, starting with ¡¥unwavering faith in the Awakened One¡¦ which you now show me are given in the sutta. I missed the target a littleƒº. ¡K > T: The four factors of stream-entry(Sotapatti) as stated in AN X.92 > (Vera Sutta) are more precise with respect to `what lay-persons > should do in order to become Sotapanna'. Please review the following > excerpt and kindly respond at your convenient time. Thank you much. ¡K S: Thank you. In your comment here, surely for consistency, it should be with respect to ¡¥the factors of the sotapanna/stream entry which the lay-person is endowed with¡¦ rather than what they ¡¥should do¡¦ or what ¡¥must be actualized¡¦ to use BB¡¦s terminology? Grateful for your reflections on this and other suttas. Metta, Sarah > "And which are the four factors of stream-entry with which he is > endowed? > > "There is the case where the disciple of the noble ones is endowed > with unwavering faith in the Awakened One <¡K> > > "He is endowed with unwavering faith in the Dhamma: <¡K> > > "He is endowed with unwavering faith in the Sangha: <¡K> > > "He is endowed with virtues that are appealing to the noble ones: > untorn, unbroken, unspotted, unsplattered, liberating, praised by > the wise, untarnished, leading to concentration. > > "These are the four factors of stream-entry with which he is > endowed. > > [Excerpt from AN X.92, Vera Sutta]. 43050 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 7, 2005 1:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Htoo- deva vehicles, rotating razors, busy demons & ariyan maths Hi Kel (& Htoo), Thanks for your help. --- kelvin_lwin wrote: > >S: 1. #41413 You were talking about dying and the `racing > > competition of kamma'. You told a story about a rich man dying > > who > > kept asking the monks to stop chanting. `Actually the father is > > seeing `a deva vehicle driven by devas…'' the father was > > reborn in > > the deva realm. It's an interesting story. Does it come from a > > sutta > > or where? I'd be interested to read it. > > > > If it's a modern story, how would anyone know?? > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- > > Htoo: I do not think it is a modern story or created story. The > > problem is that I do not remember the source. What I remember is I > > also saw a pictorial description that deva-vehicle was there. <...> ... Kel: If I'm not mistaken it's the story of Anathapindika. I think > it's included in the Greatest Disciples book under "Death of > Anathapinkdika". ... S: Kel, I think you may be right - at least I think it may be *based* on Anathapindika's death, rebirth in Tusita and reappearance in Jetavana. I had wondered about Anathapindika, but it's a very 'free' interpretation indeed;-). Maybe, as Htoo said, he recalled the pictorial description. One reason I ask him is just out of interest. Another is because many of his posts contain so much good material and are often saved in U.P., but I like to check that at least most the facts are correct first;-). ... >I also heard a similar story in a lecture but that > person became an anagami so wasnt reborn into Deva realm. Or the > one where Buddha chided Ashin Sariputtra for not giving appropriate > sermon for the person to achieve anagami-magga right before death > though they had the potential. I think a few of the chief lay > disciples death bed stories were given somewhere. ... Perhaps some have been 'adapted' for children's books too. If you recall others or sources, let us know. Metta, Sarah ======= 43051 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 7, 2005 2:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Predominant roots? Hi Kel (Rob K & All), --- kelvin_lwin wrote: > > "Ledi Sayadaw's ....Paramattha-dipani created a sensation in the > > field of Abhidhamma studies because he pointed out 325 places in > > Kel: The version I read is he overheard Sri Lanka monks saying > Burmese Abhidhamma studies were based on commentaries with some > errors. So he took it upon himself and corrected those since he was > uniquely qualified due to intimitate knowledge of the whole > tipitaka. So I guess it's in the eye of the beholder really. … S: I think you're right (about the 'eye of the beholder'. I used to occasionally visit Dr U Rewatta Dhamma in Birmingham and London in the 70s and I had a lot of admiration for the difficult task he set out to accomplish, being based in one of England’s most run-down slum areas at the time. We talked a little about Abhidhamma, but not about controversies in Burma. The following, however, are extracts from an article of his on the Abhidhamma: http://www.nibbana.com/abidama1.htm He starts his article with this introduction which I know you’ll agree with, but which I post for others: ***** "At the heart of the Abhidhamma philosophy is the Abhidhamma Pitaka, one of the divisions of the Pali Canon recognized by Theravada Buddhism as the authoritative recension of the Buddha's teachings. This canon was compiled at the three great Buddhist councils held in India in the early centuries following the Buddha's demise: the first, at Rajagaha, convened three months after the Buddha's Parinibbana by five hundred senior monks under the leadership of the Elder Mahakassapa; the second, at Vesali, a hundred years later, and the third, at Pataliputta, two hundred years later. The canon that emerged from these councils, preserved in the Middle Indian language now called Pali, is known as the Tipitaka, the three "baskets" or collections of the teachings" ***** S:Later when he introduces the commentaries, some don't agree when he writes: ***** ”When the authorship of the Commentaries is ascribed to Acariya Buddhaghosa, it should not be supposed that they are in any way original compositions, or even original attempts to interpret traditional material. They are, rather, carefully edited versions of the vast body of accumulated exegetical material that Buddhaghosa found at the Mahavihara in Anuradhapura. This material must have preceded the great commentator by centuries, representing the collective efforts of generations of erudite Buddhist teachers to elucidate the meaning of the canonical Abhidhamma.” ***** S:He adds more details on the commentaries and when it comes to the commentary on the Abhidammattha Sangaha, he writes: ***** “2. Abhidhammathavibhavini-Tika, or in brief, the Vibhavini, written by Acariya Sumangalasami, pupil of the eminent Sri Lankan elder Sariputta Mahasami, also in the twelfth century. This tika quickly superceded the Old Commentary and is generally considered the most profound and reliable exegetical work on the Sangaha. In Burma this work is known as tika-gyaw, "the Famous Commentary." The author is greatly respected for his erudition and mastery of the Abhidhamma. He relies heavily on older authorities such as the Abhidhamma-Anutika and the Visuddhimagga-Mahatika (also known as the Paramatthamanjusa). Although Ledi Sayadaw (see below) criticized the Vibhavini extensively in his own commentary on the Sangaha, its popularity has not diminished but indeed has even increased, and several Burmese scholars have risen to defend it against Ledi Sayadaw's criticisms.” <…> "4. Paramatthadipani-Tika, "The Elucidation of the Ultimate Meaning," by Ledi Sayadaw. Ledi Sayadaw of Burma (1846-1923) was one of the greatest scholar-monks and meditation masters of the Theravada tradition in recent times. He was the author of over seventy manuals on different aspects of Theravada Buddhism, including philosophy, ethics, meditation practice, and Pali grammar. His tika created a sensation in the field of Abhidhamma studies because he pointed out 325 places in the esteemed Vibhavini-tika where he alleged that errors and misinterpretations had occurred, though his criticisms also set off a reaction in defense of the older work." ***** S: So it seems there has been a significant amount of controversy by Burmese scholars and bhikkhus too. In case there is any question about whether Dr U Rewatta Dhamma would know, I just made use of that psychic or psycho tool bar favourite;-) to find this: “A lifetime of Buddhism -- The Ven. Dr. Rewata Dhamma was born in Myanmar in 1929. He has studied Theravada Buddhism since childhood. He obtained the highest degree in Pali examination at the age of 23 and was then awarded the title of Sasanadhaja siripavara dhammacartiya by the then president of Myanmar in 1953.” **** S:Anyway, Kel, I appreciate the approach you referred to of reading. Considering and testing out according to your experience and appreciate the high regard you have for Ledi Sayadaw's writings. Indeed they contain a wealth of detail and there's no doubt about his familiarity with all the texts in Pali. I may respond later to the extract of Ledi Sayadaw’s that you kindly posted for me. It’s good to discuss these points further – I don’t think they are minor academic points at all, but crucial aspects of how we see the practice. Metta, Sarah ======== 43052 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 7, 2005 4:00am Subject: DSG get-together in Bangkok -end of this month Hi Azita & All, I'm also replying to your off-list note here in case anyone else can join us, now everything is confirmed. .... --- azita gill wrote: > Hello Sarah, > Is it seeing or is it thinking? just a little > reminder. ... A good start - attachment was what was most apparent when I read the reminder which just goes to show how prevalent it is as soon as seeing sees and sanna marks the visible object. ... You then asked about the details for the discussions in Bangkok with A.Sujin at the end of this month. I just spoke to her and they are confirmed for Tues 29, Wed 30 and I think Thurs 31st. I mentioned some friends may be visiting for part of the time only. so for convenience we'll be meeting at the Foundation, starting 9am on Tuesday 29th. If anyone else here is able to join any part or all of these discussions, I'm sure it will be very worthwhile and agreement with anyone, including A.Sujin, or even with Buddhaghosa is never a requirement! Just like on DSG, some of the best discussions are when people have different 'takes' or understandings of the teachings. If anyone would like more details of the venue, times etc, please contact me or Sukin off-list. I know Sukin will be happy to give anyone his mobile no and any help on driections in Bkk etc too. Azita, thanks for passing the info on to Vince and Nancy. We'll see you, Chris, Bkk-ers and them on Tues 29th at the foundation. Ken O, just turn up if you prefer not to be tied. You may even get another big-brotherly pep talk from Vince if you're lucky:-). Metta, Sarah ... > V&N will be in Bkk all day March 29 and half 30. > Do you have any start times for discussion group, and > are they going to be at the Foundation? > This info will be forwarded to them as I don't arrive > in Bkk until late, late Mon 28. > 43053 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Mar 7, 2005 0:02am Subject: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Charles, You wrote: ------------- > You are going to have to drop the pali and sanscrit when writing to me, I don't understand it and you run the risk of saying something that I have a totally different understanding of. Plus real comprehension is shown when you can explain things in words that the receiver can understand. > -------------- Sure, no problem. I continued to use Pali terms because you had said on a couple of occasions that you understood my point of view (and were trying to change it). It seems to me now, that you have been taught a very different Abhidhamma from the one I am being taught - the Theravada one. And so we have probably been talking at cross- purposes for most of our conversation. I will skip over some parts of your post to get to the following, very important part: ---------------------- C: > What has happen is people get part of a picture or they forget the other parts and also a mistranslation has taken place (the Idea of no-essence/soul/atman becoming no-self) also (the point of no- thing you can own/control completely becoming no-self). > ----------------------- I wonder if you are making a point I have heard others make from time to time: Even on DSG, people have said, "Sure, there is no eternal self or atman, but there is a temporary self!" Worse still, some Buddhists believe Nibbana is a kind of heaven where we will live eternally. A major source of this belief is the web site, Access To Insight. There, Bhikkhu Thanissaro teaches that the doctrine of anatta is not actually true. He says it is only a device to remove stress from our thinking and thereby smooth the progress of meditation. This part of the venerable's teaching is entirely, and dangerously, misguided. I wonder if this explains why you disagree when I say desire is the cause of our problems and it cannot lead the way out. You seem to be saying that we somehow have control over reality. This is at odds with the Dhamma that says the world is composed purely of conditioned namas and rupas (arising and falling away at extraordinary speed). Apart from those conditioned dhammas (and with the exception of Nibbana) there is nothing - no people, no controller, no sun, no chariots, nothing. The Abhidhamma that I have been learning lists, classifies and explains all of the various dhammas. It is entirely consistent with the other parts of the Dhamma and is found, not only in the Abhidhamma Pitaka, but also in the suttas and (I think) in the Vinaya. In order that we can both know what we are talking about, would you please expand upon your comments above, and briefly describe your understanding of anatta. Thanks, Ken H 43054 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 7, 2005 6:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 - Appliedthinking/Vitakka, Jotipala. Hi Mike, op 06-03-2005 22:49 schreef mnease op mlnease@z...: >> N: I looked at the Thai Co and B.B.'s notes. This passage refers to the >> Buddha when he was a Bodhisatta and commenced the six years of intense >> striving before his enlightenment. Sense pleasures would obstruct his > goal, >> they do not lead to nibbana. > > Sure, likewise malevolence and harming. I also find it interesting that he > was still subject to such thoughts at this point in his life, presumably > because the path had not yet arisen sufficiently to eradicate the latent > defilements even after all those lifetimes of developing the paramis, > bojjhangas etc.. N: He had to develop them to an extraordinary level, so that he could become a Sammaasambudha. It is also a lesson for us that the development is ciira kaala bhaavanaa. Ven. Dhammanando translated the beautiful passage for us about Jotipala who attained the lokiya vipassana ñaa.na which is sankhaarupekkhaa ñaa.na, before the process of enlightenment, thus before anuloma ñaa.na. In the Questions of King Milinda we find good passages on the Bodhisatta (Dilemmas V, 223). As Jotipala, he was born into a family of wrong view. He had accumulated wisdom, but now he had little confidence. As a blazing fire comes into contact with water, it becomes cool and black. Like black coal. This teaches us that what we accumulated is never lost, but we need the right conditions to develop the perfections further. Jotipala met the Buddha Kassapa, he had the right conditions to go on developing the perfections. So, there are ups and downs from life to life and also during one life, just now. I heard Kh. Sujin say on tape: awareness can be accumulated, it will take in a few lifetimes. But even one moment is precious since it is never lost. M: >> In fact the Bodhisatta must have been aware of them, how otherwise would > he >> realize their presence? > > Of course--this awareness would have been after the fact though, I think--in > reviewing. Or do you think these were cases of cittas with awareness taking > immediately fallen-away vitakkas as objects? N:I think both cases. Otherwise he could not acquire tender insight. M: p.s. Do you know the Paa.li for 'intuitive wisdom' in this context? Is it > vipassanaa? N: My Thai text has paññaa. The Co explains that through the wrong vitakka lokiya pañña, the samaapattis (jhaana attainments) and abhiññas decline. Nina. 43055 From: Date: Mon Mar 7, 2005 7:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Larry (and Jon) - A brief reply below in context: In a message dated 3/6/2005 11:11:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > >Howard: "I have no basis for knowing the existence of unobserved rupas." > >Hi Howard and Jon, > >I have been contemplating this from the point of view of how to >discriminate between sense consciousness and sense object for the >purpose of distinguishing between nama and rupa _in experience_ for the >"Purification of View" as outlined in the Visuddhimagga. The idea is not >to only know the names of the various namas and rupas but to identify >them in experience, thereby dividing the amorphous glob of experience >into many parts, thereby facilitating a glimpse of anatta. It is meant >to be an exercise for a relative beginner, say college level, not >something reserved for only Buddhas and arahants. --------------------------- To me, the criterion of "an operation of knowing in some fashion", plus, of course, nibbana, is quite satisfactory for "nama". For "rupa" I understand any experiential content that is not nama. I have no problem distingishing mental from physical for the most part. Fear, for example, is an operation directed towards an object. --------------------------- > >The problem is how to consciously distinguish between consciousness and >non-consciousness. -------------------------- To me, consciousness is the mere presence of content. Somehow I know when that has been in play - there has been content. There is no more to consciousness than the mere presence of an experience as I see it. -------------------------- I think there is no way around reasoning. You can't >be conscious of what you are not conscious of. > >It seems clear to me that abhidhamma's _idea_ is that that color "over >there" is rupa and the experience of the color and the space between eye >and color is eye consciousness for the color and mind consciousness for >the space. But the difference between color and experience of color >isn't really analyzed except to say experience of color has color as >object. [I have a thought on object here, but maybe we should keep it >simple.] > >Here is an interesting quote from Visuddhimagga: > >Vism.XV,41. Individually, however, the eye element should be regarded as >the surface of a drum, the visible-data element as the drumstick, and >the eye-consciousness element as the sound. Likewise, the eye element >should be regarded as the surface of a looking-glass, the visible-object >element as the face, and the eye-consciousness element as the image of >the face. Or else, the eye-element should be regarded as the lower >fire-stick, the visible-data element as the upper fire-stick, and the >eye-consciousness element as the fire. So too in the case of the ear and >so on. ---------------------------- Howard: None of these does it for me. The first is the worst, though. -------------------------- > >Larry: I think one could take either a realist or phenominalist view of >this and it probably doesn't make any difference as long as you come up >with "many parts" and have confidence in the view. ------------------------- I think both views are reasonable and each has its appeal. ------------------------- > >Larry ========================= With metta, Howard 43056 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 7, 2005 11:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Four Great Elements as Foundation /feelings change Hi Charles, op 06-03-2005 21:38 schreef Charles DaCosta op dacostas@P... > N: There are different conditions at work for different realities, that makes > it complex. > C: Complex/compounded N: I am thinking of the twentyfour classes of conditions as taught in the Patthana, not merely of compounded. A difficult term to me. What is compounded: different conditions work together so that a dhamma arises. > C: If by sannaa you mean perception (becoming aware of something), that is the > key player. In the USA there is a saying about some people -- They see through > rose colored glasses. In this case, altering perception to effect feelings. N: The transl of perception could be misleading. I think of remembrance arising with each citta. It marks or remembers the object. Because of it we remember the past, also past feelings, or what we liked or disliked in the past. Ch: If > I am really happy today, every thing worked out extremely well, I don't mind > getting a flat tire on my way home from work. But if the opposite happens, the > flat tire might take me over the edge. N: A good daily life example. See, rupas of the body also are a condition. Nutrition (sufficient food to eat), the right climate (not tired out from tropical heat) also play their part. Pleasant or unpleasant experiences you remember influence your resillience. Our defilements are deeply accumulated and thus we have like when the situation is pleasant, dislike when it is unpleasant. When we feel happy, it is good to know whether this is lobha or not. When there is no kusala such as metta, karuna, daana, siila, bhaavanaa, our happiness is just lobha, or pleasant feeling accompanying lobha. The more we see conditions for our moods, the less will we be taken in by them. We learn not to be overcome by objects, but by understanding there are conditions to, in a way, 'overcome' objects, no matter how unpleasant they are. In the suttas this is said of the arahat. > N: ... Also contact changes all the time. > C: this changing is mainly due to cycle of concocting (thinking, racing > thoughts, inner gossip) and coming back to the object. N: There is a different citta each moment and thus the accompanying contact, a cetasika, is also different. It has the function of contacting the object so that citta experiences it. This happens all the time, also when there is no thinking, no racing thoughts, but seeing, hearing, or life-continuum, bhavangacitta. Nina. 43057 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 7, 2005 11:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Mike and Larry, A good topic. op 07-03-2005 06:04 schreef mnease op mlnease@z...: > Without 'one' to experience I don't see this as a problem--if I understand > it correctly, naama can experience ruupa (as well as naama). I think only > the 'experiencer' needs to be subtracted from the equation for this to make > sense. I'm all for concept and reason in their place but their place is not > in satipa.t.thaana I think. Concept and reason can occur (usually do I > think) afterward and can be very valuable if consistent with dhamma. N: I think also before, we need intellectual understanding first. We have to hear again and again and again that nama and rupa are objects of sati and paññaa, all objects appearing through the six doors, one at a time, also now. We have to know that sati cannot be directed to specific objects. That sati cannot be induced. The more one wants it the less chance for its arising. Nina. 43058 From: suryarao Date: Mon Mar 7, 2005 1:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello everybody THanks a lot Nina for your guidance. Instead of posing question right now, I would prefer to read some and then put it ... Thanks, Sanjay --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Sanjay, > welcome here. Of course, as far as I am concerned, it does not matter that > you are Hindu. > I appreciate your interest in Abhidhamma. <....> 43059 From: suryarao Date: Mon Mar 7, 2005 1:47pm Subject: Re: Hello everybody Hi Sarah, Thanks a lot for such elaborate reply ! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Sanjay, > > --- suryarao wrote: > > > This is Sanjay. > > I stumbled upon this website through some adhidhamma website. I > > liked it so joined. > ... > S: Well, I'm glad you found us and welcome. It's good to know you may have > an interest in abhidhamma too. > ... > > Intro.. I'm Hindu practising vipassana for past 10 years. very > > irregularly though. I have read some books on vipassana. I immensely > > respect the technique. I follow nothing but vipassana so far. > > Presently in US. I pressume my being hindu wont be a problem on this > > group. > ... > S: No problem at all - we're a pretty diverse lot here - all kinds of > backgrounds in terms of religions and nationalities here. Thank you for > introducing yourself. > .... > > Would like to know, what is general discussion here ? Are moderators > > really well learned, ripen in dhamma ? do they advice ? > .... > S: We discuss anything of interest to those posting (like yourself) and > relevant to the homepage description. Vipassana - the meaning in the texts > and the technique you refer to are hot topics for a start;-). > > The moderators are not 'really well learned, ripen in dhamma'. They are > jsut ordinary folk who like to discuss these hot topics or any others with > friends here. Sometimes they advise, sometimes they are advised, sometimes > neither;-). > .... I take it as a modest gesture and looking forward learn more here. > > I really liked some of the files kept here, esp adhidhamma.pdf one. > > Immensely informative. Thanks. > > > > I hope to get ispiration to work diligently on the path of dhamma. > ... > S: Please post any extract you find particularly helpful. I'm not sure > exactly what you're referring to. > > With your keen interest in Abhidhamma, I'd also suggest: > > 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life' by Nina Van Gorkom, one of our active members: > http://www.abhidhamma.org/ > > (Also any other materials at this site). > > Also, in the files section, take a look at "Useful Posts', a selection by > the moderators from the archives. See if any topics are of special > interest such as `Abhidhamma-beginners' etc. (You may not be a beginner, I > don't know!!). Oh, try `Vipassana' too. Yes I'm still abhidhamm-beginner... > > Anyway, I'd be glad if you'd let us know if you have any questions or > topics you'd like to discuss further. This is the best way to learn. > > Thanks again for introducing yourself, > > Metta, > > Sarah Metta ... Sanjay 43060 From: Date: Mon Mar 7, 2005 4:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Mike, I didn't do a very good job of articulating this problem. Let me try again. In order to distinguish between nama and rupa it is necessary to distinguish between the color rupa and sense consciousness. When we experience a color what is the color rupa and what is the sense consciousness? If the color is the color rupa how do we know that? I am taking the view that the color we experience is eye consciousness and this eye consciousness is a mirror image of the color rupa. Thus rupa is not directly known in the same way feeling is directly known. It can only be inferred. Suppose we are color blind. Eye consciousness experiences a color that is not there. A red rupa is experienced as a brown eye consciousness. If the color experience were a rupa then rupa would be an experience like feeling is an experience and eye consciousness would be something like attention or perhaps mere luminescence. I think it is possible that luminescence is a quality of consciousness, but this does not preclude color-as-consciousness from being luminescence. If you think rupa is inert matter then you are a realist and you need reason to understand rupa. If you think rupa is an experience in itself, like feeling, then you can "know" rupa directly, without reason, simply by being conscious of it (insofar as consciousness is knowing). Again, the two views are: 1) color experience is rupa, 2) color experience is eye consciousness. I believe the paragraph below from Visuddhimagga supports the "color experience is eye consciousness" view. Some could argue that sutta supports the "color experience is rupa" view. Vism.XV,41. Individually, however, the eye element should be regarded as the surface of a drum, the visible-data element as the drumstick, and the eye-consciousness element as the sound. Likewise, the eye element should be regarded as the surface of a looking-glass, the visible-object element as the face, and the eye-consciousness element as the image of the face. Or else, the eye-element should be regarded as the lower fire-stick, the visible-data element as the upper fire-stick, and the eye-consciousness element as the fire. So too in the case of the ear and so on. Larry 43061 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 7, 2005 8:46pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 140 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(j) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** Both the Visuddhimagga and the Atthasåliní use similes in order to explain the difference between vitakka and vicåra. Vitakka is gross and vicåra is more subtle. We read in the Visuddhimagga ( IV, 89): * "… Applied thought (vitakka) is the first compact of the mind in the sense that it is both gross and inceptive, like the striking of a bell. Sustained thought (vicåra) is the act of keeping the mind anchored, in the sense that it is subtle with the individual essence of continued pressure, like the ringing of the bell…" * Several more similes are used in order to explain the difference between vitakka and vicåra. Vitakka is like the bird’s spreading out its wings when about to soar into the air, and vicåra is quiet, like the bird’s planing with outspread wings. When we read this simile we may think that vitakka has to come first and that then vicåra follows. However, this simile is used in order to show that vitakka and vicåra have different characteristics. Another simile the Visuddhimagga and the Atthasåliní use is the following : vitakka is like the bee’s diving towards a lotus and vicåra is like the bee’s gyrating around the lotus after it has dived towards it. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43062 From: Tep Sastri Date: Mon Mar 7, 2005 8:50pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Eight Conditions for the Arising of Panna/ Vera Sutta Dear Sarah, Jon and Nina - I really appreciate your thoughtful discussion on 'sotapattiyanga' that make it quite educational. Nina's point on the complementariness, and jon's emphasis on the difference between the "factors _of_ stream-entry" and the "factors _for_ stream-entry" are very good. Sarah, below are two links that should lead you to the suttas I mentioned earlier. The translation might not be as smooth as Bhikkhu Bodhi's, but it is very accurate (when compared to the Thai version). http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an10-092.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/index-subject.html#s Kindest regards to all, Tep May your persistence be aroused and not lax; your mindfulness established and not confused; your body calm and not aroused; your mind centered and unified. ========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Tep, (Jon & Nina), > > Thank you (and also Jon & Nina) for your helpful messages. I still don ¡¦t > have the sutta (Vera sutta) in front of me and couldn¡¦t follow the > reference ANX,92 to find it in the PTS transl of AN. (pls give me a link > anytime if you can do so easily as the titles are often different in > translations). > 43063 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 0:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello One and All...Thank you Hi Ian, You really gave a great intro - many thanks indeed. Most informative. I also appreciated your pre-empting of my usual prompts. --- Ian Allan Andrews wrote: <....> > I will, on occasion, avail myself of Jonothan's offer to "put up [my] > own thoughts/questions for discussion" as I am interested in the > practical aspect of the application of abhidhamma to one's everyday > life. Noticing the minutiae of consciousness and catching oneself > before making a mistake can be a daunting task. And the abhidhamma is > here to help and assist us with this task. .... S: Please elaborate further, if you care to, of course. I am especially interested in what you mean by the 'daunting task'. Any language would be fine. ..... >This is what I see as the > most important aspect of studying the abhidhamma -- its practical > application. Although just being able to understand what is being > discussed (being able to identify and acknowledge its reality within > our consciousness) can be equally as daunting, as thoughts are as > fleeting as the breath. ... S: Again I'm curious to understand more about your meaning here. You see, you kindly answered the simple questions already, such as about where you live, so now I ask the difficult ones;-). Like the others, I look forward to any of your further input. A big welcome. Metta, Sarah ====== 43064 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 1:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Water, Life, and Death Hi Andrew T (& Maya), I found your post to Maya very moving and beautifully written too. --- Andrew wrote: > > "I am nothing but the constituents of the clinging aggregates that > is subject to change and unsatisfaction." > > Well, Maya, here's my theory ... I think the source of your > fascination with water may be found in the little quotation at the > very end of your email: the Buddha's teaching of anatta (no-self)! > When we truly realise that there is no permanent, lasting and > directing self, we see the world very differently. It's as if "we" > are just aggregates bobbing along in flowing water, having no control > over where we flow to. …. S: Yes, well said. And here, of course, is also the reason we resist the teaching of anatta and fight it with all the ammunition we have at our disposal until satipatthana begins to develop. Of course I was reminded of the description of sati recently which Larry and Nina posted: “Text Vis. : It has the characteristic of not wobbling. [64] Note 64 (from the Tiika). 'Apilaapana' ("not wobbling") is the steadying of an object, the remembering and not forgetting it, keeping it as immovable as a stone instead of letting it go bobbing about like a pumpkin in water'.” …. S: So when there is the growth of sati, the aggregates are not ‘out of control’ as anatta might suggest to some, but slowly there will be a growth in the guarding of the sense doors. So the irony is, that it is only by understanding more about the conditioned nature of aggregates that have no control and bob or wobble around at the mercy of the flows of life, that any real steadying or non-wobbling can develop! > You mentioned that you had been depressed. That, of course, happens > to all of us in this dukkha-ridden human existence. The Dhamma > points out that living in a sphere where we experience both happy and > unhappy can be much more advantageous than living in an ever happy > god realm. … S: More of your interesting and wise comments snipped. Before Nina mentioned a passage in the commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha which indicates the causes of happiness are: a) happiness accompanying lobha (attachment) b) being born with patisandhi citta (and thereby bhavanga cittas) accompanied by happiness and c) being a person who by nature does not think deeply. So often we just wish to be happy, but this is usually just a craving for pleasant feeling, i.e. attachment. …. <…> > For this reason, I think it is a mistake to believe that we *can* > direct the waves and currents in the present moment and explain this > supposed ability by saying "that's my cetana at work!" Wrong. > That's conditions at work. Many times when we are happy and calm, it > *looks like* "we" are practising mindfulness or metta or whatever. > That we are directing the flow of our consciousness. But that's only > an illusion. A water illusion? > > Our hope is to understand, not to direct. … S: Very good. Yes, the big water illusion;-). So, Andrew, I look forward to any more of your reflections, reminders and assistance with all our ‘troubled waters’. Metta, Sarah ====== 43065 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 1:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Citta Hi James & Connie, You make a great team! --- connie wrote: > James: Hmmm…that's interesting. So, he was a self-proclaimed sotapanna > and > a bit of a drama queen so you naturally think I have a psychic > connection > to him. Are you trying to tell me something? LOL! > > Connie: I think we're all drama queens, keeping our own story lines > going, > stuck in our views and their consequences. ... S: So true....drama queens and fellow stumblers... So why not do us a favour and post extracts from BB's 'Critical examination...' and discuss further together. Yes, I enjoy the discussions, especially when I'm not the one being psyched or accused of being condescending, smiling too much or whatever for a change..LOL and j/k, James! Attachment to viewpoints is of course of no use to anyone. On the otherhand some views are right and some are not, surely? The ariyans have no doubt about this at all, though many ignorant worldlings would call their confidence in what is true to be mere attachments. When we read in the suttas and especially the oft-quoted Sutta Nipata verses about the need to give up all views, it is the wrong views we hold that are being referred to. Anyway, I wasn't intending to really join in. Why not compare BB's and Nanavira's takes on D.O. and discuss in depth? You can keep us entertained and educated at the same time. Also on citta vithi (process of cittas), magga and phala cittas and anything else, if you don't have the stomach for the Vinaya this time round. ... > BBodhi's answer to "Clearing the Path" is in the mail. ... S: I look forward to both your reflections. Metta, Sarah p.s Oh yes, Connie, Simon Says!! James, I passed on your kind comments to my mother and she sends you her warm regards. She knows who you are because she read some of your letters last year in Switzerland. ================================ 43066 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 1:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Adinava e Nekkhamma Hi Enio, --- Enio César wrote: <...> > The Buddhist teachings are very vast. It doesn't seem to be possible to > study them without a route. So, to initiate my studies, I chose the > route given by the Buddha Himself. > The site "Access to Insight" has a Brazilian version "Acesso ao > Insight", where the original site in English has been translating into > Portuguese. From there I copied the Portuguese version of the > anupubbi-katha and now I am searching material about each topic of it. > It's not an easy task, because my English is really very bad and > sometimes it's not easy to distinguish the different views of the > various vehicles and schools. ... S: You remind me about Michael Beisert (sp?) who runs the Brazilian site. He was a very active member here for a while and I really enjoyed my discussions with him. We ended up in the Kathavatthu (Points of Controversy). If you have any contact, please tell him he's missed and he'll probably tell you about all our fixed views;-). Your English seems good. Could you perhaps raise one of these topics from anupubbi-katha (gradual way) at a time with a mention of the materials you have. We could then discuss each one and add more material, perhaps. I'm still trying to understand what it is you're doing exactly, so pls elaborate. Sounds an interesting project. Just a simple phrase like 'draw near' to the teacher or teachings can carry a deep meaning. Is this the kind of thing? ... > I have been working first with the concepts of each topic of the > anupubbi-katha, complementing them with clarifying texts found on the > web. These two topics I left last, because it's not easy to find > material about them. ... As, I said, let's make it more of a joint project. I'm sure some of the knowledgable friends here will be happy to give links or references to further texts if you can briefly introduce each topic. You'll be doing us all a favour. Metta, Sarah ===== 43067 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 3:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Report --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Htoo - snip-- ====================== Wonderful. It sounds like there was both calm and significant clarity. Was this a state you "fell into", or was it during meditation? With metta, Howard ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Howard, Thanks for your reply. It was during the session. I detected calmness. There also was clarity. But I do not think there is any insight apart from the knowledge that I knew 'that I knew clearly the state'. I think it is a facilitating stage. But I do not think it is absorption. With much respect, Htoo Naing 43068 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 3:57am Subject: Dhamma Thread (275) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 31 planes of existence. These are called 31 realms or 31 bhumis. Human realm is just one of 31 realms. 4 apaya bhumis or 4 woeful planes of existence and 1 human realm or manussa bhumi have been discussed in foregoing posts. There are 6 kama deva realms and 20 brahma deva realms or 20 brahma realms. 6 kama deva realms are part of 11 kama bhumis or 11 sensuous planes of existence or 11 realms of sensuous sphere. 11 sensuous sphere realms are 4 woeful, 1 human, and 6 deva realms. After having discussed on 5 realms the remaining 6 realms will be dealt with here in this post. There are 6 deva realms. All these 6 realms are sensuous sphere or the domain of sensuous beings. That is all beings in these 6 realms are very fond of sensuous things and if they are not mindful or if they are not of the followers of The Buddha's Path, these devas in all these 6 realms will just follow sensuous matters rather than Dhamma. If one considers deeply he or she may become shocked (sanvega) that being reborn in devas realms is not better than being reborn in human realm. Because devas are subjected to forget. This happens because of the sensuous things that they experience. Deva realms are filled with sensuous things and they do not have the same things that we people in this world on this earth in this human realm are being faced. In deva realms there is no disease or human-like sufferings even though they have to suffer very great despair in their dying period. Most devas forget to follow The Buddha teachings. Devas are in separate realms from our human realm even though they occasionally visit our human realm. Their visits are more frequent when there is a Buddha in human realm. Otherwise most will not come to human realm. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. 43069 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 4:28am Subject: Dhamma Thread (276) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 6 deva realms. They are in hierchy structure. That is one is higher than another. These 6 deva realms are 1. catumahaaraajika deva bhumi 2. taavatimsaa deva bhumi 3. yaamaa deva bhumi 4. tusitaa deva bhumi 5. nimmanarati deva bhumi 6. paranimmita-vassavati deva bhumi The lowest among these 6 deva realms is catumahaaraajika deva bhumi. Here it will be explained. Catu means 'four'. Maha means 'great'. Raaja (raja) means 'king'. Raajika means 'at where king something ..' 'in where king something..' 'related to king's dwelling or king's activities'. Catumahajarika means 'where 4 great deva kings dwell and rule. This realm or bhumi is quite close to human realm and there are deva who are in close connection with human beings even though human beings may or may not know their existence. Tavatimsa is made up of the words 'ta' and 'tim'. Ta means 'three' and 'tim' means 'thirty'. So tavatimsa means '33'. There are 6 deva realms even though there maybe different deva population. Even if this name 'tavatimsa' did not arise there is a deva realm which is 'tavatimsa deva bhumi'. Once Bodhisatta was a human being and there he did good deeds along with 33 people. After their death in human realm all were reborn at 'tavatimsa deva bhumi'. Because of this its name become 'tavatimsa deva bhumi'. Above these 2 deva realms is yaamaa deva bhumi, which does have higher sensuality than 2 lower ones. Above this deva bhumi is tusitaa deva bhumi and it is higher than yaamaa deva bhumi. Catumaharajika devas do have fixed lifespan. They have 500 deva-years to live once they are reborn in catumaharajika deva realm. Higher and higher realms of deva have 4 times lifespan of their immediate underneath deva realm. Above tusitaa deva realm is nimmanarati deva realm. Nimmita means 'created one'. Nimma means 'creation' and narati means 'enjoy'. These nimmanarati devas enjoy their own creation and they are free of 'the suffering of lower deva realms'. Paranimmita-vassavati deva realm is the highest of all 6 deva realms. Para means 'others'. These devas enjoy 'the sensualities that are created by lower deva realm called nimmanarati devas'. Devas do not have 'satti' or bravery. Lower devas dare not look up higher devas unless the higher ones allow. The exception is the lowest 2 deva realms. This is one of the points why tavatimsa is the place of deva meeting. Catumaharajika devas can access tavatimsa deva realm. But both catumaharajika devas and tavatimsa deva do have access to higher deva realms while all other devas have access to their lower deva realms. Sakka is the king of tavatimsa deva realms and he also has the power to rule catumaharajika devas. 4 catumaharika deva kings have to report to the tavatimsa deva king 'Sakka' on a regular basis. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. 43070 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 4:58am Subject: Dhamma Thread (277) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 6 deva realms. These 6 realms are sensuous sphere like human being and 4 woeful planes of existence. There are beings or sattas in these 6 realms. When dhammas are seen there is no being at all. But there are devas in these realms. They are reborn in these 6 realms. How were they reborn? There are 19 states of mind or 19 cittas that serve as rebirth consciousness or linking-consciousness or patisandhi citta. They are 1 duggati patisandhi or 1 woeful rebirth, 9 kama patisandhi or 9 happy destination rebirths, 5 rupa patisandhi or 5 fine-material- beings' rebirth, and 4 arupa patisandhi or non-material-beings' rebirth. Among them 9 kama patisandhi cittas are cittas of devas when they are reborn at thier respective realm. These 9 cittas are 1 upekkha- santirana citta of kusala origin and 8 mahavipaka cittas. Upekkha-santirana citta has been repeatedly explained in Dhamma Thread posts. At any time, anyone is encouraged to ask for further explanation. This upekkha santirana citta can serve as rebirth-consciousness for the lowest deva realm and not for tavatimsa-&-above deva realm. These devas have the least power unlike other devas who have deva-power. 8 patisandhis are 8 mahavipaka cittas. These 8 mahavipaka cittas are the results of their corresponding mahakusala cittas. 8 kama patisandhi or 8 mahavipaka cittas are 1.somanassa saha gatam nana sampayuttam asankharika citta 2.somanassa saha gatam nana sampayuttam sasankharika citta 3.somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika citta 4.somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika citta 5. upekkha saha gatam nana sampayuttam asankharika citta 6. upekkha saha gatam nana sampayuttam sasankharika citta 7. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika citta 8. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika citta Somanassa is made up of 'so' 'mana' and 'assa'. 'So' means good, agreeable. Mana means 'mind'. Assa shows possession. Manassa means 'of mind' 'mental'. Somanassa means 'mental joy' 'agreeable mind state or agreeable mental state'. The first 4 cittas have 'joy' or 'piti' as a mental factor. Upekkha is made up of 'upa' and 'ekkha'. Upa means 'not extreme'. Ekkha means 'feeling'. So upekkha means 'not good feeling' 'not bad feeling' or 'indifferent feeling'. It is a subtle feeling and hard to know. The latter 4 cittas have upekkha vedana or 'indifferent feeling' as a mental factor. Saha means 'in parallel' and gata means 'to go'. So somanassa saha gatam means 'along with joy' or 'along with agreeable mental feeling'. Nana means 'wisdom'. Sampayutta is made up of 'sam' and 'yutta'. Sam means 'well' 'thoroughly' and 'yutta' means 'along with' or 'co-arising'. So nana-sampayutta means mixed with wisdom. This means that panna cetasika or 'wisdom mental factor' arises with citta inseparably. Vippayutta means the opposite of sampayutta and so nana-vipayutta does not have wisdom. Sankhara means 'preparation' 'influencing' 'reforming' 'shaping'. Sankharika means 'being shaped' 'being influenced' 'being prompted'. Asankharika means 'direct opposite of sankharika. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. 43071 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 3:23am Subject: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: Hi, Htoo Butting in here also ;-)) > >What is in my mind is that 'if javana cittas are not kiriya cittas, > >they do have kamma effect'. > > > >But your thoughts are that if there is no kamma patha there is no > >rebirth related to that akusala. > > > >I sense both are talking on the same subject. > > > >When I approach 'kamma' while writing Dhamma Thread I will discuss it. I look forward to this. I find this a difficult area. My (tentative) understanding is that javana cittas that are kusala or akusala may have effect in one of 3 ways-- - they condition rebirth (that is, if the cetana is kamma patha) - they condition only vipaka citta through the 5 sense-doors (that is, if some but not all of the factors of kamma patha are present) - they do not condition vipaka (that is, none of the factors of kamma patha are present) but are accumulated as part of the anusaya (and so may in due course be of a strength such that they condition rebirth or vipaka of the 5 sense-doors). I'd be interested to know whether this is how you understand it too. Jon ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Jon, It is not butting in. A good idea to participate in deed. I think I need to learn more about kamma. Because Sarah and I seem not to agree regarding this point. I think the seat of our understanding on these specific points is the angle of view. Conventionally if someone is not committing anything there is no reason to be reborn. Once committed, then there will be rebirth. The problem is the 'word' here ''committing''. What is committing? For me as I do not take consideration into rebirth as only vipaka it understand that 'committing' that I use is 'non-arahats' javana' that is non-kiriya javana. What Sarah discussed with me was 'conventional topic kamma'. That is kamma for average people. I do not know your third proposal. That is why I said above I need to learn more. With much respect, Htoo Naing PS: I have been busy these days. Apology for delayed reply 43072 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 3:35am Subject: Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Dear Jon, Thanks for your participation. Please see below. You wrote: Hi, Htoo Hope you don't mind if I butt in here ;-)) -------- Htoo: I do not assume butting in. -------- Jon: I don't think we can say that cittas that arise while doing this or that are kusala. The most we can say is that certain kinds of action are likely to involve a degree of kusala. But the reality of the particular case may be different. Kusala is of 3 kinds only: dana, sila or bhavana; or of 10 kinds as the punna-kiriya-vatthu. In the case of school learning, I see no reason the think that this should be kusala any more than any other ordinary, everyday activity. -------- Htoo: I was thinking on the matter of learning of monks. When they read some dhammas what are their javana cittas? I do not think simple learning is akusala unless they develop attachment while learning. --------- Jon: Well, I would just say that there is no necessary connection between 'deep thought' (a form of concentration) and the arising of kusala citta. ------------ Htoo: I agree. But it is difficult to say. ---------- Jon: Of the 7 jhaana factors (factors that conduce to concentration on a given subject matter), most are cetasikas that arise with both kusala and akusala cittas, and one is an exclusively aksuala cetasika. There are of course many references to concentration in the suttas and other texts, but I would see those references as being to concentration of the kusala kind, and not as supporting the idea that concentration tends to be kusala. Jon ---------- Htoo: I think it is better to leave 'Tiger Wood' here and we move to Dhamma. But those who do not have much demerit would not face any bad result as they are not doing bad things. ( Playing golf is not bad things even though it is not kamma patha kusala.) With much respect, Htoo Naing PS: I have been busy these days and I have to reply this at a later date. 43073 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 11:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Adinava e Nekkhamma Hi Sarah and Enio, A good idea. The Buddha gave a gradual teaching to general Siiha, beginning to help him see the danger of akusala and the benefit of kusala. It shows the Buddha's compassion, to be so thoughtful of what a person can take in first. Only later on he came to the deep teaching. It is good to reflect on this and apply in our life all these points the Buddha gave as a gradual teaching. Enio, I am still missing Michael, tell him. Nina. op 08-03-2005 10:38 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > I have been working first with the concepts of each topic of the >> anupubbi-katha, complementing them with clarifying texts found on the >> web. These two topics I left last, because it's not easy to find >> material about them. > ... > As, I said, let's make it more of a joint project. I'm sure some of the > knowledgable friends here will be happy to give links or references to > further texts if you can briefly introduce each topic. You'll be doing us > all a favour. 43074 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 11:45am Subject: Re: The Citta Hi Sarah, Sarah: So why not do us a favour and post extracts from BB's 'Critical examination...' and discuss further together. Yes, I enjoy the discussions, especially when I'm not the one being psyched or accused of being condescending, smiling too much or whatever for a change..LOL and j/k, James! James: ;-) I read this post to a friend and he said, "Gosh that sounds like a woman who is fed up with you!" Hmmm…remember my off- list e-mail? ;-) Anyway, I may do as you suggest but I am still reading BB's critical examination (and taking issue with certain points). After that, I will probably read `Clearing the Path' to look more closely at the other side. This is a complicated issue so if I do decide to post about it, which I may not, it won't be for a while. Sarah: Attachment to viewpoints is of course of no use to anyone. On the otherhand some views are right and some are not, surely? James: Oh no, I am not going to get into it with you until you are less fed up with me. ;-)) Metta, James 43075 From: Joop Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 11:47am Subject: [dsg] Re: Water, Life, and Death Hallo Andrew T, Sarah, Maya (and all), The diagnosis of Andrew and Sarah surprised me: --- Andrew wrote: > "I am nothing but the constituents of the clinging aggregates that > is subject to change and unsatisfaction." > Well, Maya, here's my theory ... I think the source of your > fascination with water may be found in the little quotation at the > very end of your email: the Buddha's teaching of anatta (no-self)! > When we truly realise that there is no permanent, lasting and > directing self, we see the world very differently. It's as if "we" > are just aggregates bobbing along in flowing water, having no control > over where we flow to. …. Sarah: Yes, well said. And here, of course, is also the reason we resist the teaching of anatta and fight it with all the ammunition we have at our disposal until satipatthana begins to develop. I think the Abhidhamma (and its commentaries) can not be used in this way as an instrument to make psychotherapeutic diagnostics (and therapies) ! And I'm glad you are not depressed any more, you have written on a poetic way about it. Metta Joop 43076 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 2:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Thanks for your contributions, see you later. F/W from Hugo with his permission From: "Hugo" Hello Sarah, wrote: > I hope you don't mind, but I'm replying to part of your kind note(sent > off-list)on DSG and sending you a copy in case you're not following. No problem. > My main objection to what you wrote for your reflection > during this period was the following: > > I had repeated something along the lines of my favourite mantra and you > then replied: > > "I know, but we can't forget in what situation we are now and that we need > to work from where we are, so we need to take provisions to make the > current situation good enough so we can work on the final result." > > It's like you are saying, yes, I agree with the teachings BUT, self still > needs to do its job and there are still all these situations no matter how > much we talk about dhammas. Also, it may seem that we've 'perceived namas > coming and going', but isn't this just thinking about them coming and > going? I don't think I am saying exactly that. I am not saying that "self still needs to do its job", I say that IF "you" see a self, then "you" have bigger problems than one who doesn't see a self, thus "you" can't "use" the same "approach" than the people who don't see a self. That's why I keep bringing examples of little kids and alcoholics because they see "less clearly" than you or me and "they" strongly cling to a self, at least in these matters. See the difference? My suspicion is that you forgot what is to behave controlled by a self, thus you only advocate just "watching namas and rupas arise and cease". It is like when you are a kid, then a teenager, then an adult. By the time you are an adult you forgot how kids feel thus you keep in insisting that they do this or that, or you get angry because they want to see the same T.V. commercial 10 times!!, you forgot that you had similar quirks. Just remember when you were a teenager you probably said, "I won't do that with my kids" (criticizing some behavior of your parents), but once you are a parent, you start doing EXACTLY that kind of behavior that you criticized before. In summary it all depends on what is your level of understanding, what you can see, what you can do. Jon also misinterpreted our disagreement (don't know if you have been following that thread), please take a look at the last couple of messages of that thread. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/42918 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/42921 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/42956 But don't tease me into coming back to discuss, otherwise Nina may die from a laugh attack. :-) > Btw, there have been several posts written to you directly or indirectly > since you started your sabbatical. I have them noted, so if you haven't > been following and you want me to give you the numbers off-list, let me > know. One was Jon's yest on Vism and one was Ken H's 'Popeye' post with a > few other one-liners in between;-). I saw them, I liked them, it showed the different "lines of thought". Greetings, -- Hugo 43077 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 2:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Thanks for your contributions, see you later. 2nd message from Hugo f/w with his permission. Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 11:57:45 -0500 From: "Hugo" View Contact Details Hey, Sarah, complementing my previous message to you. I just thought of an excellent real-life example. My little kids "sees" dragons. Yes! He is playing normally and then he comes running like crazy, or he starts to cry and scream. He says that there is a dragon in the room, we (dad and mom) of course don't see anything, we ask him for the details he tells us that the dragon is green and yellow. We used "your approach", we told him that dragons doesn't exist, that there is nothing. Well, he keeps seeing them, still getting afraid, still crying, still suffering. We used another approach, dad and/or mom would "scare the dragon off", so we made the theatrical scene of telling the dragon to go off and leave us alone. It didn't work, he still sees them and is still scared. We used another approach, we asked for some more details about the dragon, then we told him to just wave and say "hello" to him, that the dragon is just a friend, he is not hurting us. Now, he is no longer that scared, still he sees the dragon and is still scared but not as much as before, and one time, my wife told me the following story. She called my son from her room, he came out from his room and passed in front of the stairs, he stopped looked down the stairs and waved his hand, smiled and said "hello", my wife was shocked, because there was nobody downstairs, so she asked my son to whom he had said "hello", my son replied "to the dragon". See? If I just kept telling my son that the dragons doesn't exist and there is nothing, I wouldn't have helped him in relieving his suffering, so I did something to stop that pain and of course I will keep working on understand that what he sees is not real, and this event with the dragon will help me as an example for when he grows up because when he starts "following the self" I can use the anecdote of the dragon and tell him that sometimes the mind plays this trick of creating things that look and feel real but they aren't. Greetings, -- Hugo 43078 From: Andrew Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 3:24pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Water, Life, and Death --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Hallo Andrew T, Sarah, Maya (and all), > > The diagnosis of Andrew and Sarah surprised me: > > --- Andrew wrote: > > "I am nothing but the constituents of the clinging aggregates that > > is subject to change and unsatisfaction." > > Well, Maya, here's my theory ... I think the source of your > > fascination with water may be found in the little quotation at the > > very end of your email: the Buddha's teaching of anatta (no- self)! > > When we truly realise that there is no permanent, lasting and > > directing self, we see the world very differently. It's as if "we" > > are just aggregates bobbing along in flowing water, having no > control > > over where we flow to. > …. > Sarah: Yes, well said. And here, of course, is also the reason we > resist the > teaching of anatta and fight it with all the ammunition we have at our > disposal until satipatthana begins to develop. > > I think the Abhidhamma (and its commentaries) can not be used in this > way as an instrument to make psychotherapeutic diagnostics (and > therapies) ! > And I'm glad you are not depressed any more, you have written on a > poetic way about it. Hi Joop I think it's good to be surprised from time to time but I get the feeling you think I have done something wrong. Problem is: I don't understand exactly what you are concerned about. Perhaps you might like to elaborate some time? Best wishes Andrew 43079 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 8:41pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 141 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(k) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** Like vitakka, vicåra arises with all kåmåvacara cittas, cittas of the sense-sphere, except the dvi-pañcaviññåùas (the sensecognitions of seeing, hearing, etc.). When seeing-consciousness, for example, arises, it does not need vitakka nor does it need vicåra, because seeing-consciousness just sees. The other cittas of the eye-door process need vitakka which directs them to visible object and they need vicåra which keeps them occupied with visible object. It is the same in the case of the other sense-door processes. Vitakka and vicåra arise in sense-door processes as well as in mind-door processes, and they also accompany cittas which do not arise in processes (1). *** 1) For details about the cittas accompanied by vitakka and vicåra, see Appendix 3. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43080 From: Waters Illusion Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 9:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bluejean Buddha: Evan Evan, I'm quoting from this site http://buddhistfaith.tripod.com/pureland_sangha/ id41.html Personally for me, praying is like relearning or rereading what the buddha has said, his teachings. It is like reading a good book, you always learn something new no matter how many times you read it. Metta, Maya ______________________________ The Purpose of Buddhist Prayer Buddhist prayer is a practice to awaken our inherent inner capacities of strength, compassion and wisdom rather than to petition external forces based on fear, idolizing, and worldly and/or heavenly gain. Buddhist prayer is a form of meditation; it is a practice of inner reconditioning. Buddhist prayer replaces the negative with the virtuous and points us to the blessings of Life. Inspirational For Buddhists, prayer expresses an aspiration to pull something into one's life, like some new energy or purifying influence and share it with all beings. Likewise, prayer inspires our hearts towards wisdom and compassion for others and ourselves. It allows us to turn our hearts and minds to the beneficial, rousing our thoughts and actions towards Awakening. If we believe in something enough, it will take hold of us. In other words, believing in it, we will become what we believe. Our ability to be touched like this is evidence of the working of Great Compassion within us. What's more, it can a function as a form of self-talking or self-therapy in which one mentally talks through a problem, or talks through it aloud, in the hope that some new insight will come or a better decision can be made. Prayer therefore frequently has the function of being part of a decision-making process. Everywhere and Anytime The wonderful thing about prayer practice is that we can do it everywhere and anytime, transforming the ordinary and mundane into the Path of Awakening. Prayer enriches our lives with deep spiritual connection and makes every moment special, manifesting the Pure Land here and now. Pray for all living things. Lord Buddha taught to have compassion for all animals as well as human. We all have Buddha-nature. 43081 From: Waters Illusion Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 9:51pm Subject: Re: Bluejean Buddha: Rob Dear Rob, Wow...that's neat! Glad to know I'm not the only indonesian-speaking person in this group. I've been to Borobudur but that was when I was very little. I faguely remember it...maybe I'll go again sometime in the future. ~Maya 43082 From: Waters Illusion Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 10:04pm Subject: Re: Water, Life, and Death: Andrew Andrew, Thank you for your elaborate email... An interesting connection you make! I've never thought of it myself. I've always considered water to be the way my mind works...or the nature of the mind. When water is calm, the reflection one sees is clear...similarly, when our mind is calm, we're able to think clearly. On the contrary when water is undulating, the reflection we see is distorted, similarly when our minds are chaotic, we can't think clearly. For some reason I find my thoughts feelings, and personality to embody the nature and characteristics of water. I'm very adaptable like water, able to take the shape of its container...on the down side, I'm easily swayed by my environment and people's opinion. I seem to be walking in and out of depression, feeling like I've lost my motivation. I have some ideas why...but my situation can't be 100% solved, I can only cope with it. I appreciate your effort to help...thank you. With Metta, Maya 43083 From: Waters Illusion Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 10:09pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Water, Life, and Death Dear Sarah, Thank you for your answer. I think you are right, it seems like my sati is weak and I am trying to strengthen it. Perhaps too much insight and not enough sati? I will however take a satipatthana course this june...hopefully that'll help me. -maya 43084 From: Waters Illusion Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 10:19pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Water, Life, and Death Joop, Andrew, Sarah, and all... thank you again, for your comments...i really do appreciate them. sorry if i responded late. ~Maya 43085 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 0:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Htoo- deva vehicles, rotating razors, busy demons & ariyan maths Dear Htoo, --- htootintnaing wrote: > You are now up to date to Dhamma Thread. This is because I had to > stop this week. Otherwise further 5 or 6 messages would be there on > the forum. ... S: Good to see you back. I appreciate your honest replies to other questions here, which I'll leave for now. > I just re-phrase the writing. > > It is in 4th chapter called vithi: > > 48. ''Asikkhaanam catucattaalisa sikkhaana muddise. Chappannaasaa' > vasesaanam, catupannaasa sambhavaa. Ayamettha puggala bhedo.'' > > a) asikkha or arahats have catucattaalisa [44 cittas] > b) sikkha or sotapatti-maggatthana to anagami-phalatthana chapannaasa > [56 cittas] > c) avasesaanam [4 puthujanas-tihetu,dvihetu,ahetu-ku,ahetu-aku] > catupannaasa [54 cittas]. > > This is what the small text says. But I recalculat them and posted. > > It is good of you that you respond in this matter. ... S: Right, I’m with you and I’m looking at the text and commentary. In B. Bodhi’s translation of the text, he adds helpful charts by U Silananda and there is one at this section with the various breakdowns. However, just as I was about to copy part of it, I notice there are a couple of small discrepancies between the chart and the commentary notes. From the commentary notes: a) arahants [44 cittas] – namely the 23 sense-sphere vipaka cittas, 20 kiriya cittas, arahant’s phala citta b) sikkha (trainees) [56 cittas] “occurring according to circumstances”- namely 23 sense-sphere vipaka citas, 2 avajjana (adverting), 21 kusala, 7 akusala. The 33 cittas excluded (i.e of total 89 cittas) are: 18 kiriya javana citas of the arahant only, 5 akusala cittas accompanied by wrong view and doubt, arahant’s magga and phala cittas. “However, differentiating, for stream-enterers and for once-returners there are [51 cittas]; for non-returners, [49 cittas]...” (S:this is where CMA’s Guide and U Silananda’s chart give [50] and [48] instead- I’m not sure what the discrepancy is – one wholesome citta, I think. Maybe RobM or Connie can help sort it out.) c) puthujanas (worldlings) [54 cittas] “occur according to circumstances; this is what one should point out without differentiating between the different types of ordinary person.” “However, differentiating, it should be understood that by those with three motivations (i.e 3 roots) exactly [54 cittas]...”; “by those with two motivations (i.e 2 roots) and those without motivations (i.e no roots), excluding the resultants associated with knowledge and the impulsions of absorption, [41 cittas]..”, “by those in the realms of misfortune, excluding just the resultants with two motivations, [37 cittas]....” There is more detail if we need it. I like this concluding comment: “The difference in persons means the difference in the occurrence of consciousness for the persons.” ... > That is why I thank you on behalf of other who are silent here. I > think some active memebers never read Dhamma Threads. Now that you > see my generalisation I can reply the specific point. I think it is > better to start another thread for discussion. Sotapams and anagams > are not the same in terms of possibility of arising of cittas. > Because 2 dosa cittas do not arise in anagams [there are 2 anagams. > One is maggatthana and another is phalatthana]. ... S: Yes, the figure of 56 included all the possible cittas for sikkhas, but none could have all. U.Silananda’s chart also covers the rupavacara and arupavacara cittas for each too. I tend to glaze over at the various numbers, but please let me know if you would like me to check anything anytime in the commentary or U Silananda’s charts. Metta, Sarah ======= 43086 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 1:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo Dear Htoo, Many thanks for your further comments on this thread too. I learn a lot from them and any checking of sources I need to do. --- htootintnaing wrote: > Htoo: > > Here is the reference: > > In the chapter nine of abhidhammatthasangaha called kammatthana it is > written > > 50. 'Upacaara samaadhi, appanaa samaadhi ceti duvidhopi samaadhi > citta visuddhi naama.' > > 51. 'Lakkhana rasa paccappatthaana padatthaana vasena naamaruupa > pariggaho ditthi visuddhi naama.' .... S: First let me give a translation from CMA, p.348, 349: (50) Purification of mind consists of two kinds of concentration, namely: access concentration and absorption concentration. (51) Purification of view is the discernment of mind and matter with respect to their characteristics, functions, manifestations, and proximate causes. .... S:These are under the section of the compendium of insight (vipassanaasangaha) in the text, after the ten insight knowledges have been enumerated. [btw, in BB’s CMA guide to (51), he gives a detailed description about a)the samathayaanika’ and b) the vipassanaayaanika and the point we both agree on with regard to path concentration being the equivalent of access for those who haven’t previously attained jhanas.] The commentary itself states: ***** (50) “It is called purification of consciousness because it is purifying by way of producing a state of consciousness that is free of hindrances, or out of consideration for the fact that is it expounded under the heading of consciousness and is a state of purification.” ***** My own understanding is that whenever we read such comments under the development of vipassana or referring to the visuddhis, the implication is that we’re reading about states of consciousness *with* samma ditthi and the other eightfold path factors. So citta visuddhi refers to degrees of samadhi or right concentration arising with satipatthana If jhana cittas or factors are the object of satipatthana, it is also citta visuddhi. I don’t believe ‘visuddhi’ can be applied to access or absorption concentration when there is any view of jhana cittas or any factors as being self, i.e when it isn’t the development of vipassana. The commentary to the next section adds: ***** (51) “The characteristic is the shared particular nature of dhammas; the property is their possessing a function; the manifestation is the manner of their appearance and effect. “Comprehending by way of their characteristic, etc, stated in this way, either in full – contact has the characteristic of contacting, earth the characteristic of hardness, and so on – or in short – mind (nama) has the characteristic of beinding, materiality (rupa) of affliction, and so on – taking hold of them by clearly distinguishing them by way of their individual characteristics and determining the reality of suffering, this is called ‘the purification of view’ out of consideration for the fact that it is a view, because of seeing that there is no self apart from mind and materiality, and a purification, because of cleaning away the stain of the view of self.” ***** S:My own understanding is that this third visuddhi refers to the first stage of insight, nama-rupa pariccheda nana, when the difference between nama and rupa is clearly discerned. I’ll look forward to any further comments from you or others. Metta, Sarah ======== 43087 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 3:25am Subject: [dsg] Re: Htoo- deva vehicles, rotating razors, busy demons & ariyan maths S: Yes, the figure of 56 included all the possible cittas for sikkhas,but none could have all. U.Silananda's chart also covers the rupavacara and arupavacara cittas for each too. I tend to glaze over at the various numbers, but please let me know if you would like me to check anything anytime in the commentary or U Silananda's charts. Metta, Sarah ======= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Sarah, Thanks for your reply and kind comments. I also would like to thank you for further inclusion of commentaries. The reason that I write 'Dhamma Thread' is 1.to explain 'citta, cetasika, rupa, nibbana' repeatedly in many different ways 2.to explain the ways they are interconnected 3.to help people follow the Path and 4.to help them for self-awareness. Here I use 'self-awareness'. There is no self. I use conventional word here. Self-awareness here means 'people can check dhammas for themselves when there is no teacher available. If a good teacher is available, there is no other good substitution for such teacher. Pothila knew everything in tipitaka but he still had to follow the instruction by a 7-year-old arahat (a child) So far 'Dhamma Thread' has passed through citta, cetasika, pakinnaka, vithi, vithi-mutta, rupa. These 6 chapters are a summary of 7 texts of abhidhamma. Samuccaya, paccaya, and kammatthana are said to be a summary of 'suttas and vinayas'. When I reach those portions, I do hope 'Sutta experts' 'vinaya experts' 'kammatthana experts' and many other experts help 'Dhamma Thread' for learners or readers. I snipped nearly everything because I agree with you regarding facts (like 44, 56, 54 and commentarial work). With much respect, Htoo Naing 43088 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 3:46am Subject: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo Dear Sarah, I agree with your reply. This happens because we both read the same text and the same commentaries. When I read your messages quoted by commentaries, I felt like I was reading in Burmese words. Please see below for further discussion. With regards, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: Dear Htoo, Many thanks for your further comments on this thread too. I learn a lot from them and any checking of sources I need to do. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Most welcome and both you and me are for the benefit of the members. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I quoted in my old message: ''50. 'Upacaara samaadhi, appanaa samaadhi ceti duvidhopi samaadhi citta visuddhi naama.' 51. 'Lakkhana rasa paccappatthaana padatthaana vasena naamaruupa pariggaho ditthi visuddhi naama.'' .... S: First let me give a translation from CMA, p.348, 349: (50) Purification of mind consists of two kinds of concentration, namely: access concentration and absorption concentration. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: namely = naama. Purification of mind = citta visuddhi. two kinds of concentration = duvidhopi samaadhi upacaara samaadhi = access concentration appanaa samaadhi = absorption concentration ceti = ca + iti = like this So essentially the meanings are the same. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah quoted from commentaries: ''(51) Purification of view is the discernment of mind and matter with respect to their characteristics, functions, manifestations, and proximate causes. .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I will leave this. Because our current discussion is on citta- visuddhi or purification of mind. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- S:These are under the section of the compendium of insight ...snip...snip... ..snip...snip...snip...and materiality, and a purification, because of cleaning away the stain of the view of self." ***** S:My own understanding is that this third visuddhi refers to the first stage of insight, nama-rupa pariccheda nana, when the difference between nama and rupa is clearly discerned. I'll look forward to any further comments from you or others. Metta, Sarah ======== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Citta visuddhi is talked in the setting of 7 visuddhi. So upacara samadhi and appana samadhi both have to be in the domain of mahasatipatthana. Abhidhammatthasangaha is so packed that sometimes some do not understand the contents fully. At that time further commentaries will help understanding. With Metta, Htoo Naing 43089 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 4:26am Subject: Dhamma Thread (278) Dear Dhamma Friends, 8 kama patisandhi or 8 mahavipaka cittas are 1.somanassa saha gatam nana sampayuttam asankharika citta 2.somanassa saha gatam nana sampayuttam sasankharika citta 3.somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika citta 4.somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika citta 5. upekkha saha gatam nana sampayuttam asankharika citta 6. upekkha saha gatam nana sampayuttam sasankharika citta 7. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika citta 8. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika citta Kama means 'sensuous things' and they are related to 5 senses of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, and thoughts related to these senses. Patisandhi is made up of 'pati' and 'sandhi'. Pati means 'again' 'further'. Sandhi means 'join' 'connect' 'link'. Patisandhi means 're-joining' 're-linking' and it is essentially 'rebirth'. This rebirth is actually 'birth'. As there were past births the current birth is called re-birth. This 'patisandhi' is not equivalent to English word 'birth'. Birth is a long process while patisandhi is just a single mind moment. So westerners may confuse with terms if pure translations are used without checking real meanings and deep meanings. For average human beings they have to be in the womb for 9 to 10 months. This is not birth or rebirth. But the baby inside has already been in the state of patisandhi or rebirth. Maha means great. Vipaka means result. Mahavipaka here is used to differentiate it from rupavipaka and arupavipaka, which are the results of rupakusala (rupa jhana kusala) and arupakusala (arupa jhana kusala). Citta here is a state of mind which exists for a single moment. Above 8 cittas are resultant consciousness to their corresponding wholesome consciousness when beings did as kamma patha dhamma or wholesome merit that brings rebirth-result. Most deva beings are born with these 8 cittas even though very few may be reborn with 'ahetuka kusala vipaka santirana citta' or 'rootless wholesome resultant investigating consciousness :-) '. 1. happy-minded, wisdom-loaded, and unprompted mind 2. happy-minded, wisdom-loaded, and prompted mind 3. happy-minded, wisdom-lack, and unprompted mind 4. happy-minded, wisdom-lack, and prompted mind 5. indifferent-feeling-tagged, wisdom-loaded, and unprompted mind 6. indifferent-feeling-tagged, wisdom-loaded, and prompted mind 7. indifferent-feeling-tagged, wisdom-lack, and unprompted mind 8. indifferent-feeling-tagged, wisdom-lack, and prompted mind When beings are in a given life, they do wholesome deeds and meritorious deeds with one of these 8 states of mind. Just before coming into this current life was the immediate past life. Their wholesome deeds might be in that past life or might be from other past life. But the kamma (potential power) when they committed came to their light near dying and there arose marana-asanna-javana-cittas or 'dying-frequenting-impulsive-consciousness' arose and at the end followed cuti-citta or dying-consciousness of that life. Cuti-citta or dying-consciousness is resultant consciousness and so there was no further result from that result. But because of 'dying- frequenting-impulsive-consciousness' which are kamma, there had to arise the resultant consciousness of one of mentioned 8 consciousness. This citta arose at the very early part of this life and it is called patisandhi citta or rebirth-consciousness or linking- consciousness. It is linking the dying-consciosuness and the first life-continuing- consciousness. That is it arose between dying-consciousness of immediate past life and the 1st life-continuing-consciousness and served as linker or joiner and so it is called patisandhi or linking. Patisandhi citta or rebirth-consciousness passed away immediately as soon as it arises. This is followed by life-continuing consciousness as there are many many kamma still being left. These consciousness arise as long as there is a life and as long as there is no sense or arammana or object that stimulate arising of consciousness in procession. These mentioned 8 consciousness are rebirth consciousness of most deva beings and they serve as life continuing consciousness and finally they serve as dying consciousness. But in between rebirth and death are many many instants of moments and if there is no consciousness in procession or no vithi cittas then there have to arise life continuing consciousness. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. 43090 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 4:43am Subject: Dhamma Thread (279) Dear Dhamma Friends, 1. happy-minded, wisdom-loaded, and unprompted mind 2. happy-minded, wisdom-loaded, and prompted mind 3. happy-minded, wisdom-lack, and unprompted mind 4. happy-minded, wisdom-lack, and prompted mind 5. indifferent-feeling-tagged, wisdom-loaded, and unprompted mind 6. indifferent-feeling-tagged, wisdom-loaded, and prompted mind 7. indifferent-feeling-tagged, wisdom-lack, and unprompted mind 8. indifferent-feeling-tagged, wisdom-lack, and prompted mind There are 8 cittas that deva biengs are reborn with. Deva beings may have 7 ahetuka akusala vipaka cittas or 7 rootless-unwholesome- resultant consciousness and 8 ahetuka kusala vipaka cittas or 8 rootless-wholesome-resultant-consciousness. So they may have further 15 cittas in addition to 8 cittas. So there are 23 cittas. Deva beings do have unwholesome mind and they commit unwholesome deeds. So there are further 12 akusala cittas added to 23 cittas and they will make 35 cittas. Deva beings will have 2 functional consciousness or 2 inoperative consciousness if they are still not arahats. So they will have 37 cittas. When they do good deeds there will arise 8 wholesome consciousness called mahakusala cittas. So they mostly will have 45 cittas if they are ordinary beings that is they do not have jhana, magga, and phala. These deva beings in 6 deva realms essentially have the same maximal possible number of cittas like human beings. That is 45 consciousness or 45 cittas out of 89 total cittas. If they further gain jhanas there will be a change in possible number of cittas that can arise in them. The same is true for when they develop insight and they obtain magga nana and phala nana. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. 43091 From: Joop Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 4:52am Subject: Abhidhamma and psychology [was Re: Water, Life, and Death] --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > Hi Joop > > I think it's good to be surprised from time to time but I get the > feeling you think I have done something wrong. Problem is: I don't > understand exactly what you are concerned about. Perhaps you might > like to elaborate some time? > > Best wishes > Andrew Hallo Andrew You asked me to elaborate a little more my 'concern' about your interpretation of Maya's liking the 'water-metaphore'. I will try but then I want to abstract from the example of Maya. So made more general. I read many examples, from Europe and more especially from the USA, where buddhist techniques are used in a pure technical way for psychotherapy. And I have read texts in which the Teachings, and more especially the Abhidhamma are used as a reader in psychology; where for example 'false views' are used as a diagnostic psychological set of instruments. To me I made a strong division: When one want to get enlightened (liberated): follow the soteriological path of the Buddha. When one want to get rid of obsessions and other mental problems: or don't pay to much attention to them or go to a psychologist. But don't mix soteriology and psychotherapy. I got the impression you did but perhaps I don't need to be concerned about your text. Metta Joop 43092 From: Joop Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 4:53am Subject: Having no opinions Dear all Not clinging to views is one of the central topics of the Teachings, especially not clinging to any doctrine of a self. Of course one should not keep 'false' views; but in some suttas the Buddha states that one should not keep any view, any opinion at all. For example verse 5 of the Atthaka Vagga, part of the Sutta-Nipata, called 'Supreme' (see below) doesn't give much room (or no room at all) for the positive value for having a 'right view', as stated in other parts of the Teachings of the Buddha. In the explanation to the translation I have read that some comments to this paradox state that this text should be taken at face value; other readers say these verses of the Atthaka Vagga should be further interpreted. I'm afraid that 'further interpreted' means : render harmless I like this Vagga: this suttas make having any orthodoxy impossible. But, to be honest, I still have opinions, I('m not yet perfetc. Metta Joop Supreme - Paramatthaka Sutta (Sutta-Nipata, IV-5) When dwelling on views as "supreme," a person makes them the utmost thing in the world, &, from that, calls all others inferior and so he's not free from disputes. When he sees his advantage in what's seen, heard, sensed, or in precepts & practices, seizing it there he sees all else as inferior. That, too, say the skilled, is a binding knot: that in dependence on which you regard another as inferior. So a monk shouldn't be dependent on what's seen, heard, or sensed, or on precepts & practices; nor should he conjure a view in the world in connection with knowledge or precepts & practices; shouldn't take himself to be "equal"; shouldn't think himself inferior or superlative. Abandoning what he had embraced, abandoning self, not clinging, he doesn't make himself dependent even in connection with knowledge; doesn't follow a faction among those who are split; doesn't fall back on any view whatsoever. One's who isn't inclined toward either side —becoming or not-, here or beyond— who has no entrenchment when considering what's grasped among doctrines, hasn't the least preconceived perception with regard to what's seen, heard, or sensed. By whom, with what, should he be pigeonholed here in the world? —this brahmin who hasn't adopted views. They don't conjure, don't yearn, don't adhere even to doctrines. A brahmin not led by precepts or practices, gone to the beyond —Such— doesn't fall back. 43093 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 5:00am Subject: Dhamma Thread (280) Dear Dhamma Friends, Deva beings will mostly be in their sensualties as they are fond of sensualities. Some devas are so fond of sensualties that they forget to take their deva food or nutriment when they are consuming the sensualties. Because of lack of nutriment support these sorts of deva beings have to leave their current deva realm. That is they die because of forgetfulness. Some deva beings met The Buddha in person and they listened what The Buddha preached. Among them some retain Dhamma and some do not. Instead of following Dhamma, they follow sensualties because of their tendencies to bend toward sensualties. Trainee deva beings or deva beings who become sotapanna, sakadagams, and anagam will stay in Dhamma and follow what The Buddha preached. Deva beings may attain jhana or absorptive consciousness if they train themselve to develop jhanas. If this happen then there will be extra possible consciousness added to 45 cittas that ordinary deva beings may have during their life time in deva realms. Deva beings may develop both rupa jhana or material absorption if they follow the practice and they may also obtain arupa jhana or immaterial absorption if they follow that pathway. As soon as they develop jhana cittas which are jhana kusala cittas there will be extra possible cittas. If they attain different stages of enlightenment then they will change their personal status or puggala to the corresponding achievement in enlightnement. This means that if they are still ordinary deva beings that is if they are puthujana there will be 45 possible cittas. If they become trainee-grade deva beings they will have 56 cittas out of 89 total cittas and if they attain arahatta magga nana and achieve arahatta phala nana then they will become arahats and there will be 44 possible alternative cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. 43094 From: nina Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 11:15am Subject: Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 1. Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 1 Alobha and Adosa. Intro: Each kusala citta has to be accompanied by alobha, non-attachment, and adosa, non-aversion, and it may or may not be accompanied by amoha or paññaa. The sobhana hetus are the foundation or support of kusala citta, they are like the roots of a tree which are its foundation and its means of obtaining nourishing sap. The Visuddhimagga deals here with the three sobhana hetus, since it mentions all the cetasikas included in the khandha of formations that accompany the first type of mahaakusala citta, mahaakusala citta accompanied by paññaa. No matter whether we perform daana or siila, the kusala citta has to be accompanied by alobha and adosa and it may be accompanied by amoha as well. For bhaavanaa, mental development, which includes samatha and vipassanaa, amoha is indispensable. Text Vis.: 143. (xiii)-(xv) By its means they are not greedy (na lubbanti), or it itself is not greedy, or it is just the mere not being greedy (alubbhana), thus it is 'non-greed (alobha). N: The Tiika refers to the expression ŒBy its means they are not greedy¹. Alobha is the opposite of greed or attachment. It itself is not greedy and it conditions the accompanying dhammas to be non-greedy. Or, beings endowed with non-greed are not greedy, the Tiika explains. Text Vis: The same method applies to 'non-hate' (adosa) and 'non-delusion¹ (amoha) [na dussanti, adussana=adosa, and na muyhanti, amuyhana = amoha (see par. 171,161)]. Of these, 'non-greed' has the characteristic of the mind's lack of desire for an object, or it has the characteristic of non-adherence, like a water drop on a lotus leaf. N: A water drop glides off a lotus leaf without affecting it. Evenso, alobha is not affected by any object that is experienced. Text Vis.: Its function is to not lay hold, like a liberated bhikkhu. It is manifested as a state of not treating as a shelter, like that of a man who has fallen into filth. N: As to Œnot laying hold¹ (apariggaho), the Tiika explains that this is non-attachment, non-attachment to anybody¹s property that could arise due to selfish clinging (mamatta). The liberated bhikkhu, the arahat, is not attached to any object, he has eradicated all forms of lobha. He is completely free from all defilements. Someone who has fallen into a cesspool does not consider that as a refuge, he sees it as a danger. **** N: The Pali terms of alobha, adosa and amoha can help us to be more precise with regard to the characteristics of dhammas, but we should not merely remember the terms. We should realize the characteristics of the dhammas represented by these terms, as they occur in daily life. Through satipa.t.thaana we can learn when the dhamma that adheres to an object appears, and when the dhamma that does not adhere, thus, alobha, appears. There are many shades and degrees of alobha. When we apply ourselves to daana, siila and bhaavana we do not think of our own comfort and pleasure. When one develops samatha one sees the disadvantages of clinging to sense objects and one's aim is to be removed from them. The development of vipassanaa leads to detachment from all objects. Through vipassanaa dhammas will be seen as they really are: impermanent, dukkha and non-self, and clinging is eradicated stage by stage. The arahat is truly liberated from all clinging. *** Vis. Text: 'Non-hate' has the characteristic of lack of savagery, or the characteristic of non-opposing, like a gentle friend. N: The Tiika adds to savagery (ca.n.dika), anger (kopo). It explains that the opposite of that is lack of savagery, non-illwill. Non-opposing means not quarreling (aviggaho). The characteristic of dosa is harshness, whereas the characteristic of adosa is gentleness, like a gentle friend. We can learn the difference when these cetasikas appear in our daily life. Text Vis.: Its function is to remove annoyance, or its function is to remove fever, as sandalwood does. It is manifested as agreeableness, like the full moon. N: The Tiika explains agreeableness: it is assured of gladness due to affection (mejjana). Non-aversion, adosa, has many shades and degrees. Adosa directed towards living beings is loving kindness, mettaa. Adosa with regard to an object that is not a living being can be described as patience. There can be patience with regard to unpleasant objects such as heat, cold, or bodily pain. When others act in an inappropriate way or indulge in wrong speech, we can have adosa, patience, instead of irritation. When we understand that akusala citta arises because it is conditioned by the latent tendencies, we shall have more mettaa and compassion for others. Adosa assists daana, siila and bhaavanaa. When we abstain from akusala which harms other beings, it is an act of kindness. We do not think of our own comfort, but we are intent of other beings¹ welfare. We need patience for samatha and vipassanaa. If we are annoyed about lack of progress this will counteract mental development. As we read in the Tiika with regard to agreeableness: Œit is assured of gladness due to affection (mejjana).¹ When we abstain from speaking harsh words, we have mettaa. We should remember that kusala siila leads to non-remorse, to gladness, happiness and calm. **** Nina 43095 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 1:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Ken. YOU: I wonder if you are making a point I have heard others make from time to time: Even on DSG, people have said, "Sure, there is no eternal self or atman, but there is a temporary self!" ............... YES! This is sutra teaching (what the Buddha dictated). The Buddha even rename his, temp self, to Taga... and the Buddha. -------- YOU: It seems to me now, that you have been taught a very different Abhidhamma from the one I am being taught - the Theravada one. And so we have probably been talking at cross-purposes for most of our conversation. ........... No, I learned it then move on. I have also looked at the Mahayana sutra and Abhidhamma. I have even look at Tibetan ..., and psychology and sociology. ------ YOU: The Abhidhamma that I have been learning lists, classifies and explains all of the various dramas. It is entirely consistent with the other parts of the Dharma and is found, not only in the abhidhamma Pitaka, but also in the sutras and (I think) in the Vinaya. ............ Please remember, the Abhidhamma was not dictated by the Buddha, it was developed by learned monks, we like to believe they were Arhants, and they know all there is to know. It is-not entirely consistent with the sutras. There are concepts in the adhidhamma that are not in the sutras (e.g., rebirth-consciousness). The Abhidhamma was an attempted to rival the Vedas (the science in Hinduism). ---------- YOU: Worse still, some Buddhists believe Nibbana is a kind of heaven where we will live eternally. A major source of this belief is the web site, Access To Insight. There, Bhikkhu Thanissaro teaches that the doctrine of anatta is not actually true. He says it is only a device to remove stress from our thinking and thereby smooth the progress of meditation. This part of the venerable's teaching is entirely, and dangerously, misguided. .............. Study Buddhist history -- you see how and why beliefs like this and yours developed, and the changes they have gone through to become so diverse and numerous today. Some Buddhist believe the view of no-existing-self is dangerously misguided. It removes the need for the 8-fold path, especially morality. Historically there were too types of people that were enilist (1. criminals and the wealthy; 2. some groups of recluses that were waiting for the body to die -- they saw this place as "hell" i.e., samsara.) ------------- YOU: I wonder if this explains why you disagree when I say desire is the cause of our problems and it cannot lead the way out. You seem to be saying that we somehow have control over reality. This is at odds with the Dharma that says the world is composed purely of conditioned namas and rupas (arising and falling away at extraordinary speed). Apart from those conditioned dramas (and with the exception of Nibbana) there is nothing - no people, no controller, no sun, no chariots, nothing. ................. I know the teachings on desire. I also studied what the Buddha went through to become "E." Also the basis on Mahayana Buddhism if Bodicita. Just because the universe is made up of conditioned dramas does not mean that nothing exist. Ask your self, "Do the conditions exist?" ------------- YOU: In order that we can both know what we are talking about, would you please expand upon your comments above, and briefly describe your understanding of anatta. .............. To talk of emptiness is not the same as nothing. Emptiness implies that there must be a container, something. MY TAKE ON NOT-self: There is no-self that exist on its own (requires nothing), that is unchanging, uncompounded, or permanent, no thing, not you, not me. Our existence is relative, the self is changing, compounded, and impermanent, and nothing can change that. Charles 43096 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 1:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Larry LBIDD@w... wrote: >Larry: "You can't be conscious of what you are not conscious of." > >Hi Howard and Jon, > >I had a better version of this email but it disappeared. What I meant by >the above is that in distinguishing between nama and rupa in experience >the problem is that rupa, as such, is not an experience. So one must >experience the experience of a non-experience _and_ experience a >non-experience separate from experience. Obviously the second part of >this is impossible without concept and reason. > > Not sure if I've caught your meaning here. Would you mind giving an example or two. In general, I would say rupa is not described by saying it is a 'non-experience'. We are talking surely about rupas that are currently the object of experience. >Also I wanted to say that even the most penetrating experience needs >reason to contextualize and make sense of it. Phenominalism can't do >without reason any more than realism can, and in some ways phenominalism >is more reasonable. But experience has to be the basis of reason. > > Any and all experiences are followed by thinking about that experience; that seems to be the nature of things. Jon 43097 From: mnease Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 2:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 1. Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "nina" To: Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 11:15 AM Subject: [dsg] Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 1. > Adosa with regard to an object > that is not a living being can be described as patience. There can be > patience with regard to unpleasant objects such as heat, cold, or bodily > pain. Thanks, I hadn't heard this before. Is this synonymous with 'khanti'? I'd never made a connection between the root adosa and khanti. mike 43098 From: mnease Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 2:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 - Appliedthinking/Vitakka,Jotipala. Hi Nina, Sorry for the delay... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Monday, March 07, 2005 6:36 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 - Appliedthinking/Vitakka,Jotipala. N: He had to develop them to an extraordinary level, so that he could become a Sammaasambudha. It is also a lesson for us that the development is ciira kaala bhaavanaa. M: Yes, longtme cultivation--in conventional terms of course. Only one moment at a time though. By the way, is vicaara necessarily conditioned by immediately previous vicaara? Since vitakka and vicaara each last only a moment, their difference is hard to understand otherwise. I thought maybe, disappearence and contiguity? ... N: In fact the Bodhisatta must have been aware of them, how otherwise would he realize their presence? M: Of course--this awareness would have been after the fact though, I think--in reviewing. Or do you think these were cases of cittas with awareness taking immediately fallen-away vitakkas as objects? N: I think both cases. Otherwise he could not acquire tender insight. Yes, that makes sense, I guess--unless tender insight had already been acquired. Thanks again, Nina. mike 43099 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 2:40pm Subject: Re: Having no opinions Hi Joop, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Dear all > > Not clinging to views is one of the central topics of the Teachings, > especially not clinging to any doctrine of a self. > Of course one should not keep 'false' views; but in some suttas the > Buddha states that one should not keep any view, any opinion at all. Thank you so much for bringing this issue up (I wanted to address it with someone other than Sarah- to give her a break ;-). I agree with your conclusions and find your sutta quotation most helpful. So often when we read in the suttas about wrong views here and wrong views there, we think that there must be a `Right View' somehow that is aligned with Buddhism; and sometimes the first factor of the Noble Eightfold Path is defined as `Right View'; however, the Buddha really taught that having no views is the ultimate means of liberation. Views are just opinions, and opinions are based on the false idea of self: "I'm right and you're wrong". The Buddha and his arahants didn't have "views" they had "direct knowledge". They didn't have to have a view/opinion about how things are because they knew directly how things are! However, to begin following the path, one must have some views/opinions about the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path; then, when the goal has been reached, those views are abandoned- and the truth is directly known. The Buddha gave a sutta about this when he said that even the teaching must be abandoned when the stream is crossed, like a raft which has served it's purpose and is no longer needed. Metta, James 43100 From: Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 5:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Jon, Regarding distinguishing between color and seeing there is a problem. It isn't like distinguishing between feeling and intention. When we distinguish between feeling and intention it's easy. Now we experience feeling, and now we experience intention. They are two distinctly different experiences. Can we say in the same way "now we experience eye consciousness, and now we experience color"? For one thing, is consciousness itself a distinct experience? Can eye consciousness, by itself without an object, be an object of consciousness? Secondly, how is color experienced distinctly different from consciousness? Experience is consciousness, so how can we experience something that is other than experience? In other words, how can we distinguish the two, rupa and consciousness, in consciousness? We can't go outside of consciousness and verify rupa with something other than consciousness, unless we use concept. Rupa is, by definition, other than nama. I suggested to Mike a couple of ways to deal with this problem in distinguishing between nama and rupa. Another way is to simply say any experience of rupa is an undifferentiated whole because we can't differentiate between consciousness and rupa _in experience_. I suspect Nina would say panna can penetrate this whole and "know" rupa directly, apart from 5-door consciousness. But it seems to me the medium is still consciousness (whatever that is) so rupa would still be "known" as an experience, in other words, a consciousness. Consciousness is knowing and there is no panna without consciousness. Larry 43101 From: mnease Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 5:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Monday, March 07, 2005 11:19 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Mike and Larry, A good topic. op 07-03-2005 06:04 schreef mnease op mlnease@z...: > Without 'one' to experience I don't see this as a problem--if I understand > it correctly, naama can experience ruupa (as well as naama). I think only > the 'experiencer' needs to be subtracted from the equation for this to > make > sense. I'm all for concept and reason in their place but their place is > not > in satipa.t.thaana I think. Concept and reason can occur (usually do I > think) afterward and can be very valuable if consistent with dhamma. N: I think also before, we need intellectual understanding first. M: Yes, thanks, I'm convinced of this. N: We have to hear again and again and again that nama and rupa are objects of sati and paññaa, all objects appearing through the six doors, one at a time, also now. M: Right-- N: We have to know that sati cannot be directed to specific objects. M: Even when supported by jhaana? N: That sati cannot be induced. M: Not induced, but aroused? I'm thinking of "...[a bhikkhu] Nisidati pallankam abhujitva ujum kayam panidhaya parimukham satim upatthapetva so satova assasati sato passasati = "Sits down, bends in his legs crosswise on his lap, keeps is body erect, and arouses mindfulness in the object of meditation, namely, the breath which is in front of him."* Since the Buddha plainly says here, "...a bhikkhu...arouses mindfulness...", aren't we just talking about different modes of expression or different methods of explanation? Let me add that I don't think this passage is meant as an instruction to a present-day layperson or that there really is 'a bhikkhu' except as a designation or formation. In other words, I think that anattataa is implicit in this and all texts (where it isn't explicit). N: The more one wants it the less chance for its arising. M: Of course it can't arise with craving. This reminded me of an interesting passage in PTS's Dispeller, from the Classification of the Structure of Conditions (3) Profitable, Rooted in a Formation: "...994. Herein, because in a single conscious moment there is no ignorance together with a profitable formation, therefore instead of saying that, kusalamuula.m...("profitable root") is said because it is the root of profitable states, as ignorance is of unprofitable states; and, because of the absence of craving and clinging, in the place of craving, "trust" (pasaada), which is engrossed in the object like craving is said; and in the place of clinging, "determination", which has a strong impact is said." Do you think this is pertinent to the arousing of mindfulness without craving or clinging? mike *http://www.abhidhamma.org/CommentaryBody.htm 43102 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 8:38pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 142 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(l) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** Vitakka and vicåra are conditioned dhammas, sa'nkhåra dhammas, which arise and fall away together with the citta they accompany. They perform their functions only during an extremely short moment, namely the duration of one citta. Their object can be a paramattha dhamma or a concept. We may wonder how vitakka and vicåra perform their functions while we are engaged with the thinking of “stories”. It seems that thinking can last for a while, but in reality there are many cittas accompanied by vitakka and vicåra and other cetasikas, which arise and fall away, succeeding one another. It is because of saññå, remembrance, that we can remember the previous thought and that there can be connection of different thoughts. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43103 From: Joe Cummings Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 9:19pm Subject: Abhidhamma challenge Hi - It has been a long time since I posted on DSG, though I have 'lurked' here now and again. On another Buddhism-related online forum I post to on occasion, a member has challenged the authenticity of the Abhidhamma Pitaka. Here's the link in case anyone here would like to respond (I hope someone will!) http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=28366&st=0 Keep up the good work. Joe 43104 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 9:33pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma challenge --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Cummings" wrote: > > Hi - It has been a long time since I posted on DSG, though I have > 'lurked' here now and again. > > On another Buddhism-related online forum I post to on occasion, a > member has challenged the authenticity of the Abhidhamma Pitaka. > Here's the link in case anyone here would like to respond (I hope > someone will!) > > http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=28366&st=0 > > Keep up the good work. > > Joe ==== Good to see you again Joe, The link seems not to be working? There are so many challenges to Abhidhamma, even from early times. Robertk 43105 From: Joe Cummings Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 10:16pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Robert I think the link I posted was incomplete, should be: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php? act=ST&f=42&t=28347&st=0#entry298058 You may have to paste together broken strings. I could post the text here if you'd like? Joe C --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Cummings" > wrote: > > > > Hi - It has been a long time since I posted on DSG, though I have > > 'lurked' here now and again. > > > > On another Buddhism-related online forum I post to on occasion, a > > member has challenged the authenticity of the Abhidhamma Pitaka. > > Here's the link in case anyone here would like to respond (I hope > > someone will!) > > > > http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=28366&st=0 > > > > Keep up the good work. > > > > Joe > ==== > Good to see you again Joe, > The link seems not to be working? > There are so many challenges to Abhidhamma, even from early times. > Robertk 43106 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 10:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo Dear Htoo,(Nina & Larry), Part 2 - thx for your prompt replies yesterday to Part 1 and another thread. This part is on kamma. --- htootintnaing wrote: > Htoo: :)) A big smile. > > We are talking the same thing with different angle. > > What is in my mind is that 'if javana cittas are not kiriya cittas, > they do have kamma effect'. > > But your thoughts are that if there is no kamma patha there is no > rebirth related to that akusala. > > I sense both are talking on the same subject. ... S: My thoughts were that if there is no kamma patha, that particular kamma or cetana will not bring any results by itself. So when we're talking about ordinary daily akusala, such as concentration with attachment or ignorance on the golf course, it's not harmful enough to condition rebirth *or any other results*. ... > When I approach 'kamma' while writing Dhamma Thread I will discuss it. > > There are 3 akusalas. There are 8 akusalas. There are 12 akusala > cittupada or 12 states of akusala mind. Akusala always have akusala > vipaka. ... S: It's true that any of these cittas can be associated with kamma patha bringing about vipaka. It's like the discussion on the numbers yesterday, all possibilities are shown, but this doesn't mean (in this case) that all akusala cittas always bring results, if you understand my meaning. In D.O. when we read about (abhi)sankhara conditioning vinnana (vipaka cittas), I understand abhisankhara refers to kamma patha, not to all akusala. This is why I understand kilesa vatta (round of defiulements) and kamma vatta(round of kamma) are differentiated. This is a very difficult area and I appreciate that you have a different understanding. .... > If not just stay away from akusala kamma patha. I do not think this > will work. .... S: What is important is to understand the harm of any akusala when it arises, not just because of the results it will bring in future, which may well just be more attachment to 'me'. I appreciated the Vism passages Larry and Nina just quoted. Alobha (non-greed) 'is manifested as a state of not treating as a shelter, like that of a man who has fallen into filth'. Not looking for a shelter in attachment, aversion or ignorance but 'the characteristic of non-adherence, like a water drop on a lotus leaf'. In India we passed some beautiful lakes full of lotus leaves (and flowers) and I thought of this simile of water drops not settling on the leaves. .... <...> > Htoo: I agree. Kamma is complicated. I think more about kamma is in > the forest rather than in the hand of The Buddha that The Buddha told > his disciples regarding what he preached. ... S: It's true. We can never 'work out' the intricacies and it's pointless to ever try. However, I'd say it has been helpful for me to appreciate the difference between ordinary, common kilesa (defilements) in a day and really serious kamma patha. Some people are afraid to smile or laugh because they know it's akusala, but being so concerned about oneself or such relatively harmless states that don't hurt others can lead to unnatural behaviours and more attachment to oneself, I think. I'd be glad to hear any more of your (or anyone else's) comments. Metta, Sarah ========= 43107 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 11:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Dear Htoo, --- htootintnaing wrote: > > > Sarah contiuned regarding Tiger Wood: ... S: I know you're also discussing these threads with Jon, but I hope you don't mind if I continue too:-). <...> > Htoo: Hmmm. I might have been wrong. But I see it as universal. I > came out of Buddhism and just see with natural eyes and neutral eyes. ... S: I'm not sure what natural and neutral eyes are:-/ .... > > You may deny this. But may I present here. > > In a book written by Professor Mehn Tin Mon learning literature is > simless and I think he wrote something about learing and those 8 > mahakusala cittas. .... S: Does this mean that if we spend an hour learning literature or science or even studying Abhidhamma, that all the javana cittas for this period of time are mahakusala? Does this make any sense? What about the many, many moments of experiencing objects throught the 5 sense doors followed by their many mind door processes even while we study? In fact, of course, there can't be any study without lots of seeing of visible objects and 'processing'. As I said, I think that unless any of the javana cittas are concerned with dana, sila or bhavana, i.e rooted in alobha, adosa and possibly amoha, then they must be rooted in moha and usually lobha or dosa. I look forward to your comments with your abhidhamma understanding. ... > > You may argue those cittas which arise while learning are lobha muula > cittas. ... S: Very, very common. Also just moha (ignorance) and sometimes low level dosa too, such as when one can't turn the page easily or one makes a mistake on the computer, hears a loud noise or has a little bodily discomfort and so on. Does one mind any interruption, such as the telephone? Easy to see the attachment followed by the dosa. When I once told K.Sujin that I like to have a quiet spell each day outside in the garden or by the pool, away from household chores and the telephone, for reading and reflecting, she just answered 'attachment'. It was true. We may think our dhamma study is a noble activity, but this is thinking of a situation again, rather than understanding the present cittas. ... > Do you think that all cittas that arise while learning is akusala > cittas [lobha here]. > > Reading or learning invlove javana cittas. ... S: I think this should be 'involve' rather than 'in love' javana cittas;-). I think that cittas change all the time and only awareness can be aware of the present dhamma and only panna can know it for what it is. When we think of a story about reading or learning and conclude that this must be kusala or akusala, it's not what we learn from our appreciation of abhidhamma. Kusala and akusala follow each other all the time - but usually, there's far more akusala, I believe. Even now as we write about dhamma, we can test it out - kindness, friendliness, appreciation of dhamma, but also lots of attachment and ignorance in between following seeing, hearing and so on. .... > Regarding javana cittas, if they are not kiriya javana they have to > be akusala or kusala. So they at each moment or at each vithi vara > will have only one alternative of akusala and kusala. ... S: Yes. So if it's not seeing or hearing and not metta or karuna or dana or satipatthana, for example, what is it right now? .... > > Did Newton have akusala cittas when he discovered the gravity because > of deep thought? ... S: Again, this is a situation - but anytime there isn't kusala, it must be akusala. Is concentrating on gravity or on mathmatical models kusala or akusala most the time? Of course, this doesn't mean we shouldn't follow such activities, but understand the various dhammas better for what they are, rather than what we'd like them to be. <....> [Thanks to Nina for picking up the comments about micha-sati] ... > Htoo: Thanks for your all response on behalf of all members. I said > this because there are many intellectual people here who may think > that Htoo has a big ego. And some even said off-line that I was > selling in the name of The Buddha. But as a very active moderator you > will know that there are less than 100 active members. Some passive > members remind me off-line to keep continuing and not to take care of > any attacks. .... S: :-) No need to think of 'attacks' or oneself too much. Remember the water drops on the lotus leaf. A lot of people find it really hard to see any benefit in detailed Abhidhamma study and don't see it as the Buddha's teaching as an old member just wrote. I think this is all quite understandable. There's room for all views or understandings. In any case, I greatly appreciate your threads and our discussions together. I'm always glad when others join in too. Metta, Sarah ========= 43108 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 11:28pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Charles, I wrote: ------------ > Even on DSG, people have said, "Sure, there is no eternal self or atman, but there is a temporary self!" ------------- And you replied: ---------------- > YES! This is sutra teaching (what the Buddha dictated). The Buddha even rename his, temp self, to Taga... and the Buddha. ---------------- I agree that the Buddha taught the existence of the five khandhas. In his case they were conventionally called 'the Buddha' just as, in my case, they are conventionally called, Ken H. By teaching the existence of the five khandhas, the Buddha dispelled the wrong view, "Nothing exists," and he also dispelled the wrong view, "The self exists." If we examine the five khandhas with right view, we will see each of them is devoid of self. And if we consider them collectively, it is the same. Even though we refer to a particular set of five khandhas as you or me (etc.) there is no you or me outside of the momentary existence of those present five khandhas. You wrote about the Theravada Abhidhamma: ------------------ C: > No, I learned it then move on. I have also looked at the Mahayana sutra and Abhidhamma. I have even look at Tibetan ..., and psychology and sociology. ------------------ I see. But that doesn't explain why you describe the 'Abhidhamma view' as representing the unconditioned reality. The Abhidhamma is the teaching of both kinds of absolute reality - the conditioned and the unconditioned. Also, it doesn't explain why you have not learnt the Pali terms (or the Sanskrit terms) for the individual dhammas. The Pali terms remind us of when we are talking about a reality as distinct from an illusion (a concept). For example, Htoo has just explained why the word 'birth' is inadequate for describing the reality, 'patisandhi.' 'Birth' involves the concept of a baby leaving the womb, whereas patisandhi is just one fleeting moment of consciousness. ------------ C: > Please remember, the Abhidhamma was not dictated by the Buddha, it was developed by learned monks, we like to believe they were Arhants, and they know all there is to know. ------------ According to the version I prefer, the Buddha taught Abhidhamma in full to the devas (in a deva realm) and then he taught it in brief to Sariputta. Sariputta, on hearing it in brief, understood it in full. He then taught it to his students and it became memorised in the same way as the suttas. ---------------------- C: > It is-not entirely consistent with the sutras. There are concepts in the adhidhamma that are not in the sutras (e.g., rebirth- consciousness). The Abhidhamma was an attempted to rival the Vedas (the science in Hinduism). ---------------------- I have not heard that before (about rebirth consciousness). Remember, the Buddha taught that conditioned reality was the five khandhas. So, when he said [in the suttas or elsewhere] that rebirth was real, he could only have been referring to a particular, momentary arising of the five khandhas. ----------------------------------------- C: > Some Buddhist believe the view of no-existing-self is dangerously misguided. It removes the need for the 8-fold path, especially morality. Historically there were too types of people that were enilist (1. criminals and the wealthy; 2. some groups of recluses that were waiting for the body to die -- they saw this place as "hell" i.e., samsara.) ----------------------------------------- May I suggest that you are not recognising the absolute reality of conditioned dhammas? When you accept that dhammas really do exist, I think you will no longer equate "no self" with "no existence." --------------- C: > I know the teachings on desire. I also studied what the Buddha went through to become "E." Also the basis on Mahayana Buddhism if Bodicita. Just because the universe is made up of conditioned dramas does not mean that nothing exist. Ask your self, "Do the conditions exist?" ------------- Do you see what I mean? You see a link between "only conditioned dhammas" and "nothing exists," but there is no such link. My answer would be, "Of course, the conditions exist! They exist because there are conditioned dhammas, and those conditioned dhammas are conditioning other dhammas to exist." I think (not sure) it was Nagarjuna who caused conditionality to be mistaken for non-existence. According to his heterodoxy, conditioned namas and rupas were just 'ideas' thought up by the Buddha to explain what was happening in [what Nagarjuna saw as] "a seamless flux" of experience. -------------- C: > To talk of emptiness is not the same as nothing. Emptiness implies that there must be a container, something. -------------- Exactly so! And there really are things that exist and that are mistaken for "containers of self." They are the namas and rupas of the five khandhas and Nibbana. ---------------------- C: > MY TAKE ON NOT-self: There is no-self that exist on its own (requires nothing), that is unchanging, uncompounded, or permanent, no thing, not you, not me. Our existence is relative, the self is changing, compounded, and impermanent, and nothing can change that. ----------------------- I agree with that, but it is not quite watertight enough for my liking. It still allows for the idea of something that persists from moment to moment. Would you agree that there is no physical phenomenon (dhamma) that exists for more than (let's say by way of approximation) one billionth of a second? And that there is no mental phenomenon that lasts for more than one seventeen-billionth of a second? (As explained in the Abhidhamma, some rupas last seventeen times as long as consciousness.) Ken H 43109 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Mar 9, 2005 11:55pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma challenge --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Cummings" wrote: > > Hi Robert > > I think the link I posted was incomplete, should be: > > http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php? > act=ST&f=42&t=28347&st=0#entry298058 > > You may have to paste together broken strings. > > I could post the text here if you'd like? > > Joe C > =========== That would be great Joe. Robert 43110 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 0:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Thanks for your contributions, see you later. Hi Hugo & Azita, Hugo, thank you for letting me share your letters on list. I loved the dragon story. Someday you must let your child meet Dan’s. He has some similar ‘Mara’ stories. (I think you could check ‘Mara’ in U.P. next time round). And no, I wouldn’t just tell a child there is no dragon (or mom or dad or me for that matter;-)). Believe it or not, a large chunk of my working life has been with children and teenagers referred by schools which are unable to help with specific problems. .... H>I say that IF "you" see a self, then "you" > have bigger problems than one who doesn't see a self, thus "you" can't > "use" the same "approach" than the people who don't see a self. > That's why I keep bringing examples of little kids and alcoholics > because they see "less clearly" than you or me and "they" strongly > cling to a self, at least in these matters. .... S: We can’t talk about dhammas and anatta to many people, but friends on DSG like yourself are unusual because there is some appreciation that the clue to understanding life lies in the understanding of these dhammas. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be here!! I just read in a commentary: “Thus personality view is abandoned by the defining of mentality-materiality (nama-rupa).” If a child is about to burn himself on the stove, you may just have to say ‘Don’t touch!’. Likewise, if a friend says he’s only here for one more post, I may just call out ‘Learn about namas and rupas – they’re anatta!’. Anyway, I’d like to quote a passage here from ‘Dispeller’, an Abhidhamma commentary on ‘order of teaching’. I meant to post it for Azita before, because it also touches on a question she’s raised about the khandhas and why vedana and sanna get their own khandha: From ‘Classification of the Aggregates, 130: “...firstly, ‘order of arising’ is not appropriate here because the aggregates do not arise in the order of their successive determingin....nor ‘order of abandoning’....nor ‘order of practice’......nor ‘order of plane’ because feeling, etc are included in all four planes. But 'order of teaching' is appropriate. "For there are those people who, while teachable, have fallen to assuming a self among the five aggregates through these not having been divided up; and the Blessed One is desirous of releasing them from assumption of a self by getting them to see how the compact mass is resolved; and being desirous of their welfare, first, for the purpose of their easy grasping, he taught the gross materiality aggregate which is the object of the eye and so on; and after that the feeling which feels the materiality experienced as desirable and undesirable; [then] the perception which grasps the aspects of the object of feeling thus: ‘What he feels, that he perceives’ (M i 293); [then] formations which form by means of perception; [and lastly] consciousness which is their support and which dominates them.” ***** H:> See the difference? > > My suspicion is that you forgot what is to behave controlled by a > self, thus you only advocate just "watching namas and rupas arise and > cease". ... S: I think we all have the illusion of behaving as controlled by a self much of the time. What I advocate is not watching anything but understanding these namas and rupas (aka the 5 khandhas) when they appear or present themselves without any special focus or watching or idea of doing anything. A little further on in the text abovd, we have a good hospital simile for Azita, which I may have given before: “ ‘As to simile’. Here the materiality aggregated (as object) of clinging is like a sickroom (gilaanasaalaa) because it is the dwelling place, as the physical basis, door and object, for the sick man, [namely] the consciousness aggregate of clinging. The feeling aggregate of clinging is like the sickness because it afflicts. The perception aggregate of clinging is like the provocation of the sickness because of the presence of feeling associated with greed, etc being due to the perception of sense desires, etc. The formations aggregate of clinging is like having recourse to what is unsuitable because it is that which gives rise to feeling which is the sickness.” ***** S:In other words, the reason we study more about these various dhammas and look at them from different angles is in order that awareness may arise and be aware of them as mere phenomena or elements. And that’s it. No self to watch, do or control in any way. <...> H:> In summary it all depends on what is your level of understanding, what > you can see, what you can do. ... S: Yes. First we need to clearly understand in theory what is nama and what is rupa. Seeing is nama, visible object is rupa. No one can see or not see. .... H:> But don't tease me into coming back to discuss, otherwise Nina may die > from a laugh attack. :-) ... S: :-) I followed your discussion with Jon – I know he’d be very glad to continue anytime. Please just post in your own time. I know Nina will always be glad to see you around. Let her have a laugh! We can see how conditions change all the time. Sometimes I plan to write to one friend and it gets interrupted or I plan to take a break , but post anyway. You can just think of it as an act of kindness to us when you post again under your own name here. (Really, that’s not a tease:-)). No need to set yourself any rules on it. Sometime, you may like to look at posts in U.P. under ‘Abhidhamma-beginners’ and ‘Anatta & Control’. I’ll be glad of any feedback, *but no hurry*. Thanks again for keeping in touch and giving me your comments and dragon story:-). Metta, Sarah ======= 43111 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 0:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nina Van Gorkom Hi Hasituppada, I was very glad to see you posting after a long break. --- hasituppada wrote: > > I had been away for some time and I was not connected to Internet. > On my return I found my Yahoo account submerged with over 30000 > messages. I had no time to read them all ,but I did read some of > Nina's. As always they are blossoms of fragrant Dhamma. There is > n't the slightest note of impatience, anger, irritation or fatigue. > She answers all however they pose the questions. Her answers are a > beam of light to illuminate that which is clouded with darkness. ... S: Jon and I were both very happy to read your appreciation of all her hard work here. 'blossoms of fragrant Dhamma' - very nice. There's always bound to be praise and blame as Htoo mentioned, but I rejoice in your kind words. Are you still living in France. Have you been on a retreat, I wonder? (Only say if you wish to, of course.) ... > Even the Buddha maintained silence when he was asked the same > question over and over again. > > During the period I was away, her several pages of Abhidhamma in > Daily life, kept Company with The Manual of Abhdhamma of Venerable > Narada Maha Thera on my work table. I like those Chapters from her > book The Abhidhamma in Daily life ( which I had copied from her > website) that elucidates in very readable simple language the > deepest of the Lord Buddha's Dhamma. ... S: Good book companions. Can we encourage you to share any paragraphs or comments you found especially helpful? Do you see the Abhidhamma as being relevant to 'practice' and the development of satipatthana/vipassana now? Presently I'm posting from her text,'Cetasikas' - you may like to follow and add comments on this too. In any case, it's good to know you're around again. Thanks for posting. Metta, Sarah ==== 43112 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 0:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma challenge Hi Joe, good you unlurk. op 10-03-2005 06:19 schreef Joe Cummings op joe@j...: > On another Buddhism-related online forum I post to on occasion, a > member has challenged the authenticity of the Abhidhamma Pitaka. > Here's the link in case anyone here would like to respond (I hope > someone will!) N: There have been many posts on the authenticity of the Abhidhamma Pitaka, especially from Sarah, see U.P. under Abhidhamma. No need to repeat those posts. I would like another approach. The fact that you or someone else asks this question must have a cause. Some people do not quite understand what the Abhidhamma is, they merely think of texts. Do you have a topic of Abhdidhamma that interests you? It would be nice if you could give some input on this. It is more important to know what interests you. We all have different backgrounds, we have accumulated different inclinations and thus, people react differently to the Abhidhamma. Different accumulated condiitons. Ah, before I know it I have landed now on the Abhidhamma with this sentence. Nina. 43113 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 1:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Predominant roots? -Kel, Suan & Htoo Hi Kel,Suan & Htoo, Kel, thank you for posting an extract from Ledi Sayadaw's Dipani. I'd like to discuss some of the comments a little with you any perhaps anyone else from Myanmar in particular. --- kelvin_lwin wrote: > Tell you what, I'm just going to quote Ledi sayadaw with excerpts > from his Dipani. You can find the full link below: > > http://www.ubakhin.com/ledi/manual6b.htm > > Of the four [satipatthana], if mindfulness or attention is firmly > established on a part of the body, such as on out-breath and in- > breath, it is tantamount to attention being firmly established **on > all things**. This is because the ability to place one's attention > on any object at one's will has been acquired. .... S: Could one of you give me a textual reference (Tipitaka/ancient commentaries) for this to look at/discuss further, so we can consider the meaning. .... > > 'Firmly established' means, if one desires to place the attention on > out-breath and in-breath for an hour, one's attention remains firmly > fixed on it for that period. If one wishes to do so for two hours, > one's attention remains firmly fixed on it for two hours. There is > no occasion when the attention becomes released from its object on > account of the instability of thought-conception (vitakkha). > > Why is it incumbent on us to firmly establish the mind without fail > on any object such as the out-breath and the in-breath? It is > because it is necessary for us to gather and control the six vinnana, > [44] which have been drifting tempestuously and untrained throughout > the past inconceivably long and beginningless samsara (round of > rebirths). .... S: When we read comments in the texts about anatta and no control, such as the following from the Vism, do you see any conflict? Vism XX1.48: "He sees all formations as not-self for the following reasons: because they are alien, empty, vain, ownerless, with no Overlord, with none to wield power over them, and so on." Of course, there are many other such quotes. ... > I shall make it clear. The mind is wont to flit about from one to > another of the six objects of the senses which live at the > approaches of the six sense-doors.[45] > > In this world, persons who are not insane, but who are normal and > have control over their minds, resemble such a mad person having no > control over his mind when it comes to the matter of samatha and > vipassana. ... S: Do we ever have any control over our minds? Isn't this the illusion? Isn't the aim of vipassana in particular to understand the conditioned nature of dhammas rather than 'control over the mind'? Vism XX 103: "The characteristic of not-self becomes evident to him through seeing rise according to condition owing to his discovery that states have no curiosity and that their existence depends upon conditions." Suan and Htoo, I don't know if you were following, but Kel was mentioning the very high regard with which Ledi Sayadaw is held by all in Myanmar. Now we referred in passing to his large number of criticisms of the Abhidhammatthavibhavini by Sumangala, the main commentary to the Abhidammattha Sangaha which some of us are so delighted to have access to. Do you have any comments? Metta, Sarah ===== 43114 From: Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 0:29am Subject: Initial Hello Hi, I'm Lisa, I find out about this groups from forwarded email of a friend. I am interested in this group because I am a Buddhist and still learning about this life. Also, I am interested about the Buddhism community outside Indonesia, where I live. There should be some good different thoughts. Lisa Herawati 43115 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 2:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Larry >Regarding distinguishing between color and seeing there is a problem. It >isn't like distinguishing between feeling and intention. When we >distinguish between feeling and intention it's easy. Now we experience >feeling, and now we experience intention. They are two distinctly >different experiences. > >Can we say in the same way "now we experience eye consciousness, and now >we experience color"? For one thing, is consciousness itself a distinct >experience? Can eye consciousness, by itself without an object, be an >object of consciousness? Secondly, how is color experienced distinctly >different from consciousness? Experience is consciousness, so how can we >experience something that is other than experience? In other words, how >can we distinguish the two, rupa and consciousness, in consciousness? We >can't go outside of consciousness and verify rupa with something other >than consciousness, unless we use concept. Rupa is, by definition, other >than nama. > > These are good questions. First, just to clarify, I assume you are talking here about the experience of rupa by consciousness that 'knows' the rupa in some sense or other--for example, consciousness accompanied by awareness or insight. Mere *experience* of rupa occurs at every moment of sense-door consciousness, and this experience is direct and unadulterated. As I understand it, the experience of rupa by consciousness accompanied by awareness or insight, if it occurs, occurs in the moments immediately after the sense-door consciousness has fallen away. Thus if there is a period of awareness of, say, visible object, the actual scenario is one of repeated moments of seeing consciousness experiencing visible object, interspersed with moments of (consciousness accompanied by) sati/panna that have the immediately past visible object (rather than the seeing consciousness) as object. When there is a period of awareness of seeing consciousness, the scenario is the same except that it is the immediately past seeing consciousness rather than the visible object that is taken as object of the consciousness with sati/panna. Actually, the situation of awareness of feeling and intention is no different, since both these mental factor accompany every moment of consciousness. It is just that at some moments one of them appears to the succeeding consciousness and at other moments the other appears to the succeeding consciousness, and their relative prominence as perceived by us depends on the relative frequency of those 2 sets of experience. Does this sound feasible? Jon 43116 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi, Joop (and James) While I agree generally with James' reply about the important difference between holding opinions about things and the knowledge that comes from direct experience, I'm not so sure that the sutta you quote really says what you say it does ('no opinions'). I think it's more about the danger of clinging to opinions or ideas, having preconceived notions, etc. For example, it talks about <>, <>, wrong view about becoming or not, etc. I have my doubts as to whether the ideal of having no opinions is really attainable. Jon Joop wrote: >Dear all > >Not clinging to views is one of the central topics of the Teachings, >especially not clinging to any doctrine of a self. >Of course one should not keep 'false' views; but in some suttas the >Buddha states that one should not keep any view, any opinion at all. ... > > >Supreme - Paramatthaka Sutta (Sutta-Nipata, IV-5) > >When dwelling on views as "supreme," >a person makes them the utmost thing in the world, >&, from that, calls all others inferior >and so he's not free from disputes. >When he sees his advantage >in what's seen, heard, sensed, >or in precepts & practices, >seizing it there he sees all else as inferior. > >That, too, say the skilled, >is a binding knot: that in dependence on which >you regard another as inferior. >So a monk shouldn't be dependent >on what's seen, heard, or sensed, >or on precepts & practices; >nor should he conjure a view in the world >in connection with knowledge or precepts & practices; >shouldn't take himself to be "equal"; >shouldn't think himself >inferior or superlative. > >Abandoning what he had embraced, >abandoning self, not clinging, >he doesn't make himself dependent >even in connection with knowledge; >doesn't follow a faction >among those who are split; >doesn't fall back on any view whatsoever. > >One's who isn't inclined toward either side >—becoming or not-, here or beyond— >who has no entrenchment >when considering what's grasped among doctrines, >hasn't the least preconceived perception >with regard to what's seen, heard, or sensed. >By whom, with what, >should he be pigeonholed here in the world? >—this brahmin who hasn't adopted views. > >They don't conjure, don't yearn, >don't adhere even to doctrines. >A brahmin not led by precepts or practices, >gone to the beyond >—Such— doesn't fall back. > > 43117 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Hi, Lisa Welcome to the group from me. Thanks for introducing yourself. I hope you'll find the discussion interesting. Please feel free to come in on any thread, or bring up your own topics for discussion. Jon lisa_herawati@j... wrote: >Hi, > >I'm Lisa, I find out about this groups from forwarded email of a friend. I >am interested in this group because I am a Buddhist and still learning >about this life. Also, I am interested about the Buddhism community >outside Indonesia, where I live. There should be some good different >thoughts. > >Lisa Herawati > > 43118 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi, Joe Nice to see you back. As is often the way with these things, I was thinking about you just the other day. Please feel free to post the text here. Jon Joe Cummings wrote: >Hi Robert > >I think the link I posted was incomplete, should be: > >http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php? >act=ST&f=42&t=28347&st=0#entry298058 > >You may have to paste together broken strings. > >I could post the text here if you'd like? > >Joe C > > 43119 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 6:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Howard upasaka@a... wrote: >Hi again, Jon - > > One further comment. I had written "My main reason for my perspective, aside from aesthetic preference, is pragmatic, because I have no basis for knowing the existence of unobserved rupas." > Now, I anticipate that you might well ask "Well, then, how is it that you accept the idea of a group of rupas arising together (experientially) yet with all but one unobserved?" > Actually, it hadn't occurred to me ;-)) > In reply I would say the following: 1) I don't know this group business to be a fact, but 2) Assuming that it is a fact, I would still consider the entire group to arise, as it were, "on the stage of consciousness", but with only one rupa sufficiently intense to register as objective support for consciousness. In this regard, I also would presume that a Buddha (if not an "ordinary" arahant) would be actually aware of *all* the rupas in a group. I presume this under the assumption that a Buddha would actually *know*, by direct insight, the fact of rupa-groups, and not just by inductive or deductive inference. > > I think your presumption about the Buddha's knowledge is a reasonable one, and in fact I think it goes for much of what we read in the texts -- things are explained that are never going to be verified by our own direct experience but which is information we need to have in order not to reject out of hand as impossible things other things that we would have a hard time accounting for. (An example of this kind of information would be the disappearance of the teaching and the appearance of a Buddha who had made a vow in the presence of a previous Buddha.) > Jon, it would, of course, be unfair for me to write this and require that the conversation go no further at present. So please feel free to reply! But forgive me please, if I don't then continue the thread further at this time. I don't want to allow myself to drawn back into the intellectual eddy that I got myself into before. > No obligation of course, and I recognise the syndrome myself ;-)). I agree about the need to keep in mind the value of discussing in a way that is useful and helpful, and not for any other reason. Easy to lose sight of at times , I find ;-)) Jon 43120 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 8:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Larry and Jon, May I butt in, just one point. I think the topic is very essential, it concerns the first stage of insight. op 10-03-2005 02:00 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Can we say in the same way "now we experience eye consciousness, and now > we experience color"? For one thing, is consciousness itself a distinct > experience? Can eye consciousness, by itself without an object, be an > object of consciousness? N: eye consciousness has qualitate qua an object, otherwise it would not be citta. It experiences visible object or color. This eye-consciousness or seeing falls away and than afterwards, in another process, citta with awareness of the characteristic of seeing can arise. It all occurs extremely fast. ... snipped, but then you mention my name. L: I suspect Nina would say panna can penetrate this whole and "know" rupa directly, > apart from 5-door consciousness. N: There can be awareness of one object at a time, sometimes of a rupa such as colour, sometimes of a nama such as feeling or seeing. We cannot predict which object appears to sati. But there is bound to be considering and thinking, more than direct awareness. It is important to understand what can be the object of sati: a nama or a rupa. L: But it seems to me the medium is still consciousness (whatever that is) so rupa would still be "known" as an experience, in other words, a consciousness. Consciousness is knowing > and there is no panna without consciousness. N: It is not so complicated. No need to think about which consciousness it is and how long it is past, etc. Of course paññaa arises with a citta, another citta, in another process after the seeing, but it is all like a flash of lightning. You have not even time to worry about which citta it must be. Rupa is rupa, and it is not known as a citta. Nama is nama. They have different characteristics, but it takes a long time to get familiar with their different characteristics. That is why we need so many different reminders as contained in the satipatthanasutta. Nina. 43121 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 8:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi MIke, op 10-03-2005 02:12 schreef mnease op mlnease@z... > > N: We have to > hear again and again and again that nama and rupa are objects of sati and > paññaa, all objects appearing through the six doors, one at a time, also > now. > N: We have to know that sati cannot be directed to specific objects. > > M: Even when supported by jhaana? N: It is different in samatha, you are right. M quotes: N: That > sati cannot be induced. > > M: Not induced, but aroused? I'm thinking of "...[a bhikkhu] Nisidati > pallankam abhujitva ujum kayam panidhaya parimukham satim upatthapetva so > satova assasati sato passasati = "Sits down, bends in his legs crosswise on > his lap, keeps is body erect, and arouses mindfulness in the object of > meditation, namely, the breath which is in front of him."* N: It is good you bring this up, this is a point for many people. The terms induced or aroused can create misunderstandings. For samatha and for vipassana paññaa which knows the right conditions for the right results is necessary. Thus, anapanasati is not just trying to induce concentration at will, paññaa is indispensable. Pañña and sati are necessary to know precisely when there is kusala citta with calm and when lobha. Understanding has to be emphasized all the time. M: Since the Buddha > plainly says here, "...a bhikkhu...arouses mindfulness...", aren't we just > talking about different modes of expression or different methods of > explanation? Let me add that I don't think this passage is meant as an > instruction to a present-day layperson or that there really is 'a bhikkhu' > except as a designation or formation. In other words, I think that > anattataa is implicit in this and all texts (where it isn't explicit). >N: Yes, he has to know the right conditions, otherwise nobody in the world can arouse sati whenever he wants it. > N: The more one wants it the less chance for its > arising. > > M: Of course it can't arise with craving. This reminded me of an > interesting passage in PTS's Dispeller, from the Classification of the > Structure of Conditions (3) Profitable, Rooted in a Formation: > > "...994. Herein, because in a single conscious moment there is no ignorance > together with a profitable formation, therefore instead of saying that, > kusalamuula.m...("profitable root") is said because it is the root of > profitable states, as ignorance is of unprofitable states; and, because of > the absence of craving and clinging, in the place of craving, "trust" > (pasaada), which is engrossed in the object like craving is said; and in the > place of clinging, "determination", which has a strong impact is said." > > Do you think this is pertinent to the arousing of mindfulness without > craving or clinging? N: it is said of kusala citta. Passaada, this means purity and the footnote says: saddhaa, confidence. This reminds me of the passage on saddhaa in Vis. XIV, 140: Text Vis.: Its characteristic is having faith, or its characteristic is trusting. And also of the Tiika: <...the opposite of faithlessness is decision, resolution that is pure. The Tiika states that this is not the same as adhimokkha, determination, that is among the Œwhat-so-evers¹ or supplementary factors, yevapannakas, mentioned in the list of dhammas in the Dhammasangani. Here, the term resolution (adhimutti) is used to describe the manifestation of faith or confidence in wholesomeness.> This refers to the first type of mahaakusala citta with paññaa, and thus it can also pertain to the development of satipatthana. Nina. 43122 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 8:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Thanks for your contributions, see you later. Hi Hugo and Sarah, I agree with Sarah. I also laughed when Howard recently posted a little, inspite of his resolution, but it gets a bit silent out here. I may think: now I am too tired or it is too late for me to answer more mails, but then there are conditions and I forget completely that I am tired. Nina. op 10-03-2005 09:22 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > Please just post in your own time. I know Nina will always be glad to see > you around. Let her have a laugh! We can see how conditions change all the > time. Sometimes I plan to write to one friend and it gets interrupted or > I plan to take a break , but post anyway. 43123 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 8:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 - Appliedthinking/Vitakka,Jotipala. Hi Mike, op 09-03-2005 23:34 schreef mnease op mlnease@z...: By the way, is vicaara necessarily conditioned by > immediately previous vicaara? Since vitakka and vicaara each last only a > moment, their difference is hard to understand otherwise. I thought maybe, > disappearence and contiguity? N:Sampaticchanacitta which is accompanied by vitakka and vicaara follows upon one of the five sense-cognitions that are without them. The sampaticchanacitta conditions the following santiranacitta by way of anantara-paccaya, samanatarapaccaya, absence condition, disaoppearance-condition. When we say citta, we also include the accompanying cetasikas. But I do not see this as a means to know their difference. First the difference between nama and rupa has to be realized. It is not sure that everybody will know the difference between vitakka and vicaara. > N: In fact the Bodhisatta must have been aware of them, how otherwise > would he realize their presence? > > M: Of course--this awareness would have been after the fact though, I > think--in > reviewing. Or do you think these were cases of cittas with awareness taking > immediately fallen-away vitakkas as objects? > > N: I think both cases. Otherwise he could not acquire tender insight. N: I would like to add: one cannot count how immediate awareness of an object is. Its characteristic can appear to sati sampajañña, but this can be in a following process, processes of cittas follow upon each other very fast. Awareness in vipassanaa is not reviewing by thinking about a reality. Nina. 43124 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 8:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Hi Sarah and Hott, excellent reminder, even for just now! Nina. op 10-03-2005 08:26 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > I think that cittas change all the time and only awareness can be aware of > the present dhamma and only panna can know it for what it is. When we > think of a story about reading or learning and conclude that this must be > kusala or akusala, it's not what we learn from our appreciation of > abhidhamma. Kusala and akusala follow each other all the time - but > usually, there's far more akusala, I believe. > > Even now as we write about dhamma, we can test it out - kindness, > friendliness, appreciation of dhamma, but also lots of attachment and > ignorance in between following seeing, hearing and so on. > .... 43125 From: nina Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 8:26am Subject: Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 2, amoha. Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 2, amoha. Text Vis.: 'Non-delusion' has the characteristic of penetrating [things] according to their individual essences, N: yatthaasabhavo: according to their own (distinct) nature. The Tiika explains that amoha (or paññaa) penetrates all dhammas according to their own nature. Text Vis.: or it has the characteristic of sure penetration, like the penetration of an arrow shot by a skilful archer. Tiika: sure penetration, penetration without fail. Text Vis.: Its function is to illuminate the objective field, like a lamp. N: Illumination of the object means, the destruction of the darkness of delusion which conceals that, as the Tiika explains. Text Vis. : It is manifested as non-bewilderment, like a guide in a forest. N: It is the opposite to delusion with regard to the object. It penetrates the characteristic of the object that appears, it knows it as it is. text Vis.: The three should be regarded as the roots of all that is profitable. **** Understanding is a controlling faculty, an indriya, in the sense of predominance since it overcomes ignorance (Atthasalini I, Book I, Part IV, Chapter 1, 122) It exercises government over the associated dhammas (the citta and cetasikas it accompanies) by the characteristic of vision, that is, the realization of the three characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anattaa. The Atthasalini states further on (in the same section) that understanding has as characteristic illuminating and understanding. It states (123) that just as a clever surgeon knows which food is suitable and which is not, understanding knows states as "moral or immoral, serviceable or unserviceable, low or exalted, black or Pure..." Understanding is indispensable for the development of samatha. If it is not known when kusala citta with calm arises and when akusala citta with attachment to calm, samatha cannot be developed. Right understanding of realities, samma-di.t.thi, is a factor of the Eightfold Path which has to be developed together with the other factors of the eightfold Path so that it can penetrate the four noble Truths. The object of right understanding which is not lokuttara, supramundane, but "lokiya", mundane, is the nama or rupa appearing at the present moment. The object of right understanding which is lokuttara is nibbaana. As we read in the Visuddhimagga and Tiika, delusion conceals the true nature of dhammas, but paññaa illuminates it. When wrong view, di.t.thi arises, there is also moha, delusion. Moha is ignorant of dhammas and wrong view interpretes the dhammas that are experienced in the wrong way, as lasting and as self. Through direct mindfulness and understanding of the dhamma that appears at the present moment, its characteristic can be known as it really is. The Book of Analysis (Vibhanga, Ch 12, § 525) gives many synonyms of sampajañña, here translated as awareness, such as: In the same section it quotes the text about the bhikkhu who is mindful and aware, when approaching, departing, looking ahead, looking around, bending or stretching,... eating, drinking, chewing tasting, etc. This reminds us to develop satipa.t.thaana, the only way leading to the destruction of darkness and the illumination of objects so that their true nature can be penetrated. We are bound to be absorbed in the situations of our daily life which may cause distress, but through paññaa all such moments can be seen as impersonal elements arsing because of conditions. **** Nina. 43126 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 8:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo Dear Sarah and Htoo, I remember an example, given by Kh Sujin, of weak akusala citta that is not akusala kamma: just putting sugar in one's tea. We also should think of samalobha, ordinary lobha, and visama lobha, lobha that is more harmful. I have seen this in a commentary. Sama means even, visama: uneven, contrary. Nina. op 10-03-2005 07:54 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > We can never 'work out' the intricacies and it's pointless > to ever try. However, I'd say it has been helpful for me to appreciate the > difference between ordinary, common kilesa (defilements) in a day and > really serious kamma patha. Some people are afraid to smile or laugh > because they know it's akusala, but being so concerned about oneself or > such relatively harmless states that don't hurt others can lead to > unnatural behaviours and more attachment to oneself, I think. 43127 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 8:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 1. Hi Mike, op 09-03-2005 23:26 schreef mnease op mlnease@z...: > Adosa with regard to an object >> that is not a living being can be described as patience. There can be >> patience with regard to unpleasant objects such as heat, cold, or bodily >> pain. > > Thanks, I hadn't heard this before. Is this synonymous with 'khanti'? I'd > never made a connection between the root adosa and khanti. N: Yes. There may be irritation or annoyance about any object, also a person or concept such as the wheather. But instead of annoyance there can be endurance of whta is unpleasant, or patience. Kh. Sujin explained to us that there is also patience when there is non-attachment to a pleasant object. When there is viriya for kusala there is also khanti. But khanti is not a specific cetasika. Nina. 43128 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 8:28am Subject: Re: Initial Hello --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, lisa_herawati@j... wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm Lisa, I find out about this groups from forwarded email of a friend. I > am interested in this group because I am a Buddhist and still learning > about this life. Also, I am interested about the Buddhism community > outside Indonesia, where I live. There should be some good different > thoughts. > > Lisa Herawati > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello Lisa, Welcome to the group. As Jon advised you can start your own post and you can follow or reply any thread on the list. Like other religions, Buddhism may have religious implications like ceremonies and their accompaniments. Unlike other religions, true Buddhism has true taste. You may encounter that there have been many sects of Buddhism. But there was only one Buddha. So try to taste true Buddhism rather than named Buddhisms. With Metta, Htoo Naing 43129 From: nanapalo Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 8:46am Subject: RE: [dsg] Initial Hello Hi Lisa, Welcome to this group. You can start with your subject or involve in other's subject. Kindly please don’t hesitate to do this. Metta, selamat -----Original Message----- From: lisa_herawati@j... [mailto:lisa_herawati@j...] Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 3:29 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Initial Hello Hi, I'm Lisa, I find out about this groups from forwarded email of a friend. I am interested in this group because I am a Buddhist and still learning about this life. Also, I am interested about the Buddhism community outside Indonesia, where I live. There should be some good different thoughts. Lisa Herawati 43130 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 8:50am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma challenge --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Cummings" > wrote: > > > > Hi - It has been a long time since I posted on DSG, though I have > > 'lurked' here now and again. > > > > On another Buddhism-related online forum I post to on occasion, a > > member has challenged the authenticity of the Abhidhamma Pitaka. > > Here's the link in case anyone here would like to respond (I hope > > someone will!) > > > > http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=28366&st=0 > > > > Keep up the good work. > > > > Joe > ==== > Good to see you again Joe, > The link seems not to be working? > There are so many challenges to Abhidhamma, even from early times. > Robertk ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello Joe, Your link is not working. Htoo 43131 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 9:04am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma challenge --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > Hi Robert > > I could post the text here if you'd like? > > Joe C > > =========== > That would be great Joe. > Robert ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello Joe C, Post it. There will be discussions. Htoo 43132 From: Andrew Levin Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 9:09am Subject: Re: abhidhamma - Andrew L --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi AndrewL, > Hi, Sarah Forgive me for taking another four weeks to reply on the thread, I sort of felt I couldn't hold my own or express my ideas and hold my own ground, (never mind the extreme mischief mode it seemed my posts here were in) it is a continuing problem for me but the past few days I think I've had some more well-being and clarity and so I think I can get back into the swing of things. Let's see. > > So how much indeed of this awareness arises naturally? I can (or > > have been able to in this past) go from sitting at my computer on IRC > > to thinking I should cultivate awareness or mindfulness, I guess > > without idea of 'me' doing it, but sitting on my pillow or meditation > > cushion and practising mindfulness. > …. > S: I think we can only say that our lives, everthing we find important are > merely these conditioned dhammas – namas and rupas, regardless of whether > there is a lot or a little awareness arising, whether we're siting at the > computer, thinking about awareness or sitting on a meditation cushion. In > other words, there's no need to work out the `best' time or situation, > because this is just thinking and our interest is with the `study of > dhammas', rather than the `study of situations'. Right, everything is indeed reliant on causes and conditions, but I am thinking here that we don't have to be quite so passive in waiting for them to arise. From what I am reading the way to know defilements or nama and rupa is to be mindful of them, well, I am asking now, what kinds of causes do you think can bring up sati? I have said that intention for it along with a few other causes can be sufficient, but see more below. > ….. > > Right, well, until we eradicte deeper views of self, can't there be > > some right practise, while superficial views of self are still there? > …. > S: Different moments. When there is `right practise' (i.e moments of > satipatthana), there's no idea of self. Of course the lurking tendency is > always there. OK, so what type of wrong view are we looking at here? Certainly not wrong view as described as one of the ten unwholesome action, but still a wrong view holding us back from seeing the true nature of present nama and rupa, right? Like a wrong view accompanying a citta, yes? > …. > > > As for `Sarah's book'. Of course I often think of `Sarah's book'. > > This can > > > be with or without wrong view of self however;-) > > > > So do you ever acquire any goodness when you open "Sarah's book'? > …. > S: Good and bad states arise rapidly in succession. None of them are > acquired by any self. Just conditioned dhammas. No need to attach to the > good and mind about the bad… > …. > > Would you be willing to accept that after reading the Dhamma which > > specifically instructed one to do so, 'Andrew' has intentionally > > tried to be mindful of his body and thought procecesses and > > succeeded, and at the end of the day felt a huge burden lifted off of > > him, sort of the opposite of that ever-present hole that most people > > try to fill with a person, a goal, or possessions? And that when > > answering the telephone, there was more attention to be put on the > > receiver or what words were going to be said? > …. > S: This is difficult. Let me put it this way, I think there can be all > sorts of great benefits from following all sorts of instructions to focus > on breathing, sensations in the body and so on. So there may be all the > results you mention. Indeed, I have interests myself in yoga, breathing > methods,Chinese healing systems etc etc , but I don't see any intentional > mindfulness as you describe in my reading of Dhamma which simply helps us > to understand conditioned dhammas as anicca, dukkha and ANATTA. So the > kind of attention or mindfulness you are referring to here is different > from the development of satipatthana, as I understand it. The Buddha described mindful awareness as one of the steps in the gradual training, going along with guarding the sense doors, morality, and contentment. On my mindfulness walks (basically one main aspect of my practise) it is just this mindfulness that is supposed to see the true nature of things. How, now, does this differ from the type of mindfulness of realities that you know, and if it is the same, sati, would you be willing to accept that it has come about through the causes of intention to be mindful, of reading a book with instructions to be mindful, describing mindfulness? As for the three characteristics, I gained some direct vision of them in physical realities from a 20 minute sitting meditation session, not sati, as one would think.. Mysterious, huh? > …. > > And that all this was done just as scripture instructed one to do so, > > and this mindfulness lasted into a formal meditation session? > > > > Sort of similar to knowing less 'ultimate' and more 'conventional' > > realities such as mindfulness of posture, after only reading "Be > > mindful, thoroughly know, your posture, and small deportments" and > > similar text? > …. > S: I understand that the idea of posture (if taken as a reality or object > of mindfulness) is a hindrance to the understanding of dhammas. Again, the > understanding of `situations' or `positions' can never break down the idea > of self. I'm happy to discuss any texts or scriptures in more detail. > …. From the (Maha-)Satipatthana sutta, mindfulness of posture is one of the objects to be known with mindfulness. Certainly it is not an ultimate reality but there must be some benefit from it for the Buddha to instruct people to follow it. Of course, not too far after mindfulness of posture comes mindfulness of the four elements, but still, posture may.. ehh. as I've read, help one to see the selfless nature of the mind/body complex especially if it is accompanied by awareness of intention to walk (so you see for example there is intention and going, no 'self' who is doing the walking, sounds right, doesn't it?). > > > > Also, I am somewhat skeptical that just reading Dhamma conditions > > mindfulness, it seems that just reading an instruction to 'be > > mindful' is enough, and that one's own thoughts to 'be mindful' > > should work just as well. > …. > S: If there is sufficient understanding of what dhammas really are and if > there is no misunderstanding of what it means to be mindful. In truth, > even the ariyans needed to continue to hear, consider and discuss the > Dhamma. There is a sutta which talks about the path for ignorant > worldlings and continues to say it is the same for sotapannas and so on up > to arahants. We need the right kind of reminders over and over again. If I am given a sufficiently long place to walk, or sufficient hours of the day, I believe I can intentionally cultivate mindfulness of the body and to a lesser extent of the mind, like clear comprehension, along that path. Certainly the instructions to be mindful were all I needed previously to cultivate mindfulness that at least had the potential to work day after day, and brought more mindfulness when it was time to do sitting meditation. However, from my experience, I agree with you that it is probable that we need to hear or discuss dharma to stay on track for long periods of time. > …. > > So you're saying metta just has to be read about or conditioned to > > come rather than my "I must read meditations on loving-kindness to > > cultivate good amounts of metta"? Could anything else just happen to > > condition metta to arise, like realizing the need for it, or wanting > > to promote the welfare of living beings [even one's own]? > …. > S: I think the main condition is the arising of metta when there is an > opportunity (with other people around) and the gradual understanding of > the characteristic of metta at such times, so that other states like > attachment are less likely to be mistaken for it. > > When we wish to promote our own welfare, this is not metta, for example. > I've had a bit of trouble with my ankle and I realized as I was hobbling > around how much time was being spent on my welfare. But then, we were > giving out our Chinese New Year red packets to building and restarurant > staff and there was some genuine good will to others and forgetting about > *me*. We can read a lot about metta, but I think the friendliness and > helpfulness when we have a chance is most useful. Fair, there are situations that have caused me to have compassion spontaneously, however, I do believe in the idea of using loving- kindness meditations or instructions to cultivate metta. For example, one day going to the beach with my friends I continually wished for each of them "May he be well, happy, and peaceful. May he have no problems. May he have no pain." and so on. This was enough to generate metta, and, come to think of it, I have generated harmlessness that was sent out for over a mile in distance during my intial work with dharma, where I had very little or no interaction on the dharma, but was doing contemplation and reading scripture alone. > …. > > OK. Also have another question. I haven't been able to get that > > good 'study' mode going to get into CMA but I do recall that there is > > a citta or cetasika that arises when the object is 'extremely' > > desirable and I think I have experienced this recently, and, since I > > have gotten Bhikku Bodhi's "The Noble Eightfold Path" I think that my > > intention should be on renunciation instead of strong liking, greed, > > or attachment, to that. As it is, it sort of sucks me in into a > > downward spiral. > …. > S: I'm not sure I follow exactly, but whatever it is, it's gone. We don't > know what will arise:anytime by conditions and unexpectedly, but it > doesn't matter at all. Just develop more awareness, understanding and > detachment, but not by trying to do anything. Let me jump in here-- certainly trying to develop detachment is one of the goals here, as being opposed to greed or attachment, (right intention, focused on renunciation, detachment, or generosity instead of lust for sensuality, if this makes sense)-- but are you saying we should do it not by trying [intentionally]? I can't understand your statement if so. > They really are just very > fleeting dhammas – pleasant, unpleasant, good, bad or whatever. If we > attach importance to what's gone already, the present dhamma is the > attachment. > …./ > > So now, with a different perspective, do you think it would be good > > to start doing a citta study thread again? I can see I missed out on > > the large part of the cetasika study thread, but nonetheless maybe it > > would be beneficial to start one. > …. > S: I'd be glad if you'd like to start one and will certainly follow. What > do you suggest? The cetasika thread will be going on for ages, so please > join in this at any time too. It's never too late for comments or > questions. > > Anyway or sort you like would be fine. > > Ideas? > …. > S: Would you like to join in an ongoing study corner or start a new one? > Or just join in different threads? Well I kind of haven't been able to study CMA as I did earlier, and there's no great understanding to be had by trying to force it to work when it's not, but I would be interested in continuing to develop and understanding of Abhidhamma from Nina's ADL and post it here. I've read up to the sections on moha and dosa myself, but am having trouble distinguishing the two. What arises is some kind of darkness in the mind, and I'm not able to recognize what exactly it is, so I guess I can re-start posting about the book here for help on that. It should help me develop understanding or awareness of cittas or cetasikas that are present in my mind at one point or another, no? Happy March 10th! ;) -A.L. 43133 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 9:17am Subject: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: Dear Sarah and Htoo, I remember an example, given by Kh Sujin, of weak akusala citta that is not akusala kamma: just putting sugar in one's tea. We also should think of samalobha, ordinary lobha, and visama lobha, lobha that is more harmful. I have seen this in a commentary. Sama means even, visama: uneven, contrary. Nina. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Nina, Sarah, and All, It is better if we can detect akusala citta at its earliest points soon after the base happen [arise & pass away]. I like the explanation of 'sama' and 'visama' lobha. Kamma has different classifications. Some have potentiative power and some have reductive power and some have destructive power etc etc. Ordinary akusala may or may reveal its effect. My belief is that all akusala cittas do have kamma. And all kamma each do carry their full power till the last moment of arahatta-cuti-citta. Kamma without results may well be such ones. But unhealthy control of smile is not Dhamma even though laughing may have akusala base. With Metta, Htoo Naing 43134 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 9:18am Subject: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Htoo,(Nina & Larry), > > Part 2 - thx for your prompt replies yesterday to Part 1 and another > thread. > I'd be glad to hear any more of your (or anyone else's) comments. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ========= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Sarah, I have replied this post under Nina's reply. With respect, Htoo Naing 43135 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:05am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Sarah wrote: Dear Htoo, ... S: I know you're also discussing these threads with Jon, but I hope you don't mind if I continue too:-). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: It's OK. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- <...> > Htoo: Hmmm. I might have been wrong. But I see it as universal. I > came out of Buddhism and just see with natural eyes and neutral eyes. ... S: I'm not sure what natural and neutral eyes are:-/ .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: In Myanmar there is a saying ''Don't look through the green glassess''. I mean here 'to look by natural eyes'. Natural eyes are unglassed eyes. So there is no judgement. Neutral eyes are also non-judgemental eyes. So they are neutral. What I said 'I came out of Buddhism' means 'all labelled Buddhisms including Theravara Buddhism'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .... S: Does this mean that if we spend an hour learning literature or science or even studying Abhidhamma, that all the javana cittas for this period of time are mahakusala? Does this make any sense? What about the many, many moments of experiencing objects throught the 5 sense doors followed by their many mind door processes even while we study? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: There are 2 alternatives in 'kama javana cittas' if not in arahats. They are akusala and kusala. If you focus on kusala or if you deviate to kusala then you will deny that cittas that are not at the objects of dana, siila, bhavana are kusala cittas. This means 'sincerely purely learning mind' is performed by one of eight mahakusala cittas. If you focus on akusala then you may agree the proposal. That is cittas that are not in killing, stealing, sexing, lying, intoxicating are not akusala. Then you might accept 'sincerely purely learning mind' is not akusala. If not akusala then it is one of 8 mahakusala cittas. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: In fact, of course, there can't be any study without lots of seeing of visible objects and 'processing'. As I said, I think that unless any of the javana cittas are concerned with dana, sila or bhavana, i.e rooted in alobha, adosa and possibly amoha, then they must be rooted in moha and usually lobha or dosa. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I have told you above. If not alobha, adosa, amoha then they must be with lobha, dosa, moha. This is logical inferrence. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: I look forward to your comments with your abhidhamma understanding. ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Actually I am a practical orientated person. But for the sake of others I do discuss things from different points of view and down to grass root level of dhamma. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > You may argue those cittas which arise while learning are lobha muula > > cittas. ... S: Very, very common. Also just moha (ignorance) and sometimes low level dosa too, such as when one can't turn the page easily or one makes a mistake on the computer, hears a loud noise or has a little bodily discomfort and so on. Does one mind any interruption, such as the telephone? Easy to see the attachment followed by the dosa. When I once told K.Sujin that I like to have a quiet spell each day outside in the garden or by the pool, away from household chores and the telephone, for reading and reflecting, she just answered 'attachment'. It was true. We may think our dhamma study is a noble activity, but this is thinking of a situation again, rather than understanding the present cittas. ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Generally akusala are much more abundant than kusala. Learing non-religious things will invlove many javana cittas. Lobha is most common one when learning. Dosa may also arise when learning. Pure moha may also arise without lobha and dosa when learning. But what cittas are they when learning mind do not have lobha, dosa and moha? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Do you think that all cittas that arise while learning is akusala > > cittas [lobha here]. > > > > Reading or learning invlove javana cittas. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ... S: I think this should be 'involve' rather than 'in love' javana cittas;-). I think that cittas change all the time and only awareness can be aware of the present dhamma and only panna can know it for what it is. When we think of a story about reading or learning and conclude that this must be kusala or akusala, it's not what we learn from our appreciation of abhidhamma. Kusala and akusala follow each other all the time - but usually, there's far more akusala, I believe. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: As I told you above, yes. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: Even now as we write about dhamma, we can test it out - kindness, friendliness, appreciation of dhamma, but also lots of attachment and ignorance in between following seeing, hearing and so on. .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: True. I try to meditate when reading. It is much more difficult than sitting with eyes closed. I drop big attachment at its early life and I drop big aversion at its early life. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Regarding javana cittas, if they are not kiriya javana they have to > > be akusala or kusala. So they at each moment or at each vithi vara > > will have only one alternative of akusala and kusala. ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > S: Yes. So if it's not seeing or hearing and not metta or karuna or dana or satipatthana, for example, what is it right now? .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Karuna and mudita are occasional cetasika in kusala cittas. Metta or non-aversion is universal to all beautiful consciousness. Seeing and hearing are not javana cittas. Appreciation of seeing and hearing are javana cittas. As soon as appreciation arise there are javana cittas. These javana cittas are akusala or if not akusala they are kusala cittas. 'Right now' if it is not satipatthana, then it is not bhavana kusala cittas. But 'right now' if javana cittas are simless that is there is no lobha, no dosa, and no moha then they are not akusala cittas. :-) if not akusala javana they are kusala javana cittas. But these kusala javana cittas are not kamma patha. So they are not dana, sila, and bhavana. They are ordinary ones. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Did Newton have akusala cittas when he discovered the gravity because > > of deep thought? ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- S: Again, this is a situation - but anytime there isn't kusala, it must be akusala. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Equally 'anytime there isn't akusala, it must be kusala. :)) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: Is concentrating on gravity or on mathmatical models kusala or akusala most the time? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Most of the time they are akusala. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: Of course, this doesn't mean we shouldn't follow such activities, but understand the various dhammas better for what they are, rather than what we'd like them to be. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dhamma is dhamma. We cannot put them 'you exist here and you sit there'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [Thanks to Nina for picking up the comments about micha-sati] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ... > > Htoo: Thanks for your all response on behalf of all members. I said this because there are many intellectual people here who may think that Htoo has a big ego. And some even said off-line that I was selling in the name of The Buddha. But as a very active moderator you will know that there are less than 100 active members. Some passive members remind me off-line to keep continuing and not to take care of any attacks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .... S: :-) No need to think of 'attacks' or oneself too much. Remember the water drops on the lotus leaf. A lot of people find it really hard to see any benefit in detailed Abhidhamma study and don't see it as the Buddha's teaching as an old member just wrote. I think this is all quite understandable. There's room for all views or understandings. In any case, I greatly appreciate your threads and our discussions together. I'm always glad when others join in too. Metta, Sarah ========= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Thanks for your discussion and pointing out very important areas. Thanks to Jon, Nina and other who joined in. With regards, Htoo Naing 43136 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:17am Subject: Dhamma Thread (281) Dear Dhamma Friends, If deva beings are born with all three good roots that is if they are reborn with tihetuka patisandhi cittas they have potentials to attain jhanas, maggas, and phalas if they encounter respective experts. As soon as deva beings achieve jhana there is an extra possible citta in that individual deva being. If he or she attains 1st jhana then 1st jhana rupakusala citta may arise if they practise jhana. There are more cittas if they further attain higher jhanas. But when they are going to die and they do not stay in jhana at near dying period, they will not be reborn in brahma bhumis or fine material deva realms but they will be reborn in sensuous sphere like in the same deva realm or one of other 5 deva realms or in human realm. There are many trainee deva beings that is sotapanna, sakadagams etc. And there are arahat deva beings in deva realms. Like human realm, the population of deva beings are changing. But unlike human realms there are trends like increasing or decreasing trends. In pre-Buddha time, there is sparse population of deva beings. This happen because akusala dominates kusala in human realm. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. 43137 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:27am Subject: Dhamma Thread (282) Dear Dhamma Friends, Brahma realms is unique. As they all are not sensuous realms there is no sensuous attraction. There are two kinds of brahma. They are rupa brahmas or fine-material beings and arupa brahmas or non-material beings. Unlike sensuous beings there are no ghana-ppasada or nose- sensitivity, jivha-ppasada or tongue-sensitivity, and kaya-ppasada or body-sensitivity. And in arupa brahma or non-material beings there is no material thing at all. That is there is no eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no body. As soon as reborn in fine-material realm there are 4 rupa-kalapas or 4 material-aggregates. They are cakkudasaka or eye-decad, sotadasaka or ear-decad, vatthu-dasaka or heart-decad, and jivita-navaka or life- faculty-nonad. Because of these limitation in rupa dhamma that they have there are also limitation in arising of cittas. There is no citta related to smelling, tasting and touching at all. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. 43138 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 11:11am Subject: 10 upekkhas Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 10 upekkhas. 1. chalangupekkha or equanimity in 6 senses 2. brahmaviharupekkha or equanimity in metta/karuna/mudita 3. bojjhangupekkha or equanimity in vipassana cetasikas 4. viriyupekkha or equanimity in equilibriating samadhi and viriya 5. sankharupekkha or equanimity in sankhara dhamma 6. vedanupekkha or equanimity in feeling 7. vipassanupekkha or equanimity in vipassana dhamma 8. tatramajjhattatupekkha or equanimity in accompanying cetasikas 9. jhanupekkha or equanimity in tatiya-jhana 10.parisuddhupekkha or equanimity in catuttha jhana With Metta, Htoo Naing 43139 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 0:08pm Subject: To Connie: BB's Article Hi Connie, Thank you for sending me "A Critical Examination of ~Naa.naviira Thera's "A Note on Pa.ticcasamuppaada"" by Bhikkhu Bodhi. At the suggestion of Sarah, and possibly because you are interested, I will give you some feedback on the article. I am not entirely finished with BB's article, and I haven't read the book by Nanavira yet, but I am finding that the points are becoming too numerous to put into a single response. This will be an initial response and more could possibly come as issues become apparent during my reading. It is my hope that this dialogue could help us both to better understand the teaching of Dependent Origination and its application to individual Buddhist practice. BB writes: "Ven. ~Naa.naviira's purpose in writing the Notes was, in his own words, "to indicate the proper interpretation of the Suttas," the key to which he believed he had discovered through an experience that he identified as the arising of the Eye of Dhamma (dhammacakkhu), that is, the attainment of stream-entry. His proposition sounds innocuous enough as it stands, until one discovers that the author sees this task as entailing nothing less than a radical revaluation of the entire Theravaada exegetical tradition… The most time-honoured explanatory tools for interpreting the Suttas, along with the venerated books from which they stem, he dismisses as "a mass of dead matter choking the Suttas." The Abhidhamma Pi.taka, the Milindapa~nha, the Visuddhimagga, the Pali Commentaries -- all come in for criticism, and the author says that ignorance of them "may be counted a positive advantage as leaving less to be unlearned." James: I am surprised that I haven't come across the writings of Nanavira before; we definitely appear to be on a similar wavelength regarding the ancient texts and in other ways! BB writes: "I will be concerned here with only one note in Ven. ~Naa.naviira's collection, his "A Note on Pa.ticcasamuppaada." This note, however, is the main pillar of Ven. ~Naa.naviira's distinctive approach to the Suttas; it is the first and longest note in the book and the most consistently radical. The Note sounds a bold challenge to the prevailing "three-life interpretation" of the twelve-factored formula of dependent arising. The traditional interpretation of this formula, expounded in full detail in the Visuddhimagga (Chapter XVII), has guided followers of mainstream Theravaada Buddhism for centuries in their understanding of this most profound and difficult principle of the Dhamma. Hence a criticism of it that claims to be validated by the Suttas themselves strikes from within at the very core of the orthodox Theravaada commentarial tradition...." James: Now it appears that BB is being the drama queen.;-) What Nanavira proposes in regards to Dependent Origination as taught by Buddhaghosa is not really that radical. First, Buddhaghosa himself realized that his interpretation of DO was questionable, as he wrote in the Visuddhimagga when introducing his analysis of DO, ""An explanation of Dependent Origination is extremely difficult," and "Now I would like to expound on the paccayakara (principle of conditionality), even though I haven't a foot to stand on, like a man stepping into a flowing river with no stepping stone." With such an introduction it shouldn't be shocking to anyone that there might be inherent problems with his interpretation. Secondly, Buddhaghosa's interpretion of DO is not the only ancient interpretation of DO; some commentary to the Abhidhamma explains DO in terms of individual mind moments instead of three lifetimes: "The Fonder expounded the paccayakara in terms of numerous moments of consciousness in the Suttantabhajaniya, but as the paccayakara is not limited to numerous minds, but can occur even in one mind moment, he now seeks to explain the paccayakara as it occurs in one mind moment, and this is the Abhidhammabhajaniya."[Vibh.A.199 (approx.)] And elsewhere: "In the Suttantabhajaniya the paccayakara is divided into different lifetimes. In the Abhidhammabhajaniya it is expounded in one mind moment."[Vibh.A.200 (approx.)] In regard to the principle of cause and effect as it functions in one mind moment in everyday life, it is said, "...birth, (aging and death) for example, here refer to birth (aging and death) of arupa (immaterial) things, not to the decaying of the teeth, the graying of the hair, the wrinkling of the skin, dying, the action of leaving existence."[Vibh.A.208 (approx.)] http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/9280/coarisea.htm#note James: Therefore, I think it is reasonable to look at various interpretations of DO and to not declare one to be `absolutely correct', as BB does with Buddhaghosa's interpretation, just because it has been a popular part of the Theravada tradition. Metta, James 43140 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 0:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Apa Kabar Lisa, I lived in Indonesia before. It is nice to have you. Iam also still learning about life. Would you tell us what you think about your life? We also have some friends from Bogor on this list, but I did not hear from them for a long time. Nina. op 10-03-2005 09:29 schreef lisa_herawati@j... op lisa_herawati@j...: > I'm Lisa, I find out about this groups from forwarded email of a friend. I > am interested in this group because I am a Buddhist and still learning > about this life. 43141 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 0:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Hi Selamat, How nice to see you again. Do tell us about the Bogor group. How is everybody? Nina. op 10-03-2005 17:46 schreef nanapalo op nana_palo@c...: > Hi Lisa, > Welcome to this group. You can start with your subject or involve in > other's subject. Kindly please don’t hesitate to do this. > > Metta, > selamat 43142 From: Enio César Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Adinava e Nekkhamma Dear Sara and Nina, I sent an email to the Michael, telling him that his absence has being felt in this list. I am sure he will answer you soon! I loved the idea to make public the topic-to-topic discussion about the gradual teaching. However, I'm afraid that it will not be possible, because all the texts are already in Portuguese and I would spend too much time to translate them to English (and my translations are always terrible!). I will talk about it with Michael. He's always very busy, but maybe he would help me to translate the texts and make this public discussion possible, in order to improve the texts and to correct my errors of interpretation or translation. I'll be back soon! With Metta! Enio César. -----Mensagem Original----- De: Nina van Gorkom Para: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Enviada em: terça-feira, 8 de março de 2005 16:12 Assunto: Re: [dsg] Adinava e Nekkhamma Hi Sarah and Enio, A good idea. The Buddha gave a gradual teaching to general Siiha, beginning to help him see the danger of akusala and the benefit of kusala. It shows the Buddha's compassion, to be so thoughtful of what a person can take in first. Only later on he came to the deep teaching. It is good to reflect on this and apply in our life all these points the Buddha gave as a gradual teaching. Enio, I am still missing Michael, tell him. <....> 43143 From: Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Jon and Nina, Let's look at our experience. When your cheek touches your pillow at night can you tell what part of that contact is tangible data (softness) and what part is body-consciousness? We can make this distinction conceptually, as you both have shown, but I don't think panna can know rupa directly or can know consciousness "without an object", for the reasons I have already stated. I put "without an object" in quotation marks because "object" means different things in different contexts. Panna can know consciousness rooted in greed without an object where the object of the greed is, say, a tomato. But I don't think panna can know eye-consciousness without visible object. Also, I don't think panna can know a cetasika as a cetasika separate from consciousness. Larry 43144 From: Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 2, amoha. Hi Nina, Can (must?) amoha know two or more objects at once? For example, how does amoha know that a particular desire arises with pleasant mental feeling _at_the_same_time? Larry 43145 From: Joe Cummings Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 6:42pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma challenge Here it is: ------------------------------------------------ I thought I would bring up the topic of Abhidhamma. In Buddhist cosmology it is the teaching that the Buddha gave to his mother in the Tavaimsa heaven, and to the devas gathered there. Sariputta, the Buddha's main disciple, asked that this teaching be given to the human world too, and he accumulated the texts. The Buddha was reluctant as only devas would have the capacity to understand it. Historically the Abhidhamma did not appear until the 3rd Buddhist council 200 years after the Buddha passed away. The style and the language of the Abhidhamma also point to it being a later work by Buddhist philosophers. So is it Genuine Buddha-word, or a later addition? Is it correct in it's interpretations? Is it really the 'higher' dhamma? I have read the Abhidhammattha Sangaha 4 or 5 times, read a few of Nina Van Gorkham's books, read a selection of about 10 sections (suttas if you like) from each of the 7 texts as recommended by one of my teachers, and plodded through some large sections of the Katthavathu which was interesting (especially as many of the 'herasies' in it are in fact modern abhidhamma stances). Oversaw and arranged the Abhidhamma section in the triple CD rom "What Did the Buddha Teach" which we based muchly on the advise of professor Ravi (reknowned abhidhamma expert at Chulalongkorn). And attended about 5 or 6 classes of Wat Maha Taht Abhidhamma courses to see if I would be interested. I also wrote a little article comparing the Theravada texts with the Hinayana texts as recorded in China. Comparisons showed that the Digha Nikaya and Majjhima nikaya followed each other closely in the Th. and Chinese texts. The Samyutta and anguttara Nikaya followed each other in style and format, but not closely in arrangement or number of suttas. The Abhidhamma of the various Hinayana schoools varied so vastly as to suggest that they were indeed later additions. (happy to mail the article to anyone interested). My own conclusion is that 1) the abhidhamma is very inaccessible due to its stodgy format 2) is a later addition, and is not the Buddha word 3) Abhidhamma teachers rarely use the original texts but rely on mostly burmese commentaries that came well over a 1000 years after the Buddha 4) Abhidhamma scholars feel superior in Buddhism to anyone who has not studied their courses Also feel that a person's advancement in Buddhism does not depend so much on their school of practise or study, so much as their own merits. Prof. Ravi is a fine example of this - I found him most admirable, despite my reluctance with the abhidhamma. 43146 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 7:10pm Subject: Re: Predominant roots? -Kel, Suan & Htoo Hi Sarah and Jon, For me, this thread ends with what Ledi Sayadaw says. Hopefully others can furnish some references you're looking for. Jon, original discussion was whether one of satipatthana inherently includes all 4. Ledi sayadaw chose kaya but Goenka's would be vedana. Webu sayadaw would say kaya or vedana as his method. I was just using vedana as an example and appears to me Ledi sayadaw's dipani supported the original "contested" statement. So my position is vedana applies following the same logic. - kel 43147 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 7:34pm Subject: Nibbanam-Vinnanam ? Hello, Its bee a while since my last post in 2 years ago. Could you please tell me if the assertation and translation below is appropriate or not? -------------------------- http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/panadi10.htm In the Theravada Canon there are references to assert that Nibbana is the consciousness liberated from all worldly objects and thoughts, as is stated in the Dighanikaya."Nibbanam-Vinnanam anidassanam anantam sabbato pabbam" - Nibbana is the consciousness that has no sign perceptible to the senses and it is immeasurable, purest and a state wherein all the connection with elements cease, leaving no trace (assesam uparujjhati). (D.i. 223). ******************************** Thanks LK 43148 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 8:31pm Subject: Re: Nibbanam-Vinnanam ? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > > Hello, > > Its bee a while since my last post in 2 years ago. > > Could you please tell me if the assertation and translation below is > appropriate or not? > > > -------------------------- > > http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/panadi10.htm > > In the Theravada Canon there are references to assert that Nibbana is > the consciousness liberated from all worldly objects and thoughts, as > is stated in the Dighanikaya."Nibbanam-Vinnanam anidassanam anantam > sabbato pabbam" - Nibbana is the consciousness that has no sign > perceptible to the senses and it is immeasurable, purest and a state > wherein all the connection with elements cease, leaving no trace > (assesam uparujjhati). (D.i. 223). > > ******************************** Dear LK, I asked suan about this passage a while back. I think he even wrote to the venerable sayadaw about it. Anyway here is his message: "The original Pali does not have the term "Nibbanam" in Chattha Sangayana Pali Tipitaka. The original Pali found in Section 499, Kevatta Suttam, Silakkhandhavagga, Dighanikayo starts with the term "Viññanam". And Kevatta Sutta Atthakatha defines "Viññanam" as follows. "Tattha viññatabbanti "Viññanam" nibbanassetam namam,.." "There, to be known specially, so (it is) "Viññanam". This is the name of nibbana." And Kevatta Sutta Tika further explains the phrase "viññatabbanti" as follows. "Viññatabbanti visitthena ñatabbam, ñanuttamena ariyamaggañanena paccakkhato janitabbanti attho, tenaha "nibbanassetam namam"ti." "(To be known specially) means to be extraordinarily known. The meaning is 'to be known in the sense of realization by ultimate wisdom, by noble path wisdom'". Therefore, (the commentator) stated that 'This is the name of nibbana'" Therefore, the term 'Viññanam' in the line of the original Pali verse "Viññanam anidassanam, anantam sabbatopabham .." does not refer to consciousness, the usual meaning of viññanam. In fact, the same verse includes the following two lines "Ettha namañca rupañca, asesam uparujjhati Viññanassa nirodhena, etthetam uparujjhati'ti". "Here (in nibbana), nama as well as rupa ceases without remainder. By ceasing of consciousness, nama as well as rupa ceases here." Therefore, I am afraid that your remark "Interesting that it can considered as a sort of vinnana as it is also said to be void of the khandas which include vinnana." would not apply to the original Pali verse. Nibbana does not become a sort of consciousness just because one of its Pali names happens to be Viññanam. In English language, the term 'object' can have different meanings. For example, the term 'object' in visual object has no relation to the term 'object' in my object of studting Pali. Hope this message helps clarification. With regards, Suan 43149 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 9:55pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 143 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(m) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** Both vitakka and vicåra are jhåna-factors which can be developed in samatha, tranquil meditation. The jhåna-factors are sobhana (beautiful) cetasikas which are developed in order to inhibit the “hindrances”, defilements which obstruct the attainment of jhåna, absorption. Vitakka which is developed in samatha “thinks” of the meditation subject and it inhibits the hindrances which are sloth and torpor (thína and middha). The Visuddhimagga states in the definition of vitakka (IV, 88): * “… for the meditator is said, in virtue of it, to have the object struck at by applied thought, threshed by applied thought…” * Thus, in samatha vitakka “touches” the meditation subject again and again until calm has developed to the degree that jhåna can be attained. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43150 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: killing a sentient being Hi Ken O, Chris and All, Ken O, your raised some livelihood issues off-list related to serving/selling liquor, cigarettes and live fish. They’re good questions. I came across a few notes I made from listening to K.Sujin on a tape (India 01) and wish to share them. I think they’re also relevant to Christine’s recent thread ‘Killing a sentient being’, so I’ll summarise them here. I didn’t note the questions in between the comments which related to war and dropping of bombs. In brief, often or even usually, there’s wrong livelihood unknowingly. For example, there are many moments in a day when we don’t speak correctly in the course of our job or livelihood. Of course, kusala is kusala, akusala is akusala, regardless of whether it concerns our work. When it concerns our living or livelihood, they are different cetasikas. Akusala is nobody – it’s just a moment,even for example, dropping a bomb in a war. It’s just a moment of intention which is kamma. There’s no need to think about past or future moments or a whole situation. As to the intention or kamma, it depends whether there is the intention to kill or whether it’s one’s duty to just drop the bomb, without knowing what will happen. There may not be any intention to kill people, but one may just be given the order. It’s not necessary to have the intention to kill, but one has to drop it. So it all comes back to the intention at any given moment and whether it’s strong or weak. One may have far away thoughts for example. There are always different cittas which only right understanding can know. So, Ken O & Chris, I think the same applies to purchasing, serving or selling liquor or the hospital and other examples you gave too, for example. There are many, many cittas at these or any other times. Of course there will be akusala cittas, but we need to look at the dhammas such as the intentions, rather than the situations, I think. As I’ve been discussing with Htoo, the intention or kamma can be supporting kamma as opposed to generating, obstructive or destructive kamma. I don’t know if this helps and I know Chris will have many objections! I look forward to your comments or feedback from anyone else. Metta, Sarah p.s Ken O, you may also like to check the posts saved under ‘Livelihood’ in Useful Posts – lots of quotes from texts. ====== 43151 From: Joop Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:21am Subject: Re: To Connie: BB's Article --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Connie, > > Thank you for sending me "A Critical Examination of ~Naa.naviira > Thera's "A Note on Pa.ticcasamuppaada"" by Bhikkhu Bodhi. At the > suggestion of Sarah, and possibly because you are interested, I will > give you some feedback on the article. I am not entirely finished > with BB's article, and I haven't read the book by Nanavira yet, but > I am finding that the points are becoming too numerous to put into a > single response. This will be an initial response and more could > possibly come as issues become apparent during my reading. It is my > hope that this dialogue could help us both to better understand the > teaching of Dependent Origination and its application to individual > Buddhist practice. Dear James, Connie and all About Nanavira, I suggest you read the essay of Stepehen Batchelor about his life, his work and his tragical end: www.stephenbatchelor.org/existence1.html One of the lessons I got out of this biography is that's dangerous to be too eager to get a arahat. About BB's article, I have not read it, only the quote of James of it (please give alonger one). I think we should not say that there are "various interpretations of DO" but that DO give the explanation of causality on several levels and on several timescales (from millisecond to a billion of years). Of course BB is orthodox (to orthodox in my taste) But is Nanavira right ? Metta Joop PS James, I did not react on your comments on my message 'Having no opinions'. Because we agree. One remark: after writing my message I realized to be close to Kalupahana's Theravadin interpretation of Nagarjuna (again). 43152 From: Charles Perera Date: Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 2, amoha. Dear Nina, I am just asking you a question. Isn't amoha a kusala citta, and as always, one citta takes one object when it arises. Amoha doesn't know a desire, but desire arises as a condition of an amoha citta ? thankyou, for a clarification. with metta, Hasituppada LBIDD@w... wrote: Hi Nina, Can (must?) amoha know two or more objects at once? For example, how does amoha know that a particular desire arises with pleasant mental feeling _at_the_same_time? Larry 43153 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:48am Subject: Sila Visuddhi (purity of sila) Hi KenH ,Tep & All, When I was checking the reference on citta visuddhi and ditthi which Htoo referred me to, I came across the following quote on sila visuddhi. [Firstly, as I understand, there are 9 different kinds of visuddhi (purity), which develop with satipatthana as stages of vipassana are reached. We know this is the reason that only the sotapanna keeps the precepts perfectly or has no cause to abstain from not observing them. Sila visuddhi therefore only arises with satipatthana which is aware of nama and rupa. There is purification from the wrong idea or ignorance of dhammas as being a self.] .... From the commentary (Abhidammatthavibhaavinii) to Abhidhammatthasangaha, STA ch9, under sila visuddhi: “The virtue of fourfold purity – the virtue of the restraint of the monastic rule, the virtue of the restraint of the senses, the virtue of the purity of livelihood, and virtue concerning the requisites – is called ‘purification of conduct’ (sila visuddhi).” Commentary “The monastic rule (patimokkha) is what frees (mokkheti) the one who keeps (paati) it from the sufferings of the realms of misfortune, etc. It is itself a restraint, because it restrains one from bodily misconduct, etc, and virtue in the sense of making [conduct] conform [to what is wholesome] and upholding [wholesome dhammas]; such is the virtue of the restraint of the monastic rule. The virtue of the restraint of the senses is the virtue that occurs by way of restraining the six senses, including the mind, with regard to visible forms, etc. The virtue of the purity of livelihood is the virtue of the utter purity of livelihood by avoiding wrong livelihood. The virtue concerning the requisites is the virtue consisting of the reflection, connected with a requisite, that a thing as a specific use. This is called the virtue of fourfold purity because it is fourfold and pure in teaching, restraint, quest, and reflection.” S: Like you always stress, Ken, H, I think the fourfold sila visuddhi needs to be seen as referring to moments of satipatthana. We can see here, under restraint of the senses (indriya samvara sila), for example, how all such moments of satipatthana are also a kind of sila. Nyantiloka also gives more detail on catu-paarisuddhi sila and visuddhi at these links: http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/s_t/sikkhaa_pada.htm http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/u_v/visuddhi.htm Also, you may like to look at A.Sujin’s book, Survey of Paramattha Dhammas, transl by Nina, Part 1V, ch 3, ‘Different Kinds of Purity’ http://www.abhidhamma.org/Para12.htm Metta, Sarah p.s Tep, thank you for giving me your kind note and the link to the Vera Sutta . Ken H, I hope you and Charles continue your discussion – I’m enjoying it!! ======================================= 43154 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 2:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Joe, Like the others, I'm glad to see you around again! Are you based in Thailand these days or in some other exotic location? Jon, myself and a few others will be in Bkk for discussions with A.Sujin at the very end of the month. I'm very glad you've raised these questions. As Nina said, we've had long discussions here before and some selected posts of relevance can be seen at these links to old posts in 'Useful Posts' in the files section. I've given the links in full to just a couple of them. I'd be glad to hear anything more from you or anyone else. You're also welcome to pass on the links if you think it's useful. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/29638 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/12658 Abhidhamma 2 - its origins, also see ‘Kathavatthu’ 3350, 4639, 8620, 9464, 12658, 12857, 17027, 19543, 19664, 19780, 22794, 22810, 29448, 29638, 33875 I hope Robert, Nina, Jon, Htoo, RobM or others add any further comments on the letter you copied. Metta, Sarah ======= 43155 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 4:41am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma challenge Dear Joe, Thanks for your posting. I have read at the site that you linked. Please see below. Robert K would also discuss separately on this matter. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joe posted part of discussion at somewhere regarding 'Abhidhamma': Here it is: ------------------------------------------------ [quote] I thought I would bring up the topic of Abhidhamma. In Buddhist cosmology it is the teaching that the Buddha gave to his mother in the Tavaimsa heaven, and to the devas gathered there. Sariputta, the Buddha's main disciple, asked that this teaching be given to the human world too, and he accumulated the texts. The Buddha was reluctant as only devas would have the capacity to understand it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: This again need to be checked at valid scripts. I do not think 'The Buddha was reluctant to preach Abhidhamma to Sariputta'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [quote] Historically the Abhidhamma did not appear until the 3rd Buddhist council 200 years after the Buddha passed away. The style and the language of the Abhidhamma also point to it being a later work by Buddhist philosophers. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I do not believe in that way. Abhidhamma is always with practitioners. Abhidhamma is always with Bhikkhus. Abhidhamma is always with monks. Abhidhamma is always with lay followers. I think here the problem is 'the idea of Historic Abhidhamma'. The Buddha did preach Abhidhamma to 1st 5 disciples and to all following disciples. Each and every sutta has abhidhamma. Abhidhamma is the life of Dhamma. Without Abhidhamma it is not Dhamma. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [quote] So is it Genuine Buddha-word, or a later addition? Is it correct in it's interpretations? Is it really the 'higher' dhamma? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I think this is doubtful idea on scripts rather than on Dhamma. The word 'a later addition' insults the work of arahats. Interpretation resides in individual's mind and not in translators or interpretters. If one sees real dhamma, he or she alreay sees abhidhamma and The Buddha. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [quote] I have read the Abhidhammattha Sangaha 4 or 5 times, read a few of Nina Van Gorkham's books, read a selection of about 10 sections (suttas if you like) from each of the 7 texts as recommended by one of my teachers, and plodded through some large sections of the Katthavathu which was interesting (especially as many of the 'herasies' in it are in fact modern abhidhamma stances). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Here the writer does not say 'the whole Abhidhamma texts that is all 7 texts.' Again he or she does not say 'the whole Kathavatthu'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [quote] Oversaw and arranged the Abhidhamma section in the triple CD rom "What Did the Buddha Teach" which we based muchly on the advise of professor Ravi (reknowned abhidhamma expert at Chulalongkorn). And attended about 5 or 6 classes of Wat Maha Taht Abhidhamma courses to see if I would be interested. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: The problem starts with CD Roms. Some people go through CD Roms and do statistics on words like vipassana, jhana, etc etc. But these CD Roms are just translations and frequency of words does not mean anything. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [quote] I also wrote a little article comparing the Theravada texts with the Hinayana texts as recorded in China. Comparisons showed that the Digha Nikaya and Majjhima nikaya followed each other closely in the Th. and Chinese texts. The Samyutta and anguttara Nikaya followed each other in style and format, but not closely in arrangement or number of suttas. The Abhidhamma of the various Hinayana schoools varied so vastly as to suggest that they were indeed later additions. (happy to mail the article to anyone interested). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Those who see Dhamma will not argue anything. But those who know everything about Dhamma including Historical account of everything will always be arguing with different people with different level of knowledge. Once one discards Abhidhamma then he or she already loses his or her escape way and then bound to the samsara forever. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [quote] My own conclusion is that 1) the abhidhamma is very inaccessible due to its stodgy format ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: This is the writer own conclusion. This is not the judgement of arahats, anagams, sakadagams, sotapams. And not even of well-learned puthujanas. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [quote] 2) is a later addition, and is not the Buddha word ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: As I said above, no ears here on this earth will be able to hear The Buddha's words and what is essential is to have genuine guide to escape way. Example is there are many many people who do not know gold. Not all gold are yellow and not all yellow metal are gold. Some may be reciting Buddha's words. But as long as they do not follow them they are not with Dhamma. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [quote] 3) Abhidhamma teachers rarely use the original texts but rely on mostly burmese commentaries that came well over a 1000 years after the Buddha ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: This is the writer's specific remark. This does not reside in Abhidhamma. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [quote] 4) Abhidhamma scholars feel superior in Buddhism to anyone who has not studied their courses ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: No. Not all. As I said above those who are reciting, doing revision or anything like that but not following what The Buddha taught is said to be not with Dhamma. If with Dhamma, there is no reason to think oneself as superior to others. Again the 40 above is just a remark of the writer of that message at other web site. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [quote] Also feel that a person's advancement in Buddhism does not depend so much on their school of practise or study, so much as their own merits. Prof. Ravi is a fine example of this - I found him most admirable, despite my reluctance with the abhidhamma. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: But there are instances that a good coach can bring a good trainee. Thanks Joe for your bring up this interesting 'Abhidhamma-aversive post' to the group where Abhidhamma is highly admired. May you be free from suffering. With Metta, Htoo Naing 43156 From: Joop Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 5:06am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Citta --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: ... > ........ When we read in > the suttas and especially the oft-quoted Sutta Nipata verses about the > need to give up all views, it is the wrong views we hold that are being > referred to. > Dear Sarah, "When we read in the suttas and especially the oft-quoted Sutta Nipata verses about the need to give up all views, it is the wrong views we hold that are being referred to." An response to my message "Having no opinion" I send some hours after yours (43092) ! I know this was not the first time and I admire your patient to repeat some discussions year after year in this DSG. Still I want to say I don't agree with you. The Paramatthaka Sutta (Sutta-Nipata, IV- 5) is about having no view at all (I hope you accept that I use 'view' and 'opinion' as synomyms), not only socalled wrong ones. I know it's easy for me to say so because this is what I experience more and more as the effect of my vipassana- (insight-) meditation. "Right views" are only a means: when one gets the anatta- insight, there is nobody who can have a view anymore! When I state this, I'm thinking of Nagarjuna words of course: "I have no opinion". Metta Joop 43157 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 6:09am Subject: Re: To Connie: BB's Article Hi Joop, Joop: One of the lessons I got out of this biography is that's dangerous to be too eager to get a arahat. James: I couldn't get the link to that article to work but I read some other biographical information on the Internet. Yeah, it is dangerous to want to become an arahant- actually one should be willing to risk his or her life (as the Buddha did). From what I read, Nanavira Thera had medical problems his whole life. Toward the end he had developed such significant medical problems that the medication he had to take interfered with his meditation practice. He decided to take his life rather than disrobe, seeing the futility in the householder life. I find his decision a bit extreme but it wasn't my life to decide- I wasn't there. Anyway, his actions have no bearing on the truth or non-truth of what he wrote. Joop: About BB's article, I have not read it, only the quote of James of it (please give alonger one). James: I thought the quote I gave was rather long ;-). If you would like the entire article write to me and I will send it to you: buddhatrue@y... Joop: I think we should not say that there are "various interpretations of DO" but that DO give the explanation of causality on several levels and on several timescales (from millisecond to a billion of years). James: Joop, this is another interpretation of DO which not everyone would agree with; therefore, there are various interpretations of DO. Joop: But is Nanavira right ? James: I don't know yet. At this point, I am leaning toward his interpretation. Joop: James, I did not react on your comments on my message 'Having no opinions'. Because we agree. James: That's okay. I usually don't respond either when there is agreement. Metta, James 43158 From: Dhammanando Bhikkhu Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 6:23am Subject: Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo Dear Sarah and everyone, I have just returned from a trip to the north of Thailand with some Icelandic friends and am now catching up with the dsg digests. So far I have noticed two posts addressed to me and will try to reply to them tomorrow. While we were passing through Lampang I stopped to pay a visit to my old Pali teacher, Sayadaw Dhammananda at Wat Tha Ma O. I recall that some of you are acquainted with him. I had received a mistaken report of his death some years ago, but in fact he is still alive and well, and despite his 85 years still spends about four hours every afternoon conducting the temple's Pali classes. My friends took some photos of us and I have added two to the dsg photo section. Just one remark on your reply to Htoo: > I'm not sure, however, if all the details you give can be found in the > texts, such as about the hell stations, the hell-dogs, the razor > trees,whips and hell-handlers & their methods. I'd be glad for any > sources. The detailed description of hell given by Htoo, including the dogs, vultures, razor trees etc., is all from the old texts, but I think little of it is available in English, with the exception of what is in the Jaataka Atthakathaa. If you have a copy of Cowell's translation you might look up the name Maatali in the index of volume VI and check the references. Maatali was the charioteer of Sakka and in several Jaatakas he takes people on Dante-like tours of the hell realms and the celestial worlds. The Nimi Jaataka gives an especially detailed description of the auxiliary hells, the punishments found in each division of hell and the evil kammas that led their inhabitants to be reborn there. Another useful source in English is Frank Reynolds' translation of the Traibhuumikathaa ("Three Worlds according to King Ruang -- a Thai Buddhist Cosmology", Asia Humanities Press 1982). Though this is actually the work of a mediaeval Siamese king, most of the cosmological details are based squarely on the Atthakathaa. Wherever they are based more on Thai folk tradition and differ from the Atthakathaa the translator remarks on this in the footnotes. Best wishes, Dhammanando 43159 From: mnease Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 6:37am Subject: Nibbaana Object for Nina Hi Nina, Is nibbaana the object of the mundane path? Does this occur with insight prior to stream-entry? Thanks in advance. mike 43160 From: Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: killing a sentient being Hi Sarah (and Ken O & Chris) - I'm trying to stay away from posting, but sometimes I find it a bit difficult. ;-) What you say in the following is literally correct, Sarah, but fraught with danger in my opinion. I add a couple comments below. In a message dated 3/11/05 4:06:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > Of course, kusala is kusala, akusala is akusala, regardless of whether it > concerns our work. When it concerns our living or livelihood, they are > different cetasikas. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, every mindstate and aspect of it is impersonal. Just conditions. ------------------------------------- > > Akusala is nobody – it’s just a moment,even for example, dropping a bomb > in a war. It’s just a moment of intention which is kamma. There’s no need > to think about past or future moments or a whole situation. ------------------------------------ Howard: Akusala states are nobody - quite impersonal - BUT. The big "BUT" pertains to certain conventional matters (which, of course, reduce to mere impersonal conditions). (1) It is possible by ongoing contemplation and practice in guarding the senses to reduce the akusala moments and increase the kusala moments (not instantaneously, of course, but as a matter of gradual cultivation), and (2) Acting on akusala inclinations, though literally done by "nobody" is, conventionally speaking, acting that is performed by somebody, and taking such actions had darn well better be resisted! There IS most assuredly the " need to think about past or future moments or a whole situation," because that is a good part of the basis on whether or not we will wreak havoc in the world and in our day-to-day lives. ------------------------------------------- > > As to the intention or kamma, it depends whether there is the intention to > kill or whether it’s one’s duty to just drop the bomb, without knowing > what will happen. There may not be any intention to kill people, but one > may just be given the order. It’s not necessary to have the intention to > kill, but one has to drop it. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: Bombs are of the nature to destroy, not only property but also life. Anyone who drops a bomb knows quite well that it is intended to result in destruction, often of lives, and often of the lives of innocents. When someone allows themselves to be put into such a situation, it is at that moment that they are succumbing to akusala. Now I am not saying that I would not succumb. I am not saying that I would not act wrongly, and I'm not saying that I DO not act wrongly. What I am saying is that wrong action must be recognized for what it is, and wrong action cannot be made right by pointing out that all that is involved are impersonal conditions. To attempt to do so is a form of Buddhist antinomianism. I know that you are not doing this, but what you are saying is open to a misinterpretation that would provide a Buddhist moral imprimatur to be stamped on immoral acts, and I am simply cautioning against such a misinterpretation of what you wrote. 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) 43161 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:20am Subject: Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Dhammanando Bhikkhu wrote: > Dear Sarah and everyone, > > I have just returned from a trip to the north of Thailand with some > Icelandic friends and am now catching up with the dsg digests. So far > I have noticed two posts addressed to me and will try to reply to them > tomorrow. > > While we were passing through Lampang I stopped to pay a visit to my > old Pali teacher, Sayadaw Dhammananda at Wat Tha Ma O. I recall that > some of you are acquainted with him. I had received a mistaken report > of his death some years ago, but in fact he is still alive and well, > and despite his 85 years still spends about four hours every > afternoon conducting the temple's Pali classes. My friends took some > photos of us and I have added two to the dsg photo section. > > Just one remark on your reply to Htoo: > > > I'm not sure, however, if all the details you give can be found in the > > texts, such as about the hell stations, the hell-dogs, the razor > > trees,whips and hell-handlers & their methods. I'd be glad for any > > sources. > > The detailed description of hell given by Htoo, including the dogs, > vultures, razor trees etc., is all from the old texts, but I think > little of it is available in English, with the exception of what is in > the Jaataka Atthakathaa. ..snip.. > Best wishes, > > Dhammanando ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Venerable Sir, Thank you very much for your input. I forgot King Nemi (one of 10 lives of Bodhisattas in almost perfection). With much respect, Htoo Naing 43162 From: connie Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:44am Subject: Re: To Connie: BB's Article Dear James, Joop, All, Nanavira's and BBodhi's articles will be at http://www.intergate.com/~dhammapatha for awhile in case anyone's interested in downloading them. The zip file for Nanavira's writings has some of his letters and early writings as well as some other stuff not by him. peace, connie 43163 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbanam-Vinnanam ? Hi LK, nice to see you back after two years, I remember you. I also remember Suan's very clear explanation of the Pali text as quoted now by Rob K. We have to see the expression Viññaana.m in the right context. Nina. op 11-03-2005 04:34 schreef lokuttaracitta op lokuttaracitta@y... > Could you please tell me if the assertation and translation below is > appropriate or not? ...stated in the Dighanikaya."Nibbanam-Vinnanam anidassanam anantam > sabbato pabbam" 43164 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Joe, I just take up one or two points. Not about the history, but touching on the Abhidhamma itself. Did you learn Thai? I am listening to MP3 of very good discussions on Abhidhamma in Thai in the Wat Bovornives, by A. Sujin and Prof Somporn. A. Sujin used to lecture in the Wat Maha Taht, wellknown to me. I am interested at your points 1 and 4. op 11-03-2005 03:42 schreef Joe Cummings op joe@j...: > My own conclusion is that > 1) the abhidhamma is very inaccessible due to its stodgy format > 2) is a later addition, and is not the Buddha word > 3) Abhidhamma teachers rarely use the original texts but rely on > mostly burmese commentaries that came well over a 1000 years after the > Buddha > 4) Abhidhamma scholars feel superior in Buddhism to anyone who has not > studied their courses N: Point 4: Just book study can lead to this. But the Abhidhamma is not supposed to be book study, it is to be lived and practised. Then one will discover many, many defilements, coarse and subtle, one had never thought of before. One comes to see that lobha arises in a day more often than one could dream of. Lobha can take any object through the six doorways. And see the suttas: here we also find the teaching of kusala and akusala. How lobha lures us all the time. I reposte what I wrote before: Learning about the latent tendencies helps us to understand why we again and again make the same mistakes in life. We learn more details about conceit and come to know that it can arise with regard to any object we experience. See the Book of Analysis, Small Matters. We should study the Abhidhamma together with Suttanta and Vinaya. Through the Vinaya we learn about many shades and degrees of defilements, to see danger in the smallest faults. Through the Abhidhamma we come to understand more the Buddha's message contained in the suttas and the Vinaya. The Abhidhamma is closely connected with satipatthana. Your point 1: 1) the abhidhamma is very inaccessible due to its stodgy format. N: You do not have to read through all the lists, but you can learn that the Abhidhamma pertains to daily life. Also the Commentaries are very helpful. Little by little it can become more interesting. Lisa wrote that she is learning about her life. Yes, through the Abhidhamma we can learn about life and death. Life is only one moment of experiencing an object and then gone completely. The citta that falls away conditions the arising of the next one, but this is a different moment. So it is at the last moment of life, this falls away and condiitons the first moment of the next life. It helps to cling less to the importance of my personality, my life. Nina. 43165 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 2, amoha. Hi Larry, op 11-03-2005 01:29 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Can (must?) amoha know two or more objects at once? For example, how > does amoha know that a particular desire arises with pleasant mental > feeling _at_the_same_time? N: It is understandable that we are wondering about this. We also wonder about unpleasant feeling, domanassa, arising with citta rooted in aversion, dosa-muulacitta. We know by inference that they arise together, and that is different from sati of satipatthana which only knows one characteristic at a time. The aim of satipatthana is to see dhammas as impersonal elements, insignificant elements that arise and are then gone immediately. We can learn about the way of developing understanding when we read the Satipatthanasutta and its commentary. Paññaa or amoha realizes only one characteristic at a time. I shall quote from the Way of Mindfulness by Ven. Soma: At one moment there may be awareness of a rupa such as colour, the next moment of feeling or of citta. These are classified as different applications of mindfulness, but citta with awareness changes from moment to moment, and shortly after mindfulness of rupa there can be mindfulness of feeling, nobody can predict this. That is how it naturally occurs. You may still wonder how one can know the difference between citta and cetasika. This cannot be known before the first stage of insight: distinguishing between the characterstic of nama and of rupa. That is how it is. Just now, we can only think about it by inference. Nina. 43166 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Larry, perhaps my quotes from Ven. Soma can be of help. op 11-03-2005 01:23 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Let's look at our experience. When your cheek touches your pillow at > night can you tell what part of that contact is tangible data (softness) > and what part is body-consciousness? N: We cannot know by thinking about it. But the first stage of insight does know the difference, though not of all namas and rupas. In the beginning only a few namas and rupas may be realized. Satipatthana has to continue so that more namas and rupas are known. L: We can make this distinction > conceptually, as you both have shown, but I don't think panna can know > rupa directly or can know consciousness "without an object", for the > reasons I have already stated. >.... I don't think panna can know eye-consciousness without > visible object. N: At one moment paññaa knows eye-consciousness, at another moment visible object. L: Also, I don't think panna can know a cetasika as a cetasika separate > from consciousness. N: See may other post with quotes. Nina. 43167 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 0:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 2, amoha. Dear Hasituppada, op 11-03-2005 07:54 schreef Charles Perera op hasituppada@y...: > I am just asking you a question. Isn't amoha a kusala citta, and as always, > one citta takes one object when it arises. N: Yes, amoha or paññaa is a sobhana cetasika and it may accompany kusala citta. Each citta can cognize only one object as you say. Citta is accompanied by several cetasikas and they all share the same object. Paññaa accompanying the kusala citta shares the same object as the citta, only one object at a time. Paññaa, when it is of the level of vipassanaa, penetrates the true characteristic of that object. Sati also accompanies the kusala citta and it is aware of the object, and in this way it supports paññaa to know its characteristic. H: Amoha doesn't know a desire, but desire arises as a condition of an amoha citta ? N: Amoha cannot arise at the same time as desire, but sati can be mindful of desire that has just fallen away and paññaa can know its characteristic, it can know it as a conditioned naama dhamma. In that case desire conditions paññaa by way of object-condition, arammana-paccaaya, by being its object. Akusala can also condition kusala by way of natural strong dependence-condition, pakatuppanissaya paccaya. Desire may arise, and then paññaa sees the danger of desire and the benefit of understanding any reality that appears, including desire, as it really is, as non-self. Nina. 43168 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 0:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo, kamma. Dear Htoo, op 10-03-2005 18:17 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > My belief is that all > akusala cittas do have kamma. N: Yes, because cetanaa is kamma. Each akusala citta is accompanied by akusala cetanaa. H: And all kamma each do carry their full > power till the last moment of arahatta-cuti-citta. > > Kamma without results may well be such ones. > > But unhealthy control of smile is not Dhamma even though laughing may > have akusala base. N: I am glad you say this! We should not lead an unnatural life full of scruples, like Rob K said, feeling guilty about eating icecream. Nina. 43169 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 0:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbaana Object, for Nina Hi Mike, op 11-03-2005 15:37 schreef mnease op mlnease@z...: > Is nibbaana the object of the mundane path? Does this occur with insight > prior to stream-entry? N: It is not the object of the Path that is lokiya, but change-of-lineage, gotrabhuu, that is still lokiya citta, has as object nibbaana. However, it does not eradicate defilements. After that lokuttara cittas arise. Gotrabhuu is intermediate between lokiya and lokuttara. See T.A. p. 356: Gotta is the clan, lineage of the ancestry. Bhuu: he has become. He becomes another person, as we could say in conventional language. Nina. 43170 From: Charles Perera Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 2:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 2, amoha. Dear Nina, Thankyou, that was very clear. May you be well and happy. with metta, Charles Nina van Gorkom wrote: Dear Hasituppada, op 11-03-2005 07:54 schreef Charles Perera op hasituppada@y...: > I am just asking you a question. Isn't amoha a kusala citta, and as always, > one citta takes one object when it arises. N: Yes, amoha or paññaa is a sobhana cetasika and it may accompany kusala citta. Each citta can cognize only one object as you say. Citta is accompanied by several cetasikas and they all share the same object. Paññaa accompanying the kusala citta shares the same object as the citta, only one object at a time. Paññaa, when it is of the level of vipassanaa, penetrates the true characteristic of that object. Sati also accompanies the kusala citta and it is aware of the object, and in this way it supports paññaa to know its characteristic. H: Amoha doesn't know a desire, but desire arises as a condition of an amoha citta ? N: Amoha cannot arise at the same time as desire, but sati can be mindful of desire that has just fallen away and paññaa can know its characteristic, it can know it as a conditioned naama dhamma. In that case desire conditions paññaa by way of object-condition, arammana-paccaaya, by being its object. Akusala can also condition kusala by way of natural strong dependence-condition, pakatuppanissaya paccaya. Desire may arise, and then paññaa sees the danger of desire and the benefit of understanding any reality that appears, including desire, as it really is, as non-self. Nina. 43171 From: Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 6:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 2, amoha. Hi Nina, I agree. Amoha doesn't know that a feeling arises at the same time as a consciousness. For consciousness rooted in greed CMA has "one consciousness, accompanied by joy, associated with wrong view, unprompted" etc. Amoha must know these qualities one at a time as the components of the apparent whole of greed rooted consciousness. Knowing all these parts, amoha can see directly that the apparent whole of the various characteristics of greed rooted consciousness is empty of ultimate characteristic (sabhava), in a word, anatta. On a more conventional level we can see this in our body. A body is two arms, two legs, a head, and a torso. Sensing this as visible data or tangible data we can understand that the apparent whole of body is empty of being one thing, and only an apparent whole. An arm or leg is, itself, divisible into smaller parts, but it isn't necessary for parts to be indivisible in order to see the emptiness of a whole. I suspect that everything we experience is an apparent whole in the sense that one consciousness moment is too small and quick to amount to a noticeable event. So I am thinking that the practical intent of abhidhamma, for purposes of bhavana, is that "ultimate reality" refers to a small compound that is experientially irreducible, and that "event" is anatta by virtue of being immediately impermanent. Of course insight is only a stepping-stone to dispassion. So if this process becomes interesting, something is amiss. Larry 43172 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 4:57pm Subject: Re: Nibbanam-Vinnanam ? Dear rjkjp Thank you for your informative help. Even a renowned sayadaw in Myanmar like him made such a rudimentary error! I like to know what's happened between Suan and the Sayadaw afterward. Dear Nina Nice to write to you again ! I remember you said you were going to translate some article on Anusaya from Thai to English . So I just read it through Useful post Htm. You wrote on http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/29228 ----------------------- Thus we see that there are latent tendencies in each of the cittas that are arising and falling away in succession so long as they have not been eradicated by the noble eightfold Path. ----------------------- Is not it possible for wisdom(panna) to clearly see each of the latent tendencies like other nama and rupa ? Or is there any aspect in each of cittas that even wisdom can never see clearly. from LK 43173 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:30pm Subject: Re: Nibbanam-Vinnanam ? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > > Dear rjkjp > > Thank you for your informative help. > > Even a renowned sayadaw in Myanmar like him made such a rudimentary > error! > > I like to know what's happened between Suan and the Sayadaw afterward. > > ======== Dear LC, Hopefully Suan will see this post and let us know. I looked at the whole article and what I suspect happened is that the sayadaw took notes from a few different English articles/translations and then composed his final version. His English is good but perhaps not firm enough to detect the subtle problem with that particular sentence. I have no doubt at all that if he was writing in Burmese this wouldn't have happened: the Sayadaw is well skilled in Abhidhamma and surely understands the Theravada position on nibbana. Robertk 43174 From: Joe Cummings Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:48pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Nina Thanks very much for that. Just to clarify one thing, those were not my observations. Rather they were posted by someone else on the Buddhism branch of the thaivisa.com Expat Forum. It's a pretty 'light' Buddhist discussion group, and we get all kinds dropping in, mostly complete neophytes. This post came from a regular particpant who claims to have a background in Pali Buddhist studies. I had made reference to the Abhidhamma in an earlier post, and I guess he felt he needed to launch his 'challenge'. Would it be OK if I posted your comments there? Thanks again, Joe --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Joe, > I just take up one or two points. Not about the history, but touching on the > Abhidhamma itself. > Did you learn Thai? I am listening to MP3 of very good discussions on > Abhidhamma in Thai in the Wat Bovornives, by A. Sujin and Prof Somporn. A. > Sujin used to lecture in the Wat Maha Taht, wellknown to me. I am interested > at your points 1 and 4. > > op 11-03-2005 03:42 schreef Joe Cummings op joe@j...: > > My own conclusion is that > > 1) the abhidhamma is very inaccessible due to its stodgy format > > 2) is a later addition, and is not the Buddha word > > 3) Abhidhamma teachers rarely use the original texts but rely on > > mostly burmese commentaries that came well over a 1000 years after the > > Buddha > > 4) Abhidhamma scholars feel superior in Buddhism to anyone who has not > > studied their courses > N: Point 4: Just book study can lead to this. But the Abhidhamma is not > supposed to be book study, it is to be lived and practised. Then one will > discover many, many defilements, coarse and subtle, one had never thought of > before. One comes to see that lobha arises in a day more often than one > could dream of. Lobha can take any object through the six doorways. And see > the suttas: here we also find the teaching of kusala and akusala. How lobha > lures us all the time. > I reposte what I wrote before: deep underlying motives of our actions, speech and thoughts. We often > deceive ourselves as to the motives of our actions, speech and thoughts that > seem to be wholesome. In reality they are mostly directed towards our own > gain, they are motivated by selfish desire. With a growing understanding of > the latent tendencies that are powerful conditions for all akusala cittas in > our life, we will be urged to be mindful of all realities, akusala included. > By reflecting and being aware of whatever reality appears we can learn to > become more sincere and truthful with regard to the cittas that arise. > > Learning about the latent tendencies helps us to understand why we again and > again make the same mistakes in life. > We learn more details about conceit and come to know that it can arise with > regard to any object we experience. See the Book of Analysis, Small Matters. > We should study the Abhidhamma together with Suttanta and Vinaya. Through > the Vinaya we learn about many shades and degrees of defilements, to see > danger in the smallest faults. Through the Abhidhamma we come to understand > more the Buddha's message contained in the suttas and the Vinaya. The > Abhidhamma is closely connected with satipatthana. > Your point 1: 1) the abhidhamma is very inaccessible due to its stodgy > format. > N: You do not have to read through all the lists, but you can learn that the > Abhidhamma pertains to daily life. Also the Commentaries are very helpful. > Little by little it can become more interesting. > Lisa wrote that she is learning about her life. Yes, through the Abhidhamma > we can learn about life and death. Life is only one moment of experiencing > an object and then gone completely. The citta that falls away conditions the > arising of the next one, but this is a different moment. So it is at the > last moment of life, this falls away and condiitons the first moment of the > next life. > It helps to cling less to the importance of my personality, my life. > Nina. 43175 From: Joe Cummings Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:55pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Sarah Thanks a lot for your response and for the links, which I'll share with the Expat Forum Buddhism branch. I'm still in Thailand, living in Chiang Mai since '97, still writing but now also working in local film production as an actor and location manager. Just finished two films back to back, SUMMER IN SIAM and BOOTLEG GURU, both of which contain small Buddhist elements in the script. I'd really like to attend the discussions in Thonburi one of these days. Probably not the end of this month but maybe in April? Joe --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Joe, > > Like the others, I'm glad to see you around again! Are you based in > Thailand these days or in some other exotic location? Jon, myself and a > few others will be in Bkk for discussions with A.Sujin at the very end of > the month. > > I'm very glad you've raised these questions. As Nina said, we've had long > discussions here before and some selected posts of relevance can be seen > at these links to old posts in 'Useful Posts' in the files section. I've > given the links in full to just a couple of them. > > I'd be glad to hear anything more from you or anyone else. You're also > welcome to pass on the links if you think it's useful. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/29638 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/12658 > > Abhidhamma 2 - its origins, also see `Kathavatthu' > 3350, 4639, 8620, 9464, 12658, 12857, 17027, 19543, 19664, 19780, 22794, > 22810, 29448, 29638, 33875 > > I hope Robert, Nina, Jon, Htoo, RobM or others add any further comments on > the letter you copied. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======= 43176 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 8:12pm Subject: Re: killing a sentient being Hello Sarah, all, Presumably one believes the mind states or physicial actions that one engages in during this lifetime, will have some determining effect on one's future. i.e. you are responsible for your actions and will suffer the consequences thereof. Mostly, despite the Teachngs, I don't think we really believe mindstates are too important other although knowing they are the intention for physical action. Maybe we don't commit gross breaches of the moral standard - we don't go about stealing, raping, murdering etc. - but we think these physical actions greatly outweigh the fleeting mind moments of stinginess, anger, lust and greed, self-pity etc that fill a proportion of each day. Your post brings two thoughts to mind. Either murder, killing, abortion are not such very great things ... just a flickering mind moment - or we haven't the faintest idea of how dangerous all the uncountable mind moments that flick by in any minute really are. metta and peace, Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Ken O, Chris and All, > > Ken O, your raised some livelihood issues off-list related to > serving/selling liquor, cigarettes and live fish. They're good questions. > I came across a few notes I made from listening to K.Sujin on a tape > (India 01) and wish to share them. I think they're also relevant to > Christine's recent thread `Killing a sentient being', so I'll summarise > them here. I didn't note the questions in between the comments which > related to war and dropping of bombs. > > In brief, often or even usually, there's wrong livelihood unknowingly. For > example, there are many moments in a day when we don't speak correctly in > the course of our job or livelihood. > > Of course, kusala is kusala, akusala is akusala, regardless of whether it > concerns our work. When it concerns our living or livelihood, they are > different cetasikas. > > Akusala is nobody – it's just a moment,even for example, dropping a bomb > in a war. It's just a moment of intention which is kamma. There's no need > to think about past or future moments or a whole situation. > > As to the intention or kamma, it depends whether there is the intention to > kill or whether it's one's duty to just drop the bomb, without knowing > what will happen. There may not be any intention to kill people, but one > may just be given the order. It's not necessary to have the intention to > kill, but one has to drop it. > > So it all comes back to the intention at any given moment and whether it's > strong or weak. One may have far away thoughts for example. There are > always different cittas which only right understanding can know. > > So, Ken O & Chris, I think the same applies to purchasing, serving or > selling liquor or the hospital and other examples you gave too, for > example. There are many, many cittas at these or any other times. Of > course there will be akusala cittas, but we need to look at the dhammas > such as the intentions, rather than the situations, I think. As I've been > discussing with Htoo, the intention or kamma can be supporting kamma as > opposed to generating, obstructive or destructive kamma. > > I don't know if this helps and I know Chris will have many objections! I > look forward to your comments or feedback from anyone else. > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s Ken O, you may also like to check the posts saved under `Livelihood' > in Useful Posts – lots of quotes from texts. > ====== 43177 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 8:18pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma challenge Dear Joe, I just take up a couple of points In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Cummings" wrote: > > heaven, and to the devas gathered there. > Sariputta, the Buddha's main disciple, asked that this teaching be > given to the human world too, and he accumulated the texts. The Buddha > was reluctant as only devas would have the capacity to understand it. ======== This is slightly wrong. No mention of sariputta requesting this. And the reason it was first taught in the deva world is that it took 3 earth months - for the deavs this was only one long sitting. Nothing about it being only suitable for devas ====== > > > Historically the Abhidhamma did not appear until the 3rd Buddhist > council 200 years after the Buddha passed away. The style and the > language of the Abhidhamma also point to it being a later work by > Buddhist philosophers. ========= I often see this said. But no evidence ever presented. Strange idea: how could the monks invent something and then say - 'ok we will now call this the Buddhavacca'. Anyone who believes this must think early Theravada were liars of the highest order. ================ > I have read the Abhidhammattha Sangaha 4 or 5 times, read a few of > Nina Van Gorkham's books, read a selection of about 10 sections > (suttas if you like) from each of the 7 texts as recommended by one of > my teachers, and plodded through some large sections of the > Katthavathu which was interesting (especially as many of the > 'herasies' in it are in fact modern abhidhamma stances). ======= I have the katthavathhu and commentaries, I7ve never seen anything in it that (for example) Nina van Gorkom contradicts. Who is he thinking of here? Robertk 43178 From: nanapalo Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 9:12pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Mrs Nina, Thank you for greeting me. Long time no listening. Wishing you and your family in happy life and please forward my regards to your husband too. Recently Dhamma Study Group Bogor has additional classes for bringing Abhidhamma at 7.30 am every Saturday, and additional Basic Buddhism at 7.00 pm. So every Saturday there are 4 session on Buddhism, i.e: 1. Discussion on Abhidhamma in daily life at 7.30 - 8.00 am and 8.00 - 9.30 am. This session is based on your books: "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" and "Cetasikas"; also Kh. Sujin's "A Survey on Paramattha Dhamma." At 10 am - 1 pm some members go for Dana to Bhante in near shoulder of Salak Mountain 2. Basic Buddhism at 2 pm - 3.30 pm based on your book: "Buddhism in Daily Life" which we translated long years ago. 3. Intermediate Buddhism at 4 - 5.30 pm 4. Basic Buddhism at 7 - 8.30 pm Point 1 discussion members will extend the hour for discussing the Application of Abhidhamma in Management soft skill, either in Bank, Company etc. But we have no other references for this purpose other than your books. Greatly appreciate if you could give me some information regarding this. Many members on this discussion are from variety backgrounds. By the way, I would like to forward Mrs Sujata Tjiomas's regards to you. She is more than 80 years old woman and is still active learning and discussing Abhidhamma with me. Now her eyes are not so good as before, so mainly she doesn’t read books anymore. For your info, since few years ago she read your "Abhidhamma in daily life", "Cetasikas", "Pilgrimage to Sri Lanka", and also "Letters from Nina" which i gave to. She told me that your books give her more understanding and insight to face her turbulent life. Few weeks ago, while I met her at Magha Puja event in our vihara, she told this to me, and asked me for querying to you either any information regarding you and your health. May you and your family be happy. With metta, Selamat rodjali Jl. City (Ranggagading) No. 9 A Bogor 16123 Jabar, INDONESIA -----Original Message----- From: Nina van Gorkom [mailto:vangorko@x...] Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 3:35 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Hi Selamat, How nice to see you again. Do tell us about the Bogor group. How is everybody? Nina. op 10-03-2005 17:46 schreef nanapalo op nana_palo@c...: > Hi Lisa, > Welcome to this group. You can start with your subject or involve in > other's subject. Kindly please don’t hesitate to do this. > > Metta, > selamat 43179 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 0:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Joe, op 12-03-2005 04:48 schreef Joe Cummings op joe@j...: > This post came from a regular particpant who > claims to have a background in Pali Buddhist studies. I had made > reference to the Abhidhamma in an earlier post, and I guess he felt he > needed to launch his 'challenge'. > > Would it be OK if I posted your comments there? N: Yes, that is fine. You are welcome. I did not get the four points were someone else's. How do you see the Abhidhamma yourself? Nina. 43180 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 1:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Selamat, I am delighted with your letter and all the news. See below, op 12-03-2005 06:12 schreef nanapalo op nana_palo@c...: > Recently Dhamma Study Group Bogor has additional classes for bringing > Abhidhamma at 7.30 am every Saturday, ... N:Just wonderful to see all your activities. > Selamat: Point 1 discussion members will extend the hour for discussing the > Application of Abhidhamma in Management soft skill, either in Bank, > Company etc. But we have no other references for this purpose other than > your books. Greatly appreciate if you could give me some information > regarding this. N: As I understand, people like to know how to apply Abhidhamma in their work? They must face now and then difficult situations, contrarious people. It is good if they can give some examples of these to me, so that I can say more on this subject. What helps most of all: seeing one's own lobha, dosa and moha. These are the source of all problems in life, not the other people, not the situation. We like to blame others for our problems, but then we have aversion, dosa, while doing so. We have to be very patient and learn more about our different cittas. They arise and fall away so fast. Often we delude ourselves and believe that cittas are kusala, but immediately after kusala citta there is bound to be akusala citta, such as attachment to our kusala. This is really hard to see. The Abhidhamma helps us to see our hidden defilements. Yes, the Abhidhamma is for application, otherwise it would not be very useful. Good to hear more input from those working in a Bank! > S: By the way, I would like to forward Mrs Sujata Tjiomas's regards to you. > She is more than 80 years old woman and is still active learning and > discussing Abhidhamma with me. N: Yes, I was thinking of her and meant to ask you. A wonderful person, anumodana for her interest. My husband and I are well, but I lost my father recently, age 104. This is dukkha to us. My warmest regards and anumodana to you and your group, Nina. 43181 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 1:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 2, amoha. Hi Larry, op 12-03-2005 03:55 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: ... Amoha must know these qualities one at a time as the > components of the apparent whole of greed rooted consciousness. Knowing > all these parts, amoha can see directly that the apparent whole of the > various characteristics of greed rooted consciousness is empty of > ultimate characteristic (sabhava), in a word, anatta. N: Just one remark about sabhava: this means with a distinct nature or with a characteristic. I would not say: greed rooted consciousness is *empty* of ultimate characteristic (sabhava), because it has a sabhava, its own nature or characteristic. Through insight we can learn that all these dhammas with their own specific nature are anattaa. L: On a more > conventional level we can see this in our body. .... > An arm or leg is, itself, divisible into smaller parts, but it isn't > necessary for parts to be indivisible in order to see the emptiness of a > whole. N: We can learn to see the body as being constituted of different rupas by being aware and develop understanding of the characteristics that appear, such as hardness or heat. I quote from Co. to satipatthanasutta: L: I suspect that everything we experience is an apparent whole in > the sense that one consciousness moment is too small and quick to amount > to a noticeable event. N: You can call one citta an event. It is quick, indeed, but paññaa developed in vipassana can directly understand one such mental event. If we only see a whole group of different dhammas, this prevents us from realizing their arising and falling away. Nina. 43182 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 1:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: killing a sentient being Hi Howard, I am glad to see you, You formulated this post in a very careful, measured way. See below. op 11-03-2005 15:58 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Howard: Sarah: Akusala is nobody it¹s just a moment,even for example, dropping a bomb >> in a war. It¹s just a moment of intention which is kamma. There¹s no need >> to think about past or future moments or a whole situation. > > ------------------------------------ > Howard: > Akusala states are nobody - quite impersonal - BUT. The big "BUT" > pertains to certain conventional matters (which, of course, reduce to mere > impersonal conditions). > (1) It is possible by ongoing contemplation and practice in guarding > the senses to reduce the akusala moments and increase the kusala moments (not > instantaneously, of course, but as a matter of gradual cultivation), and > (2) Acting on akusala inclinations, though literally done by "nobody" > is, conventionally speaking, acting that is performed by somebody, and taking > such actions had darn well better be resisted! There IS most assuredly the " > need to think about past or future moments or a whole situation," because that > is a good part of the basis on whether or not we will wreak havoc in the world > and in our day-to-day lives. N: Yes, Lodewijk and I often discuss this. In the ultimate sense there is no person, just citta, cetasika and rupa. But we live in the world with our fellowmen and have to take responsibilities. We should practise the Brahmaviharas and these are directed towards persons. Take also the Vinaya. The Buddha wanted to help the monks with all these rules so that they could develop the way leading to arahatship. Vinaya and satipatthana should go together. But, we see that the Buddha was htinking with great compassion about situations. He gave rules and also many modifications adapted to situations. He was so concerned about people's welfare. Sarah: As to the intention or kamma, it depends whether there is the intention to >> kill or whether it¹s one¹s duty to just drop the bomb, without knowing >> what will happen. There may not be any intention to kill people, but one >> may just be given the order. It¹s not necessary to have the intention to >> kill, but one has to drop it. >> > ---------------------------------------- > Howard: > Bombs are of the nature to destroy, not only property but also life. > Anyone who drops a bomb knows quite well that it is intended to result in > destruction, often of lives, and often of the lives of innocents. When someone > allows themselves to be put into such a situation, it is at that moment that > they> are succumbing to akusala. > Now I am not saying that I would not succumb. I am not saying that I > would not act wrongly, and I'm not saying that I DO not act wrongly. What I am > saying is that wrong action must be recognized for what it is, and wrong > action cannot be made right by pointing out that all that is involved are > impersonal conditions. To attempt to do so is a form of Buddhist > antinomianism. N: Yes, that is what Lodewijk points out. We should not say all the time just conditions, just a moment, etc. and not pay attention to situations. We have to, we live in the world. We think of people and situations, but this can be with akusala citta or with kusala citta, also with kusala citta and paññaa. H: I know that you are not doing this, but what you are saying is open to a > misinterpretation that would provide a Buddhist moral imprimatur to be stamped > on immoral acts, and I am simply cautioning against such a misinterpretation of what you > wrote. N: Yes, I quite agree. I also know that Sarah said before: we should not use conditions as an excuse, right. We should keep the middle way: developing understanding of dhammas one at a time, and also: develop metta and karuna for persons, in the situations of life. There is no contradiction here, these ways of approach should go together. The same wrong interpretation could arise as to kamma and vipaka. I cross the road with eyes closed, it depends on kamma what happens. I do not go to a doctor, it depends on kamma. Kh. Sujin said: we have to be careful as to safety and health. She also goes to a doctor. Nina. 43183 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:52pm Subject: Re: Nibbanam-Vinnanam ? > Dear LC, > Hopefully Suan will see this post and let us know. > I looked at the whole article and what I suspect happened is that > the sayadaw took notes from a few different English > articles/translations and then composed his final version. His > English is good but perhaps not firm enough to detect the subtle > problem with that particular sentence. I have no doubt at all that > if he was writing in Burmese this wouldn't have happened: the > Sayadaw is well skilled in Abhidhamma and surely understands the > Theravada position on nibbana. > Robertk Dear?@Robertk It is good to know Suan might give us his post. Are there still 3 different kinds of views on Nibbana like below among Sangha in Myanmar ? ------------------------------------ http://www.nibbana.tk/ A DIALOGUE ON NIBBANA | | Teja (interposed.):We all are agreed that Nibbana is something, though we differ as to the nature of that. Agga: Yes. Burma, I mean the Burmese Buddhist world of philosophy, is divided into three camps, so to speak. There is the Shwegyin school which holds that Nibbana is spiritual mind, while the Okpo school advances the view that it is unique mind and body. The Ledi school, however, teaches that it is neither mind nor body but purely calm. Now, before deciding which of these three views is correct | | ------------------------------------ from LK 43184 From: djmathi Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 0:32am Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Nina, Does abhidhamma contain any instructions on practice techniques? I have seen many lists there and it put me off reading the abhidhamma, even though i do enjoy the suttas with its dialogue. I somehow feel that my dharma knowledge is incomplete without knowing the abhidhamma but at the same time i feel it is an needless complication as well as much can be understood through practice itself. metta matheesha <....> > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom > wrote: <...> > > > 4) Abhidhamma scholars feel superior in Buddhism to anyone who has > not > > > studied their courses > > N: Point 4: Just book study can lead to this. But the Abhidhamma is > not > > supposed to be book study, it is to be lived and practised. Then one > will > > discover many, many defilements, coarse and subtle, one had never > thought of > > before. One comes to see that lobha arises in a day more often than > one > > could dream of. Lobha can take any object through the six doorways. > And see > > the suttas: here we also find the teaching of kusala and akusala. > How lobha > > lures us all the time. <...> 43185 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 2:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Nibbanam-Vinnanam ? Dear LK, (and Azita), I appreciate your input. op 12-03-2005 01:57 schreef lokuttaracitta op lokuttaracitta@y...: > I remember you said you were going to translate some article on > Anusaya from Thai to English . So I just read it through Useful post > Htm. > > You wrote on > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/29228 > ----------------------- > Thus we see that there are latent tendencies in each of the cittas > that are arising and falling away in succession so long as they have > not been eradicated by the noble eightfold Path. > ----------------------- > Is not it possible for wisdom(panna) to clearly see each of the > latent tendencies like other nama and rupa ? > Or is there any aspect in each of cittas that even wisdom can never > see clearly. N: The latent tendencies are dormant, they do not arise with the akusala citta. Thus, they are not objects appearing at the present moment so that paññaa can directly know them. However, they condition the arising of akusala citta with these akusala cetasikas, such as wrong view, conceit, etc. Now we know by inference that we still have those latent tendencies, but in the course of insight paññaa will understand more deeply dhammas as conditioned dhammas. This insight is not thinking about conditions. Paññaa can penetrate all that is real, but, of course this is hard for us to understand now. Meanwhile, even knowing through intellectual understanding about the latent tendencies helps us in our life. Why do we and other people act in such or such a way? Akusala is rooted very deeply. If we see other people behaving wrongly, we have more understanding, less inclination to blame them. I remember that the late Phra Dhammadharo (this is for Azita!) had a novice as attendant who was very forgetful. He lost keys, and when it was mealtime, he did not lift (in Thai: jok) the gift of food so that the bhikkhu was allowed to take it and eat. For those who may not know: when one lifts it it is a sign that it has been given, and not just taken by him. Phra Dhammadharo used to say: he forgets but he just cannot act otherwise, he just cannot do it. He understood accumulated inclinations. This makes one more patient. Nina. 43186 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:14am Subject: Re: Nibbanam-Vinnanam ? Thanks for the link LC, I found it hard to follow the dialogue, a bit philosophical but interesting. Robertk In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > > > > Dear LC, > > Hopefully Suan will see this post and let us know. > > I looked at the whole article and what I suspect happened is that > > the sayadaw took notes from a few different English > > articles/translations and then composed his final version. His > > English is good but perhaps not firm enough to detect the subtle > > problem with that particular sentence. I have no doubt at all that > > if he was writing in Burmese this wouldn't have happened: the > > Sayadaw is well skilled in Abhidhamma and surely understands the > > Theravada position on nibbana. > > Robertk > > Dear?@Robertk > > It is good to know Suan might give us his post. > > > Are there still 3 different kinds of views on Nibbana like below > among Sangha in Myanmar ? > > > ------------------------------------ > http://www.nibbana.tk/ > > A DIALOGUE ON NIBBANA > > | > | > > Teja (interposed.):We all are agreed that Nibbana is something, > though we differ as to the nature of that. > > Agga: Yes. Burma, I mean the Burmese Buddhist world of philosophy, is > divided into three camps, so to speak. There is the Shwegyin school > which holds that Nibbana is spiritual mind, while the Okpo school > advances the view that it is unique mind and body. The Ledi school, > however, teaches that it is neither mind nor body but purely calm. > > Now, before deciding which of these three views is correct > > | > | > ------------------------------------ > > from LK 43187 From: abhidhammika Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:51am Subject: Re: Nibbanam-Vinnanam ? Dear Robert K, Lokuttaracitta, Nina, Mike and all How are you? I wrote to Dr Lwin (Nibbana.com) about the Nibbana/consciousness matter soon after the issue has been exposed by Robert K. What I learnt after that letter was that Sayadaw was not in good health. So I did not follow up the matter. Robert K wrote: "I have no doubt at all that if he was writing in Burmese this wouldn't have happened: the Sayadaw is well skilled in Abhidhamma and surely understands the Theravada position on nibbana." I agree with Robert. One of the problem for users of English as a second language is that they tend to accept what they find in Pali- English dictionaries without having the time to think through the implications or consequences of their translations, especially if the translator happened to be someone like the Sayadaw in question, whose postition would make him extremely busy. Having said that, Nibbana can be really an issue for controversy even among the learned Burmese Theravada Sayadaws. This happened once during the reigns of the third or second last Burmese Kings. To settle the nibbana issue at that time, Dutiya Myopyingyi Sayadaw wrote a comprehensive critical studies on nibbana (Nibbanasaruupadiipaka) who was not happy about some Sayadaw's partial understanding and interpretation of nibbana as though it were a mental state or nothingness in the sense of a non-paramattha. Myopyingyi is the name of a monastery, and means the Great Monastery Outside the Town. Dutiya means the second, but does not refer to the monastery. It refers to the Sayadaw. Theravada Sayadaws are very unlike Mahayana monks. Theravada Sayadaws always tend to remain anonymous and avoid self-promotion while Mahayana monks tend to seek self-promotion and brand name for their personal opinions and doctrines. Thus, we seldom know the real personal names of the Burmese Theravada Sayadaws. Their names are usually the names of the monasteries. If there is the need to mention two or more successive Sayadaws from the same monastery, then they are called as the First Monasteryname Sayadaw, the Second Monasteryname Sayadaw and so on. With regards, Suan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > > Dear rjkjp > > Thank you for your informative help. > > Even a renowned sayadaw in Myanmar like him made such a rudimentary > error! > > I like to know what's happened between Suan and the Sayadaw afterward. > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > > Dear rjkjp > > Thank you for your informative help. > > Even a renowned sayadaw in Myanmar like him made such a rudimentary > error! > > I like to know what's happened between Suan and the Sayadaw afterward. > > ======== Dear LC, Hopefully Suan will see this post and let us know. I looked at the whole article and what I suspect happened is that the sayadaw took notes from a few different English articles/translations and then composed his final version. His English is good but perhaps not firm enough to detect the subtle problem with that particular sentence. I have no doubt at all that if he was writing in Burmese this wouldn't have happened: the Sayadaw is well skilled in Abhidhamma and surely understands the Theravada position on nibbana. Robertk 43188 From: Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 0:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: killing a sentient being Hi, Chris (and Sarah) - In a message dated 3/11/05 11:12:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth1@b... writes: > Your post brings two thoughts to mind. Either murder, killing, > abortion are not such very great things ... just a flickering mind > moment - or we haven't the faintest idea of how dangerous all the > uncountable mind moments that flick by in any minute really are. > ====================== Excellent analysis, I think, Chris! I suspect we all favor the latter alternative. 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) 43189 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 6:25am Subject: Re: Sila Visuddhi (purity of sila) Dear Sarah - You wrote: p.s Tep, thank you for giving me your kind note and the link to the Vera Sutta . You're welcome! I also appreciate your asking and enthusiasm. In the message # 43153 (March 11, 05) you wrote about 'purity of sila' as follows: S: "Firstly, as I understand, there are 9 different kinds of visuddhi (purity), which develop with satipatthana as stages of vipassana are reached. We know this is the reason that only the sotapanna keeps the precepts perfectly or has no cause to abstain from not observing them. Sila visuddhi therefore only arises with satipatthana which is aware of nama and rupa. There is purification from the wrong idea or ignorance of dhammas as being a self ". S: "Like you always stress, Ken, H, I think the fourfold sila visuddhi needs to be seen as referring to moments of satipatthana. We can see here, under restraint of the senses (indriya samvara sila), for example, how all such moments of satipatthana are also a kind of sila". I think you might have put the carriage before the horse when you said, "the fourfold sila visuddhi needs to be seen as referring to moments of satipatthana." My understanding is that practicing the indriya-samvara-sila conditions satipatthana to be fulfilled later on when the four foundations of mindfulness are practiced according to the Maha-satipatthana Sutta. The fulfillment of indriya-samvara- sila leads to fulfillment of samma-sati in the sequential manner. This is explained in SN 46.6 Kundaliya Sutta. A summary of this sutta is available at http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/guide- tipitaka/guidetipitaka-06.htm "The Buddha advises him to cultivate and frequently practise restraint of the five senses. This will establish the threefold good conduct in deed, word and thought. When the threefold good conduct is cultivated and frequently practised, the Four Foundations of Mindfulness will be established. When the Four Foundations of Mindfulness are well established, the Seven Factors of Enlightenment will be developed. When the Seven Factors of Enlightenment are developed and frequently applied, the. Fruits of the Path and liberation by knowledge will be achieved". Kindest regards, Tep May your persistence be aroused and not lax; your mindfulness established and not confused; your body calm and not aroused; your mind centered and unified. ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi KenH ,Tep & All, > > When I was checking the reference on citta visuddhi and ditthi which Htoo > referred me to, I came across the following quote on sila visuddhi. > 43190 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 7:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Djmathi, op 12-03-2005 09:32 schreef djmathi op matheeshag@h...: > Does abhidhamma contain any instructions on practice techniques? N: I would not call it techniques, that sounds too much like a rule: you have to do this or that. Whereas in reality citta, consciousness, arises just for a moment because of its own conditions and then it falls away. As I wrote to Selamat: D:I have seen many lists there and it put me off reading the abhidhamma, even though i do enjoy the suttas with its dialogue. N: You do not have to read all the Abhidhamma classifications, but you could take just a few lines at a time. Moreover, there are not only lists in the Abhidhamma, also descriptions. For example, we learn that citta rooted in attachment can be accompanied by happy feeling. Here we have something to consider. When we feel happy, we think that this must be good. Actually, happy feeling can arise with kusala citta, but it arises more often with akusala citta rooted in attachment. From the time we get up until we go to sleep, attachment arises most of the time. Attachment can also be accompanied by indifferent feeling and this is much harder to know. Attachment can be coarse but also more subtle. When we just want to walk or move around, there can be attachment already. When you consider this more you can see that there is Abhidhamma also in the suttas. We learn about attachment to all the objects experienced through the senses and the mind-door in the suttas. This is repeated many times. The Abhidhamma helps us to have a deeper understanding of the suttas. Is there a specific sutta you would like to discuss? Then we can see that Abhidhamma is contained in it. D: I somehow feel that my dharma knowledge is incomplete without knowing the > abhidhamma but at the same time i feel it is an needless > complication as well as much can be understood through practice > itself. N: Abhidhamma is not just the text, it is for application, for practice. It depends on the individual's inclination how much he will study. There is no need to force oneself. Even if one studies a little but considers well it is beneficial. Nina. 43191 From: Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 4:04pm Subject: Vism.XIV,144 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 144. (xvi)-(xvii) The tranquilizing of the body is 'tranquility of the body'. The tranquilizing of consciousness is 'tranquility of consciousness'. And here 'body' means the three [mental] aggregates, feeling, [perception and formations] (see Dhs.40). But both tranquility of the body and of consciousness have, together, the characteristic of quieting disturbance of the body and of consciousness. Their function is to crush disturbance of the [mental] body and of consciousness. They are manifested as inactivity and coolness of the [mental] body and consciousness. They should be regarded as opposed to the defilements of agitation, etc., which cause unpeacefulness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. 43192 From: connie Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 7:03pm Subject: Buddha Nature Hi, All, Thus begins a section on The Origins of the Buddha Nature in an article I was sent by one of my enchanting friends: The Buddha nature concept is a characteristic teaching of Mahayana Buddhism, but its origin can be traced back to early Buddhism. In an early scripture, for example, Shakyamuni talks about the "luminous mind" (Skt citta-prakrti) covered by the layers of delusion: "This mind ... is luminous, but it is defiled by tainst that come from without; that mind ... is luminous, but it is cleansed of taints that come from without". Shakyamuni explains that since people are unaware of their innate luminous mind, they do not eventry to cultivate their potential. So the brilliance of this luminous mind remains obscured. The following is part of my reply, mostly a rehashing of Luminous Mind UPs, with the hope that if I have misunderstood anything, someone here will correct me. Thanks for Shin's [Shin Yatomi] article on Buddha Nature, Paula. He mentions the "luminous mind" (Skt citta-prakrti) [I do not know the Sanskrit 'prakrti'. In Pali, the the word is 'pabhassaram'.], [...snip...] Mind, consciousness, citta ... same in Pali and Sanskrit... [I thought the Skt was citra?]... anyway, 'thought moment'. Each lasting how long? There is no continuous or lasting mind or other reality other than nibbaana. The text before our quote reads, "Monks, I know not of any other single thing so quick to change as the mind: insomuch that it is no easy thing to illustrate how quick to change it is." "This mind" and "that mind" in Shin's quote are not the same types of mind. To my understanding, the luminous mind here - "that mind" - is the bhavanga citta, the life-continuum or 'subconscious'. It is the same type of citta as the rebirth linking consciousness and takes the same object [mind always has an object] throughout our lives, but it is not really from this lifetime. Whenever there is not a sense-door or mind-door process citta with an object of this lifetime, there is bhavanga citta. Between processes or when we are fast asleep and 'totally out of this world', it is the bhavangas that maintain our being this person, this lifetime. [If this bhavanga or deep sleep or between processes citta is what we need to develop, wouldn't we be well advised to spend our lives comatose? I won't go into why the bhavangas can't be developed, but it has to do with them being vipaka or result of kamma.] It, "that mind", is undefiled by any processing of the objects of this lifetime (the taints that come from without); however, it is not luminous in the sense that there are no latent defilements there. If there is no ignorance, there is no rebirth [patisandhi citta], which is just another (bhavanga) mind moment. [The other type of bhavanga is the cuti citta or dying consciousness]. The bhavangas are luminous in the sense that the defilements [not to mention any wholesomeness] arise in the process cittas - "this mind" - specifically, during the moments of javana cittas, when kamma is accumulated. Bhavangas are considered to be outside the process or vithi cittas. If the argument runs along the lines that we are born pure and just need to uncover &/or develop that, we're back to the same bramanic atta-Atta theories Buddha rejected. Shin tries to say this atta-Atta thing is not the case. There is still the problem of identifying anything as me or mine rather than impersonal elements (dhammas, dhatus) that arise and fall according to conditions. I am tempted to go into a consideration of 'turning poisons to medicine'. As a figure of speech, it's not bad, but in actuality, one thing cannot become another. I think Buddha's teachings point to knowing the true natures of all realities, always at each present moment, which requires awareness or sati. Understanding, right or wrong, dictates how we live and what we become. It is understanding that needs to be developed in order that skillful states can arise and the defilements be abandoned, but now I'm veering off into the question of the mutual possession of the 10 worlds. Back to Shin... [...snip...] If it's not the bhavanga citta that is BuddhaNature, what is it? If it IS some kind of mind, how can it be said that it's inherent in the universe or our physical environment? This is rather long and I know you are busy. Just know I read the article, I guess. thanks again, connie 43193 From: Joe Cummings Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 7:23pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge > > > > Would it be OK if I posted your comments there? > N: Yes, that is fine. You are welcome. Thanks, Nina. > How do you see the Abhidhamma yourself? As I wrote in the other forum, I don't have the wisdom to be able to say that one basket of the Tipitaka is superior to the others. It's all good ... Hence I treat every verse I read and ponder with equal respect, and remain in awe of the entirety of the Suttanta, Vinaya and Abhidhamma. I understand how people might treat the Tipitaka as a 'buffet', picking and choosing according to which parts pleased them. But I trust the six Buddhist Councils, who have verified the Pali canon, more than I would trust my own inclinations or habituations. Put another way, I know enough to know that I don't know much at all. Ultimately, like you say, it's a matter of putting the Tipitaka to practise, not evaluating the relative merits of the three baskets based on how 'stodgy' or 'fluid' they might seem to the conditioned mind. The work that you, Ajahn Sujin and the rest of the DSG are doing remains important to me though, so I must admit attachment to the Abhidhammist view. Joe 43194 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 9:33pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 144 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(n) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** As regards the jhåna-factor vicåra which is developed in samatha, this keeps the citta “anchored on” the meditation subject and inhibits the hindrance which is doubt. As we have seen, in the case of kåmåvacara cittas, both vitakka and vicåra arise together when they accompany the citta. In the case of jhånacittas however, a distinction has to be made. In the first stage of jhåna both vitakka and vicåra are needed in order to experience the meditation subject with absorption. Thus, both vitakka and vicåra accompany the rúpåvacara kusala citta, the rúpåvacara vipåkacitta and the rúpåvacara kiriyacitta of the first stage of jhån(1). In the second stage of jhåna one has acquired more skill in jhåna and vitakka is no longer needed in order to experience the meditation subject with absorption. At that stage vitakka has been abandoned, but vicåra still arises. In the subsequent stage of jhåna, which is more tranquil and more refined, also vicåra has been abandoned; it is no longer needed in order to experience the meditation subject with absorption. Some people have abandoned both vitakka and vicåra in the second stage of jhåna and thus for them there are only four stages of rúpa-jhåna instead of five. That is why the stages of jhåna can be counted in accordance with the four-fold system or the five-fold system. *** 1) Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Chapter 22. The rúpåvacara vipåkacitta is the result of the rúpåvacara kusala citta. The rúpåvacara kiriyacitta is the citta of the arahat who attains jhåna. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43195 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbaana Object, for Nina Hello Mike and Nina, This is very interesting. I had an idea that once nibbana was experienced "one" became a sotapanna, but did not know so much detail. Maybe this clears up our discussion about the subject, Mike. thank you for all your detailed posts, Nina. I find them so helpful Patience, courage and good cheer Azita. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Mike, > op 11-03-2005 15:37 schreef mnease op mlnease@z...: > > > Is nibbaana the object of the mundane path? Does this occur with insight > > prior to stream-entry? > N: It is not the object of the Path that is lokiya, but change-of- lineage, > gotrabhuu, that is still lokiya citta, has as object nibbaana. However, it > does not eradicate defilements. After that lokuttara cittas arise. > Gotrabhuu is intermediate between lokiya and lokuttara. See T.A. p. 356: > consciousness occurs, overcoming the lineage of the ordinary person and > arriving at the lineage of the noble ones. > > Gotta is the clan, lineage of the ancestry. Bhuu: he has become. He becomes > another person, as we could say in conventional language. > Nina. 43196 From: Joe Cummings Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 0:15am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma challenge Robert Here's one source that appears to support the notion that the Abhidhamma was written down during the 3rd Council: 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. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/history.html As I said before, for me it doesn't matter when the various books were compiled. That the six councils approved of them is enough for a non-arahant like myself! Joe {1, 4}--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > Dear Joe, > I just take up a couple of points > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Cummings" > wrote: > > > > heaven, and to the devas gathered there. > > Sariputta, the Buddha's main disciple, asked that this teaching be > > given to the human world too, and he accumulated the texts. The > Buddha > > was reluctant as only devas would have the capacity to understand > it. > ======== > > This is slightly wrong. No mention of sariputta requesting this. And > the reason it was first taught in the deva world is that it took 3 > earth months - for the deavs this was only one long sitting. > Nothing about it being only suitable for devas > ====== > > > > > > Historically the Abhidhamma did not appear until the 3rd Buddhist > > council 200 years after the Buddha passed away. The style and the > > language of the Abhidhamma also point to it being a later work by > > Buddhist philosophers. > > ========= > I often see this said. But no evidence ever presented. Strange idea: > how could the monks invent something and then say - 'ok we will now > call this the Buddhavacca'. Anyone who believes this must think > early Theravada were liars of the highest order. > ================ > > > > > I have read the Abhidhammattha Sangaha 4 or 5 times, read a few of > > Nina Van Gorkham's books, read a selection of about 10 sections > > (suttas if you like) from each of the 7 texts as recommended by > one of > > my teachers, and plodded through some large sections of the > > Katthavathu which was interesting (especially as many of the > > 'herasies' in it are in fact modern abhidhamma stances). > > ======= > I have the katthavathhu and commentaries, I7ve never seen anything > in it that (for example) Nina van Gorkom contradicts. Who is he > thinking of here? > Robertk 43197 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 0:11am Subject: Kamma (was, NEW dialogue with Htoo) Hi, Too Thanks for the reply, and my apologies for the delay in responding. >I think the seat of our understanding on these specific points is the >angle of view. Conventionally if someone is not committing anything >there is no reason to be reborn. Once committed, then there will be >rebirth. > >The problem is the 'word' here ''committing''. > >What is committing? > > I don't know if this is the context you have in mind, but I think if we say a person 'commits' kamma we mean that the act in question is kamma patha (with all necessary factors present) or is an act that otherwise brings result. >For me as I do not take consideration into rebirth as only vipaka it >understand that 'committing' that I use is 'non-arahats' javana' that >is non-kiriya javana. > >What Sarah discussed with me was 'conventional topic kamma'. That is >kamma for average people. > >I do not know your third proposal. That is why I said above I need to >learn more. > > Well, my third proposal is just a tentative understanding of the texts, but with nothing specific to back it up, except for the fact that, in the classification of the 3 vatthas, kamma vattha and kilesa vattha are separate vatthas. I take kamma vattha to refer to the first and second of my 3 proposals, and kilesa vattha to refer to the third. If this distinction is not made, then I am not sure what the difference between the 2 vatthas would be. Any thoughts on this? Jon 43198 From: cosmique Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 0:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha Nature Dear Connie and all, connie wrote: In an early scripture, for example, Shakyamuni talks about the "luminous mind"... If it's not the bhavanga citta that is BuddhaNature, what is it? If it IS some kind of mind, how can it be said that it's inherent in the universe or our physical environment? Cosmique: Ven. Nyanananda touches on this issue in his sermons 7 and 8 on Nibbana. If you wish, click on http://www.beyondthenet.net/CALM/clm_main1.asp?content=nibbana Perhaps, it will shed some light on your question. I presume that his interpretation is not traditional but it never hurts to look at the issue from a different angle. Metta, Cosmique The heaviness of one's burden is due to one's grasping. 43199 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 0:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Hi, Too >Htoo: I was thinking on the matter of learning of monks. When they >read some dhammas what are their javana cittas? I do not think simple >learning is akusala unless they develop attachment while learning. > > Well, we can say if it's not akusala it will be kusala, or we can say it it's not akusala it must be kusala; either is true, I suppose ;-)) But it seems to me that since akusala is the more prevalent state and the more likely to arise (and hence the more 'natural'), and is the one not to be encouraged, that it is more realistic to see things in the second way, to avoid the inherent tendency to see kusala (the desired state) where in fact there is akusala. You mention learning dhamma. I think the position is the same for monk or layperson. It may be true, speaking conventionally, to say that times of learning dhamma are times of more kusala, but in more 'absolute' (i.e., moment-to-moment) terms there is both kusala and akusala arising. The important thing is not to take one for the other, or to think, 'I'm learning dhamma, it must be kusala.' >I think it is better to leave 'Tiger Wood' here and we move to >Dhamma. But those who do not have much demerit would not face any bad >result as they are not doing bad things. ( Playing golf is not bad >things even though it is not kamma patha kusala.) > > I agree that, speaking conventionally, playing golf is not a 'bad thing', and so not bringing unpleasant result. But playing golf is certainly not to be considered as kusala either. So this would be an instance of the third proposal in my earlier post. Again, on a more 'absolute' basis, neither of the foregoing statements necessarily hold true. A person playing golf could cheat, get very angry with his opponent, or be carrying out a shady business strategy. Or, on the other hand, one could play golf as part of an act of dana. I don't think it is helpful to 'characterise' conventional situations as either one or the other; what is important is the reality of the moment. Jon 43200 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 1:05am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma challenge - In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Cummings" wrote: > > Robert > > Here's one source that appears to support the notion that the > Abhidhamma was written down during the 3rd Council: > =========== Dear Joe, In my post I said that no evidence is presented to support the idea that the Abhidhamma was first invented and recited at the 3rd council (about 200 yeas after Buddha's parinibbana). The quote you gave from Mr John Bullit of accesstoinsight is his opinion and not-at least for me- evidence that what he says is true. I don't know what his source is but I see he uses the sanskrit word 'Sthaviravadin' instead of the pali Theravada - why? You know in the 19th century the western scholars ridiculed the idea that the pali texts that were being translated in Sri lanka could be a genuine record of the Buddha's words. That is until they uncovered the Asoka pillars and had hard evidence - insciptions matching word for word what the Theravada tradition had passed down all these millenia. The reason the mockers of Abhidhamma have allowed the ancestry of Abhidhmma back as close as 200 years from the Buddhas time is only becuase they have no choice- even non-buddhist scholars conceded the evidence is rock-solid. If they had any leeway they would love to be able to say it was all invented by Buddhaghosa a thousand years later. Imagine how many arahants were alive at this time (so close to when the Buddha was living), many attending the council. Does anyone think they got togther and said 'let's make up some new stuff and say it was originally the Buddhaword. It's a big lie but what the heck.' Knowing as they did such suttas as Anguttara Nikaya II.23 Abhasita Sutta "Monks, these two slander the Tathagata. Which two? He who explains what was not said or spoken by the Tathagata as said or spoken by the Tathagata. And he who explains what was said or spoken by the Tathagata as not said or spoken by the Tathagata." endquote Would they really want to do such a thing? Sure they would if they had no scruples and were fools of the highest degree - but I don't perceive that about the ancient Theravada. The Atthasalini says about the one who denies the Abhidhamma as the Buddha's word 'He who excludes the Abhidhamma (from the Buddha-Word) damages the Conqueror's Wheel of Dhamma (//jina-cakkam paharam deti//). He excludes thereby the Omniscience of the Tathagata and impoverishes the grounds of the Master's Knowledge of Self-confidence' (//vesarajja-nana// to which Omniscience belongs); he deceives an audience anxious to learn; he obstructs (progress to) the Noble Paths of Holiness; he makes all the eighteen causes of discord appear at once." And the one who listens to someone who disparages Abhidhamma will follow their teacher into a deep hole. It is a fearful thing to doubt the profound teaching of the Buddha; one should strive as if their head was on fire, to develop faith (and insight) in the nectar of Dhamma. Robertk > 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. > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/history.html > > As I said before, for me it doesn't matter when the various books were > compiled. That the six councils approved of them is enough for a > non-arahant like myself! > > Joe > > > > {1, 4}--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" > wrote: > > > > Dear Joe, > > I just take up a couple of points > > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Cummings" > > wrote: > > > > > > heaven, and to the devas gathered there. > > > Sariputta, the Buddha's main disciple, asked that this teaching be > > > given to the human world too, and he accumulated the texts. The > > Buddha > > > was reluctant as only devas would have the capacity to understand > > it. > > ======== > > > > This is slightly wrong. No mention of sariputta requesting this. And > > the reason it was first taught in the deva world is that it took 3 > > earth months - for the deavs this was only one long sitting. > > Nothing about it being only suitable for devas > > ====== > > > > > > > > > Historically the Abhidhamma did not appear until the 3rd Buddhist > > > council 200 years after the Buddha passed away. The style and the > > > language of the Abhidhamma also point to it being a later work by > > > Buddhist philosophers. > > > > ========= > > I often see this said. But no evidence ever presented. Strange idea: > > how could the monks invent something and then say - 'ok we will now > > call this the Buddhavacca'. Anyone who believes this must think > > early Theravada were liars of the highest order. > > ================ > > > > > > > > > I have read the Abhidhammattha Sangaha 4 or 5 times, read a few of > > > Nina Van Gorkham's books, read a selection of about 10 sections > > > (suttas if you like) from each of the 7 texts as recommended by > > one of > > > my teachers, and plodded through some large sections of the > > > Katthavathu which was interesting (especially as many of the > > > 'herasies' in it are in fact modern abhidhamma stances). > > > > ======= > > I have the katthavathhu and commentaries, I7ve never seen anything > > in it that (for example) Nina van Gorkom contradicts. Who is he > > thinking of here? > > Robertk 43201 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 1:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Larry >Let's look at our experience. When your cheek touches your pillow at >night can you tell what part of that contact is tangible data (softness) >and what part is body-consciousness? We can make this distinction >conceptually, as you both have shown, but I don't think panna can know >rupa directly or can know consciousness "without an object", for the >reasons I have already stated. > > I'm afraid I still haven't understood what those reasons are. As I understand it, each dhamma retains at all times its general ans specific characteristics which are 'knowable' to panna. The reason that for us the distinction you mention remains one that is known conceptually only is because of the lack of developed panna. . >I put "without an object" in quotation marks because "object" means >different things in different contexts. Panna can know consciousness >rooted in greed without an object where the object of the greed is, say, >a tomato. But I don't think panna can know eye-consciousness without >visible object. > > Hmm, interesting. So what do you see as the difference, in the context of the present discussion, between citta rooted in greed with tomato as object and citta that is eye consciousness experiencing visible object? >Also, I don't think panna can know a cetasika as a cetasika separate >from consciousness. > > And ditto here. Thanks. Jon 43202 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 1:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo Dear Dhammanando Bhikkhu Many thanks for the update on your namesake at Wat Tha Ma O. I admire his work very much, and he is a very unassuming and likeable person as well, cheery in spite of (as I remember) almost constant health problems and very poor eyesight. It was good to see the photo. It is amazing that he is still actively teaching Pali. I remember staying over at the temple once or twice (it was there I first acquired a taste for early morning congee, a habit that continues to this day ;-)). With best wishes Jon Dhammanando Bhikkhu wrote: >Dear Sarah and everyone, > >I have just returned from a trip to the north of Thailand with some >Icelandic friends and am now catching up with the dsg digests. So far >I have noticed two posts addressed to me and will try to reply to them >tomorrow. > >While we were passing through Lampang I stopped to pay a visit to my >old Pali teacher, Sayadaw Dhammananda at Wat Tha Ma O. I recall that >some of you are acquainted with him. I had received a mistaken report >of his death some years ago, but in fact he is still alive and well, >and despite his 85 years still spends about four hours every >afternoon conducting the temple's Pali classes. My friends took some >photos of us and I have added two to the dsg photo section. > 43203 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 1:36am Subject: FW: [Pali] AN 6.11.08 sampajañña In the Pali list we discuss words used in the suttas. I give here an extract that may interest some people here. The subject was sampajannña. I explained that I prefer clear comprehension instead of full comprehension. ---------- Van: Nina van Gorkom Datum: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 09:38:18 +0100 Aan: Onderwerp: Re: [Pali] AN 6.11.08 N: Rob K's quotes have: clear comprehension. If we use the word 'full' it seems already accomplished, but I rather think of a development. It is different from intellectual understanding based on listening and study, it is already direct awareness and understanding. In Samatha the yogavacaara has to be aware of his cittas and he has to investigate when there is kusala citta with true calm and when there is attachment to calm. Sati sampajañña, clear comprehension of the different cittas when they occur is necessary in Samatha. In vipassana there is the development stage by stage of the understanding of different characteristics of nama and rupa. The three characteristics are not penetrated in the beginning. First there is more understanding of the visesa lakkhana of different namas and rupas. Gocara sampajañña, one has to know the gocara, the field or object: aggregates, elements and bases (aayatanas), one nama or rupa at a time. Sati sampajañña has to begin, and the quotes of Rob K. about standing, walking, etc. eating, speaking etc. are good examples. Quote from Rob: end Rob's quote. I continue the quote: These are the nama elements and rupa elements in daily life that are the objects of sati sampajañña. There is full understanding of the three characteristics shortly before enlightenment, when insight has been developed to that stage. Nina. 43204 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 1:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge, Asoka Pillars. Dear Rob K, This is very interesting. I am always impressed by the Asoka pillars. Do you have some details about these texts? That is, if you have time. I looked at the Pali of the one in Lumbini with Jim, but I had some difficulties with the language since it was Asoka's time. Jim helped me to decipher it. Nina. op 13-03-2005 10:05 schreef rjkjp1 op rjkjp1@y...: > You know in the 19th century the western scholars ridiculed the idea > that the pali texts that were being translated in Sri lanka could be > a genuine record of the Buddha's words. That is until they > uncovered the Asoka pillars and had hard evidence - insciptions > matching word for word what the Theravada tradition had passed down > all these millenia. 43205 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 2:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Dear Htoo Apologies for mis-spelling your name here and in the earlier post (I think it must have been something to do with the spell-checker ;-). Jon Jonothan Abbott wrote: >Hi, Too > > > > > 43206 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 2:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: killing a sentient being Hi, Chris Christine Forsyth wrote: >Hello Sarah, all, > >Presumably one believes the mind states or physicial actions that >one engages in during this lifetime, will have some determining >effect on one's future. i.e. you are responsible for your actions >and will suffer the consequences thereof. > >Mostly, despite the Teachngs, I don't think we really believe >mindstates are too important other although knowing they are the >intention for physical action. Maybe we don't commit gross breaches >of the moral standard - we don't go about stealing, raping, >murdering etc. - but we think these physical actions greatly >outweigh the fleeting mind moments of stinginess, anger, lust and >greed, self-pity etc that fill a proportion of each day. > > Well, there is some basis for the view that akusala that moves one to speech or action (for example, a sharp word, slamming the door as one leaves the room) is stronger than the akusala that results in mere disturbance of the mind (e.g., mild annoyance). Not that there aren't exceptions, of course. As you say, so much of our lives is akusala. But do you see this 'everyday' aksuala as having consequences of any particular kind? I would have thought that even strong akusala of this kind (attachment to food or aversion to certain individuals) cannot be compared to the akusala that accompanies such 'minor infractions' as taking something not given, lying, etc. which can condition rebirth. >Your post brings two thoughts to mind. Either murder, killing, >abortion are not such very great things ... just a flickering mind >moment - or we haven't the faintest idea of how dangerous all the >uncountable mind moments that flick by in any minute really are. > > Intention is all important. This means it is necessary to distinguish between doing something knowing a certain consequence is inevitable but not intending that consequence, and doing that thing for the purpose of bringing about that consequence. In my view, acts of akusala kamma patha are to be avoided as far as is possible, while everyday akusala tendencies are an inevitable part of life. Jon 43207 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 3:10am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Dear Htoo > > Apologies for mis-spelling your name here and in the earlier post (I > think it must have been something to do with the spell-checker ;-). > > Jon > > Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > >Hi, Too ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Jon, :-). Actually I didnot notice that. Even if I saw it, it is not a problem. With respect, Htoo Naing 43208 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 3:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Howard One or two brief responses, mostly to comments where you refer to my view/position. >Howard: > Jon, I believe we share the view that there is only one object (e.g., hardness) that is experienced. The difference is in what we take that to be. You, as I understand it, take it to be some thing or event that arises and ceases on its own and that may or may not be experirnced by an arising act of consciousness. I, on the other hand, consider the dhamma to be an experiential phenomenon/event that occurs only as an element of experience. > Well, I think our difference is not in what we take the presently-experienced sense-door object to be, but as to whether or not it should be taken to be anything. To my understanding, the presently experienced sense-door object is not to be 'taken' as one thing or another; the development of insight is the seeing of that dhamma as it truly is. There should be no a priori assumptions. As to what it truly is, that would be, to my understanding, things like being a rupa (i.e., a dhamma that does not experience an object), as having whatever unique characteristic it has (hardness, visible object, etc.), as conditioned, and as annica, dukkha or anatta, depending on the level of understanding that arises (i.e., neither or the aspects that you mention above). But again, it is not to be 'taken as' any of those things, since our concept of what those things mean will be laden with wrong view anyway. >For you, the experirncing of the dhamma is a literal coming together of three separate phenomena: the dhamma (which can exist unexperienced), the sense door (which arises only in dependence on a waiting object), and the sense consciousness (which arises only in dependence on the other two being already in effect). > Not quite. To my understanding, the arisen sense-door object-to-be impinges on the sense-door/base, that base being a rupa conditioned by kamma. But yes, sense-door consciousness arises after such an impingement has occurred. > My main reason for my perspective, aside from aesthetic preference, is pragmatic, because I have no basis for knowing the existence of unobserved rupas. > > As I mentioned above, I do not see this issue (the existence of so-called unobserved rupas) as having any relevance in the context of the presently experienced sense-door object. It assumes importance only if one adopts a certain a priori assumption. > What I mean by an external rupa is a rupa that exists but may or may not be experienced. That is all I mean, and I do believe they are what you believe in. > > Not so (as already explained). If I 'believe in' anything, it is that the characteristic of any dhamma, including the present sense-door object, can be known by awareness and understanding, should those mental factors arise. Jon 43209 From: Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 0:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Jon - In a message dated 3/13/05 6:34:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > Hi, Howard > > One or two brief responses, mostly to comments where you refer to my > view/position. > > >Howard: > > Jon, I believe we share the view that there is only one object (e.g., > hardness) that is experienced. The difference is in what we take that to be. > You, as I understand it, take it to be some thing or event that arises and > ceases on its own and that may or may not be experirnced by an arising act of > consciousness. I, on the other hand, consider the dhamma to be an experiential > phenomenon/event that occurs only as an element of experience. > > > > Well, I think our difference is not in what we take the > presently-experienced sense-door object to be, but as to whether or not > it should be taken to be anything. > > To my understanding, the presently experienced sense-door object is not > to be 'taken' as one thing or another; the development of insight is the > seeing of that dhamma as it truly is. There should be no a priori > assumptions. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Actually, I think we agree on this, Jon. I think that, in fact, each of us does have a bit if a hypothesis about this matter (and many others), but we hold these hypotheses tentatively and lightly, and we recognize that they are merely guesses. Reality is what it is, and all our assumptions, one way or the other, have no effect on that in the slightest. Indeed, on any matter, when wisdom reveals reality there will be knowing, and until then there is no certainty at all. --------------------------------------- > > As to what it truly is, that would be, to my understanding, things like > being a rupa (i.e., a dhamma that does not experience an object), as > having whatever unique characteristic it has (hardness, visible object, > etc.), as conditioned, and as annica, dukkha or anatta, depending on the > level of understanding that arises (i.e., neither or the aspects that > you mention above). But again, it is not to be 'taken as' any of those > things, since our concept of what those things mean will be laden with > wrong view anyway. -------------------------------------- Howard: You are right, Jon. When there is no knowing, our inclination to grasp after certainty leads us to "take" things to be a certain way; but the wise action is, as the Korean Son master, Seung Sahn, says is to say "Only don't know"!! ;-) --------------------------------------- > > >For you, the experirncing of the dhamma is a literal coming together of > three separate phenomena: the dhamma (which can exist unexperienced), the sense > door (which arises only in dependence on a waiting object), and the sense > consciousness (which arises only in dependence on the other two being already in > effect). > > > Not quite. To my understanding, the arisen sense-door object-to-be > impinges on the sense-door/base, that base being a rupa conditioned by > kamma. But yes, sense-door consciousness arises after such an > impingement has occurred. > > > My main reason for my perspective, aside from aesthetic preference, is > pragmatic, because I have no basis for knowing the existence of unobserved > rupas. > > > > > > As I mentioned above, I do not see this issue (the existence of > so-called unobserved rupas) as having any relevance in the context of > the presently experienced sense-door object. It assumes importance only > if one adopts a certain a priori assumption. > > > What I mean by an external rupa is a rupa that exists but may or may not > be experienced. That is all I mean, and I do believe they are what you > believe in. > > > > > > Not so (as already explained). If I 'believe in' anything, it is that > the characteristic of any dhamma, including the present sense-door > object, can be known by awareness and understanding, should those mental > factors arise. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Good! Your position of "no position" is better than mine. ------------------------------------ > > 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) 43210 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 5:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Water, Life, and Death Dear Maya, here's my theory: Water is a calming element (even in the form of a storm). Many creatures meditate, using it to help calm the mind; so I am not surprised to read it brings you peace. One of the other things water causes us to feel is a sense of timeless-ness and lightness. Once the mind losses the idea of struggling, all tends to float away. Therefore, it is not uncommon for problems to feel as though they float away -- at least until the "realities of life" (i.e., the current situation) sucks us back into it-self. However, if you keep to the dynamic image of water, you can return to calm again. Then, like a dance, you will flow back and forth between the two. And Balance will be restored. Read the Tao Teh Ching Charles ----- Original Message ----- From: Andrew --- Illusion" wrote: Recently I have undergone a series of depression for reasons that are beyond me. ... I found that water was my only means of comfort-- ... Every time I look at a body of water, I feel at ease...I feel as if my whole being was floating with it taking me wherever it goes. ... Maybe if I could find the real meaning behind it or the real cause of my fascination with water...then maybe I'd be able to rediscover myself. "I am nothing but the constituents of the clinging aggregates that is subject to change and unsatisfaction." 43211 From: Joop Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 6:08am Subject: Dependent origination in daily life (Was Re: To Connie: BB's Article --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > > Dear James, Joop, All, > > Nanavira's and BBodhi's articles will be at > http://www.intergate.com/~dhammapatha for awhile in case anyone's > interested in downloading them. Dear Connie, James, RobM and all I have read the articles of Bhikkhu Bodhi and Ven. Nanavira. Or tried to do; because, to be honest, neither of them mirror my sense of spirituality. Who of them is right? Because BB states DO is about three lifetimes and Nanavira states that's about nothing else than one lifetime. So it's not possible both are right. But how to prove ? Analysis of the Sutta-texts, as both gentlemen do, is one possiblility. I prefer another possiblility: compare it with our daily reality as an empirical test. "DEPENDENT ORIGINATION IN DAILY LIFE" is then the theme. For that reason I quote the first part of an article of Christina Feldman (IMS and Barre Center for Buddhist Studies) with which I feel more at home. It's also a (slow) reaction to RobM's message #42535; Subject: Re: Was "Introduction", Now "Paticcasamuppada by way of Patthana Conditions" Metta Joop Dependent Origination by Christina Feldman source: www.dharma.org/ij/archives/1999a/christina.htm In the Buddha's teachings, the second noble truth is not a theory about what happens to somebody else, but is a process which is going on over and over again in our own lives—through all our days, and countless times every single day. This process in Pali is called pañicca-samuppàda, sometimes translated as "dependent origination" or "co-dependent origination" or "causal interdependence." The process of dependent origination is sometimes said to be the heart or the essence of all Buddhist teaching. What is described in the process is the way in which suffering can arise in our lives, and the way in which it can end. That second part is actually quite important. Pañicca-samuppàda is said to be the heart of right view or right understanding. It is an understanding that is also the beginning of the eight-fold path, or an understanding that gives rise to a life of wisdom and freedom. The Buddha went on to say that when a noble disciple fully sees the arising and cessation of the world, he or she is said to be endowed with perfect view, with perfect vision—to have attained the true dharma, to possess the knowledge and skill, to have entered the stream of the dharma, to be a noble disciple replete with purifying understanding—one who is at the very door of the deathless. So, this is a challenge for us. What the pañicca-samuppàda actually describes is a vision of life or an understanding in which we see the way everything is interconnected— that there is nothing separate, nothing standing alone. Everything effects everything else. We are part of this system. We are part of this process of dependent origination—causal relationships effected by everything that happens around us and, in turn, effecting the kind of world that we all live in inwardly and outwardly. It is also important to understand that freedom is not found separate from this process. It is not a question of transcending this process to find some other dimension; freedom is found in this very process of which we are a part. And part of that process of understanding what it means to be free depends on understanding inter- connectedness, and using this very process, this very grist of our life, for awakening. Doctrinally, there are two ways in which this process of pañicca- samuppàda is approached. In one view it is held to be something taking place over three lifetimes, and this view goes into the issues of rebirth and karma. My own approach today is the second view, which I think is really very vital and alive, which looks at pañicca- samuppàda as a way of understanding what happens in our own world, inwardly and outwardly, on a moment-to-moment level. It's about what happens in our heart, what happens in our consciousness, and how the kind of world we experience and live in is actually created every moment. To me, the significance of this whole description is that if we understand the way our world is created, we also then become a conscious participant in that creation. It describes a process that is occurring over and over again very rapidly within our consciousness. By this time in the day, you have probably all gone throughout countless cycles of dependent origination already. Perhaps you had a moment of despair about what you had for breakfast or what happened on the drive out here, a mind-storm about something that happened yesterday, some sort of anticipation about what might happen today—countless moments that you have gone through where you have experienced an inner world arising: I like this; I don't like this; the world is like this; this is how it happened; I feel this; I think that. Already this early in the day, we could track down countless cycles of this process of pañicca-samuppàda—when we've been elated, when we've been sad, when we've been self-conscious, fearful—we've been spinning the wheel. And, it is important to understand this as a wheel, as a process. It is not something static or fixed, not something that stays the same. You need to visualize this as something alive and moving, and we'll get into how that happens. The basic principle of dependent origination is simplicity itself. The Buddha described it by saying: When there is this, that is. With the arising of this, that arises. When this is not, neither is that. With the cessation of this, that ceases. When all of these cycles of feeling, thought, bodily sensation, all of these cycles of mind and body, action, and movement, are taking place upon a foundation of ignorance—that's called samsara. That sense of wandering in confusion or blindly from one state of experience to another, one state of reaction to another, one state of contraction to another, without knowing what's going on, is called samsara. It's also helpful, I think, to see that this process of dependent origination happens not only within our individual consciousness, but also on a much bigger scale and on more collective levels—social, political, cultural. Through shared opinions, shared views, shared perceptions or reactions, groups or communities of people can spin the same wheel over extended periods of time. Examples of collective wheel spinning are racism or sexism, or the hierarchy between humans and nature, political systems that conflict, wars—the whole thing where communities or groups of people share in the same delusions. So understanding dependent origination can be transforming not only at an individual level, but it's an understanding about inter- connectedness that can be truly transforming on a global or universal level. It helps to undo delusion, and it helps to undo the sense of contractedness and the sense of separateness. In classical presentations, this process of dependent origination is comprised of twelve links. It is important to understand that this is not a linear, progressive, or sequential presentation. It's a process always in motion and not static at all. It's also not deterministic. I also don't think that one link determines the arising of the next link. But rather that the presence of certain factors or certain of these links together provide the conditions in which the other links can manifest, and this is going to become clearer as we use some analogies to describe how this interaction works. It's a little bit like a snowstorm—the coming together of a certain temperature, a certain amount of precipitation, a certain amount of wind co-creating a snow storm. Or it's like the writing of a book: one needs an idea, one needs pen, one needs paper, one needs the ability to write. It's not necessarily true that first I must have this and then I must have this in a certain sequential order, but rather that the coming together of certain causes and conditions allows this particular phenomena or this particular experience to be born. It is also helpful to consider some of the effects of understanding pañicca-samuppàda. One of the effects is that it helps us to understand that neither our inner world, nor our outer world is a series of aimless accidents. Things don't just happen. There is a combination of causes and conditions that is necessary for things to happen. This is really important in terms of our inner experience. It is not unusual to have the experience of ending up somewhere, and not knowing how we got there. And feeling quite powerless because of the confusion present in that situation. Understanding how things come together, how they interact, actually removes that sense of powerlessness or that sense of being a victim of life or helplessness. Because if we understand how things come together, we can also begin to understand the way out, how to find another way of being, and realize that life is not random chaos. Another effect of understanding causes and conditions means accepting the possibility of change. And with acceptance comes another understanding—that with wisdom, we have the capacity to create beneficial and wholesome conditions for beneficial and wholesome results. And that's the path—an understanding that we have the capacity to make choices in our lives that lead toward happiness, that lead toward freedom and well being, rather than feeling we're just pushed by the power of confusion or by the power of our own misunderstanding. This understanding helps to ease a sense of separateness and isolation, and it reduces delusion. A convenient place to start in order to gain some familiarity with the process of dependent origination is often with the first link of ignorance. This is not necessarily to say that ignorance is the first cause of everything but it's a convenient starting place: With ignorance as a causal condition, there are formations of volitional impulses. With the formations as a causal condition, there is the arising of consciousness. With consciousness as a condition, there is the arising of body and mind (nàma-rupa). With body and mind as a condition, there is the arising of the six sense doors. (In Buddhist teaching, the mind is also one of the sense doors as well as seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching.) With the six sense doors as a condition, there is the arising of contact. With contact as a condition, there is the arising of feeling. With feeling as a condition, there is the arising of craving. With craving as a condition, there's the arising of clinging. With clinging as a condition, there's the arising of birth. And, with birth as a condition, there's the arising of aging and death. That describes the links. This process, when reversed, is also described as a process of release or freedom. With the abandonment of ignorance, there is the cessation of karmic formations. With the cessation of karmic formations, there is the falling away of consciousness, and so on. …(snip) … 43212 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 8:31am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hi, Connie (also, James, RobertK, Nina, Sarah, Howard, KenO) - Thank you so much for your long message (#43192) that is 'good to the last drop'. Before commenting on "that mind" (Bhavanga citta? ) I want to list your key points as follows, for ease of discussion on "this mind" versus "that mind". 1) Shakyamuni: "This mind ... is luminous, but it is defiled by taints that come from without; that mind ... is luminous, but it is cleansed of taints that come from without". 2) Connie: Mind, consciousness, citta, or 'thought moment', is not lasting -- because it is "quick to change". 3) Connie: "This mind" and "that mind" in Shin's quote are not the same types of mind. 4) Connie: To my understanding, the luminous mind here - "that mind" - is the bhavanga citta, the life-continuum or 'subconscious'. ... it is the bhavangas that maintain our being this person, this lifetime. Bhavangas are considered to be outside the process or vithi cittas. 5) Connie: If this bhavanga or deep sleep or between processes citta is what we need to develop, wouldn't we be well advised to spend our lives comatose? 6) Connie: If there is no ignorance, there is no rebirth [patisandhi citta], which is just another (bhavanga) mind moment. 7) Connie: The bhavangas are luminous in the sense that the defilements [not to mention any wholesomeness] arise in the process cittas - "this mind" - specifically, during the moments of javana cittas, when kamma is accumulated. 8) Connie: If the argument runs along the lines that we are born pure and just need to uncover &/or develop that, we're back to the same bramanic atta-Atta theories Buddha rejected. Shin tries to say this atta- Atta thing is not the case. There is still the problem of identifying anything as me or mine rather than impersonal elements (dhammas, dhatus) that arise and fall according to conditions. 9) Connie: I think Buddha's teachings point to knowing the true natures of all realities, always at each present moment, which requires awareness or sati. Understanding, right or wrong, dictates how we live and what we become. It is understanding that needs to be developed in order that skillful states can arise and the defilements be abandoned. Connie, I would like to comment on your comments as follows. Items 1) and 3) tell me that the objective for following the Teachings, which is described very well in 9), is to attain "that mind" which is cleansed of taints. The result is a luminous mind that no longer changes. The "no longer changes" description implies that "that mind" is unconditioned and lasting -- Nibbana. The mind in 2) must be "this mind", since it is not "that mind" which is lasting. Your understanding in 4) is contradicting to the nature of "that mind" which is luminous, unconditioned, and lasts. So, it must not be a bhavanga citta as you stated in 6). Your comment in 5) ignores or misunderstands the truth that the objective for following the Buddha's Teachings is to eradicate ignorance (avijja) in order to turn "this mind" into "that mind", which is luminous in the sense of having zero avijja. Since "that mind" is not a bhavanga citta, we should not worry about spending our "lives" in coma. [Is there a life after attainment of "that mind"?] Your comment in 7) is a good one; i.e. defilements arise outside the bhavangas. The comment in 8) also makes sense, that is, it does not make sense to argue that "we are born pure and just need to uncover &/or develop that". Kindest regards, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Hi, All, > > Thus begins a section on The Origins of the Buddha Nature in an article I > was sent by one of my enchanting friends: > The Buddha nature concept is a characteristic teaching of Mahayana > Buddhism, but its origin can be traced back to early Buddhism. In an > early scripture, for example, Shakyamuni talks about the "luminous mind" > (Skt citta-prakrti) covered by the layers of delusion: "This mind ... is > luminous, but it is defiled by tainst that come from without; that mind > ... is luminous, but it is cleansed of taints that come from without". > Shakyamuni explains that since people are unaware of their innate > luminous mind, they do not eventry to cultivate their potential. So the > brilliance of this luminous mind remains obscured. > > > The following is part of my reply, mostly a rehashing of Luminous Mind > UPs, with the hope that if I have misunderstood anything, someone here > will correct me. > > Thanks for Shin's [Shin Yatomi] article on Buddha Nature, Paula. He > mentions the "luminous mind" (Skt citta-prakrti) [I do not know the > Sanskrit 'prakrti'. In Pali, the the word is 'pabhassaram'.], [...snip...] > > Mind, consciousness, citta ... same in Pali and Sanskrit... [I thought the > Skt was citra?]... anyway, 'thought moment'. Each lasting how long? > There is no continuous or lasting mind or other reality other than > nibbaana. The text before our quote reads, "Monks, I know not of any > other single thing so quick to change as the mind: insomuch that it is no > easy thing to illustrate how quick to change it is." > > "This mind" and "that mind" in Shin's quote are not the same types of mind. > > To my understanding, the luminous mind here - "that mind" - is the > bhavanga citta, the life-continuum or 'subconscious'. It is the same type > of citta as the rebirth linking consciousness and takes the same object > [mind always has an object] throughout our lives, but it is not really > from this lifetime. Whenever there is not a sense-door or mind-door > process citta with an object of this lifetime, there is bhavanga citta. > Between processes or when we are fast asleep and 'totally out of this > world', it is the bhavangas that maintain our being this person, this > lifetime. [If this bhavanga or deep sleep or between processes citta is > what we need to develop, wouldn't we be well advised to spend our lives > comatose? I won't go into why the bhavangas can't be developed, but it > has to do with them being vipaka or result of kamma.] It, "that mind", is > undefiled by any processing of the objects of this lifetime (the taints > that come from without); however, it is not luminous in the sense that > there are no latent defilements there. If there is no ignorance, there is > no rebirth [patisandhi citta], which is just another (bhavanga) mind > moment. [The other type of bhavanga is the cuti citta or dying > consciousness]. The bhavangas are luminous in the sense that the > defilements [not to mention any wholesomeness] arise in the process cittas > - "this mind" - specifically, during the moments of javana cittas, when > kamma is accumulated. Bhavangas are considered to be outside the process > or vithi cittas. > > If the argument runs along the lines that we are born pure and just need > to uncover &/or develop that, we're back to the same bramanic atta- Atta > theories Buddha rejected. Shin tries to say this atta-Atta thing is not > the case. There is still the problem of identifying anything as me or > mine rather than impersonal elements (dhammas, dhatus) that arise and fall > according to conditions. I am tempted to go into a consideration of > 'turning poisons to medicine'. As a figure of speech, it's not bad, but > in actuality, one thing cannot become another. I think Buddha's teachings > point to knowing the true natures of all realities, always at each present > moment, which requires awareness or sati. Understanding, right or wrong, > dictates how we live and what we become. It is understanding that needs > to be developed in order that skillful states can arise and the > defilements be abandoned, but now I'm veering off into the question of the > mutual possession of the 10 worlds. Back to Shin... > > [...snip...] > > If it's not the bhavanga citta that is BuddhaNature, what is it? > > If it IS some kind of mind, how can it be said that it's inherent in the > universe or our physical environment? > > This is rather long and I know you are busy. Just know I read the > article, I guess. > > thanks again, > connie 43213 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 11:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha Nature Dear Cosmique - I followed the Web link you had provided in the reply to Connie's message (Titled 'Buddha Nature') and found a few remarks which I hope you might be kind enough to give me some thoughts. -- "The culmination of the practice of paying attention to the cessation aspect of preparations is the realization of the cessation of existence". -- "More often than otherwise, commentarial interpretations of Nibbàna leaves room for some subtle craving for existence, bhavataõhà. It gives a vague idea of a place or a sphere, àyatana, which serves as a surrogate destination for the arahants after their demise". I do not understand much of the article. How does it "shed some light" into Connie's question(s) as you put it? Warm regards, Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, cosmique wrote: > Dear Connie and all, > > Cosmique: Ven. Nyanananda touches on this issue in his sermons 7 and 8 on Nibbana. If you wish, click on http://www.beyondthenet.net/CALM/clm_main1.asp?content=nibbana > Perhaps, it will shed some light on your question. I presume that his interpretation is not traditional but it never hurts to look at the issue from a different angle. > > Metta, > > Cosmique 43214 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 0:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Ken, When you said: "... he also dispelled the wrong view, 'The self exists.'" I would say, "he also dispelled the wrong view, 'The self exists as an eternal (permanent and unchanging) soul, something uncompounded (the essence), some thing that you have complete control over. He also taught, how the self exist; and how thoughts, speech, and acts effect others (other selves). All I have been trying to say is that the Buddha actually taught how to view the self, and not to remain attached to it. The Buddha never taught that conventional wisdom or reality should be though of as non-existent or unreal. If he did then there would be no need for Morality (i.e., Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood). Actually there would be no need for the 8-Fold path because suffering would not exist either (since there is no-one to suffer). In reality the Buddha did dispel a myth about self, that myth was about the nature of its existence. After all, if he did teach that there are no-selves, no not even one, then the teachings about all those realms of existence that Abidharmmist like to talk about would be a lie, and most of the other teachings too ... ****** K: If we examine the five khandhas with right view, we will see each of them is devoid of self. And if we consider them collectively, it is the same. Even though we refer to a particular set of five khandhas as you or me (etc.) there is no you or me outside of the momentary existence of those present five khandhas. ......... You would be completely right if you replace "self" with the following: attman (eternal soul), uncompounded-ness, permanence, something that can be controlled, ... swell as change "momentary existence" to relative existence. The concept of "Self" (that is devoid of these things and seen as a source of suffering) is a Right View. But like I said, I do know and understand your perspective; however, I attribute it to incomplete translations (the other concepts being summarized and thus called the self). *************************************** Hi Charles, ------------ I wrote: > Even on DSG, people have said, "Sure, there is no eternal self or atman, but there is a temporary self!" ------------- And you replied: ---------------- > YES! This is sutra teaching (what the Buddha dictated). The Buddha even rename his, temp self, to Taga... and the Buddha. ---------------- I agree that the Buddha taught the existence of the five khandhas. In his case they were conventionally called 'the Buddha' just as, in my case, they are conventionally called, Ken H. By teaching the existence of the five khandhas, the Buddha dispelled the wrong view, "Nothing exists," and he also dispelled the wrong view, "The self exists." If we examine the five khandhas with right view, we will see each of them is devoid of self. And if we consider them collectively, it is the same. Even though we refer to a particular set of five khandhas as you or me (etc.) there is no you or me outside of the momentary existence of those present five khandhas. ************** C: > the Theravada Abhidhamma I learned it then move on. I have also looked at the Mahayana sutra and Abhidhamma. I have even look at Tibetan ..., and psychology and sociology. ------------------ K: I see. But that doesn't explain why you describe the 'Abhidhamma view' as representing the unconditioned reality. The Abhidhamma is the teaching of both kinds of absolute reality - the conditioned and the unconditioned. Also, it doesn't explain why you have not learnt the Pali terms (or the Sanskrit terms) for the individual dhammas. The Pali terms remind us of when we are talking about a reality as distinct from an illusion (a concept). For example, Htoo has just explained why the word 'birth' is inadequate for describing the reality, 'patisandhi.' 'Birth' involves the concept of a baby leaving the womb, whereas patisandhi is just one fleeting moment of consciousness. .......................... In reality, I stated that the 'Abhidhamma view' examines the "Conditioned reality." Showing its impermanent, compounded, lacking an essence, etc... I also state that your view, the view of nothing-ness is not the 'Abhidhamma view,' it is the view of the unconditioned. Therefore, you should not mix the two. Now, I have to admit I was wrong, one of the aims of the Abhidhamma is to bring one to the Ultimate / Absolute truth of reality. This is through the vehicle of knowledge leading into wisdom. And for some, morality and concentration are natural (i.e., already apart of their being); therefore, the Abhidhamma can bring one to enlightenment. However, wisdom without morality is dangerous, and wisdom without concentration is only a book one carries around in their head. Pali terms (or the Sanskrit terms): I have lived in Denmark for almost 10 years and I still can't speak Danish. Most of the time I can't even understand what my 3 year old is saying. In the US I took English comprehension (ENG101) in the university 3 times. Five years later I had to take it a forth time (really ENG99 -- grammar). Other then it being a weakness (languages), I have found that it is better to try and be as clear as possible. when using a foreign language (to the receiver) you always run the risk of the receiver translating the words differently, so to me it is always better if I give the receiver the translation I want them to know. Also, I believe you see how well someone really understands something when that can explain it in their own words. So If I was born in ... and spoke pali all my life then, of-course, I would love it if you could communicate in it now, but since the opposite is true, I really have no use for pali or Sanskrit, I will want for all to be translated by some one else. ***************** C: > Please remember, the Abhidhamma was not dictated by the Buddha, it was developed by learned monks, we like to believe they were Arhants, and they know all there is to know. ------------ According to the version I prefer, the Buddha taught Abhidhamma in full to the devas (in a deva realm) and then he taught it in brief to Sariputta. Sariputta, on hearing it in brief, understood it in full. He then taught it to his students and it became memorized in the same way as the suttas. .......................... This may be true, my point was to clarify that the Abhidhamma did-not develop the same way as the suttras and the vinya, and you are supporting that statement. ******************* C: > It is-not entirely consistent with the sutras. There are concepts in the adhidhamma that are not in the sutras (e.g., rebirth-consciousness). The Abhidhamma was an attempted to rival the Vedas (the science in Hinduism). ---------------------- K: I have not heard that before (about rebirth consciousness). Remember, the Buddha taught that conditioned reality was the five khandhas. So, when he said [in the suttas or elsewhere] that rebirth was real, he could only have been referring to a particular, momentary arising of the five khandhas. .......................... This makes me assume you do not believe in reincarnation, is that true? §§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§ C: > Some Buddhist believe the view of no-existing-self is dangerously misguided. It removes the need for the 8-fold path, especially morality. Historically there were too types of people that were enilist (1. criminals and the wealthy; 2. some groups of recluses that were waiting for the body to die -- they saw this place as "hell" i.e., samsara.) ----------------------------------------- K: May I suggest that you are not recognizing the absolute reality of conditioned dhammas? When you accept that dhammas really do exist, I think you will no longer equate "no self" with "no existence." ............................................... I really like this. This is a very good question/smart conclusion, because this is the risk that I face by emphasizing the relative. But don't worry, I do "try" and sometimes are forced to think both. And there are other teachings of Dhamma that can even bring a relative "existence" to full enlightenment and even Buddahood. §§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§ C: > I know the teachings on desire. I also studied what the Buddha went through to become "E." Also the basis of Mahayana Buddhism is Bodicita. Just because the universe is made up of conditioned dramas does not mean that nothing exist. Ask your self, "Do the conditions exist?" ------------- K: Do you see what I mean? You see a link between "only conditioned dhammas" and "nothing exists," but there is no such link. My answer would be, "Of course, the conditions exist! They exist because there are conditioned dhammas, and those conditioned dhammas are conditioning other dhammas to exist." I think (not sure) it was Nagarjuna who caused conditionality to be mistaken for non-existence. According to his heterodoxy, conditioned namas and rupas were just 'ideas' thought up by the Buddha to explain what was happening in [what Nagarjuna saw as] "a seamless flux" of experience. .................. It was the "Unconditionally" to be mistaken for non-existence, so often when people say no-self they mean no-self exists at all. This is what I assume you mean. This is wrong most of the time for most beings. BUT YES, "... the conditions exist! They exist because there are conditioned dhammas, and those conditioned dhammas are conditioning other dhammas to exist." This is what I call relative existence, not-no-existence. ******************* C: > To talk of emptiness is not the same as nothing. Emptiness implies that there must be a container, something. -------------- K: Exactly so! And there really are things that exist and that are mistaken for "containers of self." They are the namas and rupas of the five khandhas and Nibbana. ............................. I think you mistake the self for something uncompounded, having an essence, something unchanging, etc... so I assume that is why you dismiss it. Am I wrong? To me the self is a label I give to "my mind & form/flesh." And by "my mind & form/flesh," I mean something that is still subject to ... and is used to identify "this" being as opposed to another being. My view gives me the ability to dance through the relative and as the absolute. So, I exist when I exist, and don't exist when not existing. ************************** C: > MY TAKE ON NOT-self: There is no-self that exist on its own (requires nothing), that is unchanging, uncompounded, or permanent, no thing, not you, not me. Our existence is relative, the self is changing, compounded, and impermanent, and nothing can change that. ----------------------- K: I agree with that, but it is not quite watertight enough for my liking. It still allows for the idea of something that persists from moment to moment. Would you agree that there is no physical phenomenon (dhamma) that exists for more than (let's say by way of approximation) one billionth of a second? And that there is no mental phenomenon that lasts for more than one seventeen-billionth of a second? (As explained in the Abhidhamma, some rupas last seventeen times as long as consciousness.) ............... Objects can "persists" from moment to moment, but they are forever changing (the rates and amounts of change are relative), and as I stated before, objects can exist for up to eons (look at the teachings about the God Realm) or do you believe the God realm and gods do not exist? (the teachings are just fables) Charles PS: ok you got me, it is better to condense them in to one thread, however it maybe that I only have the weekends to reply. So if a reply does not come rightaway please understand that I have a 2-3 commute every day to work and the same to get home. And that is if nothing goes wrong -- here it usually does. 43215 From: robmoult Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 1:58pm Subject: Dependent origination in daily life (Was Re: To Connie: BB's Article Hi Joop, Connie, James & All, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > I have read the articles of Bhikkhu Bodhi and Ven. Nanavira. Or tried > to do; because, to be honest, neither of them mirror my sense of > spirituality. > > Who of them is right? Because BB states DO is about three lifetimes > and Nanavira states that's about nothing else than one lifetime. So > it's not possible both are right. But how to prove ? > Analysis of the Sutta-texts, as both gentlemen do, is one > possiblility. > ===== Bhikkhu Bodhi follows the traditional intepretation of DO as exlained by Buddhaghosa. Nanavira (and Buddhadasa) have introduced radically new interpretations of DO. Both Nanavira and Buddhadas are "out of the box" thinkers. I feel that I am not yet conversant enough with the traditional intepretation to properly evaluate either Nanavira or Buddhadasa. I feel that I have to first properly and deeply understand the traditional interpretation before evaluating modern alternatives. Metta, Rob M :-) 43216 From: Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 4:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha Nature Hi Connie, I doubt if the sutta was talking about the bhavanga citta. That's not a sutta thing. My guess is that the "luminous" characteristic applies to all consciousnesses. However, I don't know if this is what Mahayana sutras have in mind as Buddha Nature. My first thought was that Buddha Nature is what Nyanaponika Thera refers to as "bare attention" (sati), but I believe I've read somewhere that Buddha Nature is impermanence for Dogen, the Zen master. What this means I don't know. Maybe it has to do with cessation. Others might say Buddha Nature is compassion. I think it is a matter of how one characterizes the Buddha. Its universal quality has to do with the accessibility of that characteristic, this being a favorite Mahayana theme. Larry 43217 From: Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 4:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Larry : "I put "without an object" in quotation marks because "object" means different things in different contexts. Panna can know consciousness rooted in greed without an object where the object of the greed is, say, a tomato. But I don't think panna can know eye-consciousness without visible object." Jon: "Hmm, interesting. So what do you see as the difference, in the context of the present discussion, between citta rooted in greed with tomato as object and citta that is eye consciousness experiencing visible object?" Larry "Also, I don't think panna can know a cetasika as a cetasika separate from consciousness." Jon: "And ditto here." Hi Jon, I don't know. I've been thinking about this all day and haven't come to a conclusion. It has to do with what is an object of consciousness. One thought is that experience is only consciousness of an object. What this means is that when I experience desire for a tomato, that desire is an object of consciousness. If that is the case it would seem that desire for a tomato arose and ceased as unexperienced javana citta and then became an object of consciousness. But that unexperienced javana citta had an object too (the tomato), so we are still left with two kinds of object, experienced and unexperienced, and possibly a different kind of citta process called "experience". This doesn't seem like a very satisfactory solution but I can't think of anything else right now. Larry 43218 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 6:51pm Subject: Dependent origination in daily life (Was Re: To Connie: BB's Article Hello RobM, Joop, Connie, James, All, Bhikkhu Bodhi states in the introduction to "The Great Discourse on Causation" p. 4/5 that he regards distribution of the twelve factors into three lives as merely an expositiory device employed for the purpose of exhibiting the inner dynamics of the round. EXCERPT: In "The Great Discourse on Causation" Bhikkhu Bodhi states: 'The prevailing interpretation regards the series as spanning three successive lives, the twelve factors representing the causal and resultant phases of these lives alternated to show the round's inherent capacity for self-regeneration. Thus ignorance and volitional formations represent the causal phase of the previous life which brought about existence in the present; the five factors from consciousness through feeling are their fruit, the resultant phase of the present life. Craving, clinging, and existence represent renewed causal activity in the present life; birth and aging and death sum up the resultant phase of the future life. At the risk of oversimplification the sequence can be briefly explained as follows: Due to ignorance - formally defined as non- knowledge of the Four Noble Truths - a person engages in ethically motivated action, which may be wholesome or unwholesome, bodily, verbal, or mental. These actions, referred to here as volitional formations, constitute kamma. At the time of rebirth kamma conditions the re-arising of consciousness, which comes into being bringing along its psychophysical adjuncts, "mentality-materiality" (nama-rupa). In dependence on the psycho-physical adjuncts, the six sense bases develop - the five outer senses and the mind-base. Through these, contact takes place between consciousness and its objects, and contact in turn conditions feeling. In response to feeling craving springs up, and if it grows firm, leads into clinging. Driven by clinging actions are performed with the potency to generate new existence. These actions, kamma backed by craving, eventually bring a new existence: birth followed by aging and death. To prevent misunderstanding it has to be stressed that the distribution of the twelve factors into three lives is an expositiory device employed for the purpose of exhibiting the inner dynamics of the round. It should not be read as implying hard and fast divisions, for in lived experience the factors are always intertwined. The past causes include craving, clinging, and existence, the present ones ignorance and volitional formations; the present resultants begin with birth and end in death, and future birth and death will be incurred by the same resultants. Moreover, the present resultant and causal phases should not be seen as temporally segregated from each other, as if assigned to different periods of life. Rather, through the entire course of life, they succeed one another with incredible rapidity in an alternating sequence of result and response. A past kamma ripens in present results; these trigger off new action; the action is followed by more results. and these are again followed by still more action. So it has gone on through time withough beginning, and so it continues. From this it is clear that dependent arising does not describe a set of causes somehow underlying experience, mysteriously hidden out of view. What it describes is the fundamental pattern of experience as such when enveloped by ignorance as to the basic truths about itself. This pattern is always present, always potentially accessible to our awareness, only without the guidance of the Buddha's teaching it will not be properly attended to, and thus will not be seen for what it is. It takes a Buddha to point out the startling thruth that the basic pattern of experience is itself the source of our bondage, "the origin of this entire mass of suffering." metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 43219 From: connie Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 7:10pm Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hi, Tep, Cosmique, Rob, All, === 1) Shakyamuni: "This mind ... is luminous, but it is defiled by taints that come from without; that mind ... is luminous, but it is cleansed of taints that come from without". 3) Connie: "This mind" and "that mind" in Shin's quote are not the same types of mind. 9) Connie: I think Buddha's teachings point to knowing the true natures of all realities, always at each present moment, which requires awareness or sati. Understanding, right or wrong, dictates how we live and what we become. It is understanding that needs to be developed in order that skillful states can arise and the defilements be abandoned. Tep: Items 1) and 3) tell me that the objective for following the Teachings, which is described very well in 9), is to attain "that mind" which is cleansed of taints. The result is a luminous mind that no longer changes. The "no longer changes" description implies that "that mind" is unconditioned and lasting -- Nibbana. === Connie: If the 'clean' mind is bhavanga cittas, it's already attained as it/they are kusala vipaka cittas. Being kusala is it part of it's cleanliness; not taking on new dirt from the javanas or interacting with/knowing sense objects from this lifetime is the other. Insofar as all bhavangas of this lifetime are kusala vipaka and take the same object (from the last lifetime), we can say the bhavangas don't change, but the mind alternates between arising as bhavanga and vithi cittas. I think (no support) that the latent taints of the bhavangas may be eradicated as appropriate to the level of ariyan attainment if there are lokuttara cittas during the lifetime. Preceding the this (luminous & defiled) & that (luminous & cleansed) mind quote, is: "Monks, I know not of any other single thing so quick to change as the mind: insomuch that it is no easy thing to illustrate how quick to change it is." I don't equate any mind/citta with Nibbaana. A Buddha still has changing cittas or mind(stream). I don't know of anything to support saying "Buddha's citta has become Nibbaana." Is that what you are saying? Are you (also) saying that the quote is not talking about the bhavanga cittas? If so, you might be pleased with B.Bodhi's msg 16751. Also, not to answer for Cosmique, but in the article he linked to (which gives the DramaQueen's DO model - http://www.beyondthenet.net/CALM/clm_main1.asp?), we read: "This mind, monks, is luminous, but it is defiled by extraneous defilements. That, the uninstructed ordinary man does not understand as it is. Therefore, there is no mind development for the ordinary man, I declare. This mind, monks, is luminous, but it is released from extraneous defilements. That, the instructed noble disciple understands as it is. Therefore, there is mind development for the instructed noble disciple, I declare." It is sufficiently clear, then, that the allusion is to the luminous mind, the consciousness of the arahant, which is non-manifestative, infinite, and all lustrous. One of the other quotes Ven. Nyanananda ties this & his DO model in with is: "Consciousness, which is non-manifestative, Endless and lustrous on all sides, It is here that water, earth, Fire, and air no footing find." I deleted the rest of this because I'm not following you, Tep, and all the other comments I had kept coming back to the 1-3-9 group. I'm with you, Rob, as far as being "not yet conversant enough with the traditional intepretation to properly evaluate either Nanavira or Buddhadasa", but think we might add Nyanananda, too. peace, connie 43220 From: Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 5:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear All, It's nice to join this group. Hallo to all who greet me. For Nina, I've a live that up and down. And I admit that sometime I can't except that yet. I try to walk in Buddha's way but I think my path still twisting. Lisa Herawati 43221 From: connie Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 8:52pm Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hi, Larry, In the article my friend sent, "Buddha nature refers to the potential for attaining Buddhahood, a state of awakening filled with compassion and wisdom." A couple pages later: "To awaken to this greatest potential of life, one must challenge self-depreciation, arrogance, attachment to lesser ego, nihilism, and selfishness." Then, on the last page: "The Buddha nature that all these beings possess is called by the name Myoho-renge-kyo ... summoned forth and manifested by our chanting..." Larry: I doubt if the sutta was talking about the bhavanga citta. That's not a sutta thing. My guess is that the "luminous" characteristic applies to all consciousnesses. Connie: You don't think the commentaries and suttas talk about the same things? The luminous, pure, radiant, clear etc thing is a little confusing. There's been some discussion about pandara for all cittas and pabhassara only for kusala cittas. See Jaran's msg 10645. Maybe Suan's 10785 after. :) I have this idea of brightness or illumination and think, "pure citta is totally dark - no rupa". peace, connie 43222 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 10:10pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 145 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(o) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** When we consider the jhåna-factors vitakka and vicåra we may be able to understand that vitakka is more gross than vicåra. Vitakka is needed in the first stage of jhåna but it is abandoned in the second stage of jhåna which is more tranquil and more refined. Vicåra which is more subtle than vitakka still accompanies the jhånacitta of the second stage of jhåna. The person who has accumulated conditions to attain jhåna must be able to distinguish between different jhåna-factors such as vitakka and vicåra and this is most intricate. This shows us how difficult it is to develop calm to the degree of jhåna. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43223 From: cosmique Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 10:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha Nature Hi Tep and all, Tep Sastri wrote: Dear Cosmique - I followed the Web link you had provided in the reply to Connie's message (Titled 'Buddha Nature') and found a few remarks which I hope you might be kind enough to give me some thoughts. -- "The culmination of the practice of paying attention to the cessation aspect of preparations is the realization of the cessation of existence". -- "More often than otherwise, commentarial interpretations of Nibbàna leaves room for some subtle craving for existence, bha­va­­taõhà. It gives a vague idea of a place or a sphere, àya­ta­na, which serves as a surrogate destination for the arahants after their demise". I do not understand much of the article. How does it "shed some light" into Connie's question(s) as you put it? Cosmique: I am not a close student of Ven. Nyanaanda; therefore I can not claim to be his infallible commentator. Nevertheless, having read all his 17 sermons on nibbana on that link, plus some other works by this author, I came to conclusion that he tends to interpret most of utterances on Nibbana psychologically rather than metaphysically. His main point is that Nibbana is not some mystical sphere out there, or beyond or the absolute, as some commentaries tend to interpret it. (It‘s regarding your second quote). In other words, if you state that nibbana is not complete cessation of being but some ultimate realm then it leaves room for some subtle craving for existence. According to him Nibbana is just a total cessation of existence foretaste of which the mind can experience through not attending to sankharas (preparations, in his version). I think that is what he means in the first quote. When you stop attending to sankharas, it is a foretaste of cessation of your existence for there is nothing left that “pulls” citta to a new state of being. I agree that his sermons are not the easiest reading I have ever had. His point becomes clearer as one rereads them. Let me summarize his approach. Firstly, he interprets the 12 link-formula in terms of one life, just like Ven. Nyanavira. Secondly, Nibbana is just a cessation of being with no reservations like “it is beyond being or not being” or it “a super-ultimate sphere”; thirdly, luminous mind discussed here is arahata-phala-samadhi. I still believe that his works can shed some light on the issue discussed here and are worthwhile reading. Metta Cosmique The heaviness of one's burden is due to one's grasping. 43224 From: Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 10:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi Connie, Connie: "In the article my friend sent, "Buddha nature refers to the potential for attaining Buddhahood, a state of awakening filled with compassion and wisdom." A couple pages later: "To awaken to this greatest potential of life, one must challenge self-depreciation, arrogance, attachment to lesser ego, nihilism, and selfishness." Then, on the last page: "The Buddha nature that all these beings possess is called by the name Myoho-renge-kyo ... summoned forth and manifested by our chanting..." L: This reminds me of the Buddha's words of encouragement to the bhikkhus. Buddha nature could mean simply "kusala citta". Do you know what "Myoho-renge-kyo" means? Larry: "I doubt if the sutta was talking about the bhavanga citta. That's not a sutta thing. My guess is that the "luminous" characteristic applies to all consciousnesses." Connie: "You don't think the commentaries and suttas talk about the same things?" L: From Jaran's and Suan's messages that you mention below I see that the commentaries do say luminous mind is either bhavanga or rebirth citta, but I couldn't find what sutta they referred to. Anyway, seems like a bit of a stretch for me. The Buddha didn't talk about things like that. Our modern commentators (RobertK, Howard, and TG) seemed to think luminous mind referred to nibbana. Could it possibly refer to nirodha samapatti? Taking Jaran's advice to stick to what is within our capabilities I think we can look to bare attention as being luminous, pure, and totally empty. I know this doesn't fit the categories, but look and see for yourself. Does bare attention have any objective content at all? When you look at an emotional outburst, what is the nature of that looking? Connie: "The luminous, pure, radiant, clear etc thing is a little confusing. There's been some discussion about pandara for all cittas and pabhassara only for kusala cittas. See Jaran's msg 10645. Maybe Suan's 10785 after. :) I have this idea of brightness or illumination and think, "pure citta is totally dark - no rupa"." Larry 43225 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 11:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, cosmique wrote: > Hi Tep and all, > > Tep Sastri wrote: > > > > Dear Cosmique - > > I followed the Web link you had provided in the reply to Connie's > message (Titled 'Buddha Nature') and found a few remarks which I > hope you might be kind enough to give me some thoughts. > > -- "The culmination of the practice of paying attention to the cessation > aspect of preparations is the realization of the cessation of existence". > > -- "More often than otherwise, commentarial interpretations of Nibb àna > leaves room for some subtle craving for existence, bha­va­­taõh?E It > gives a vague idea of a place or a sphere, àya­ta­na, which serves as a > surrogate destination for the arahants after their demise". > > I do not understand much of the article. How does it "shed some light" > into Connie's question(s) as you put it? > > > Cosmique: > > I am not a close student of Ven. Nyanaanda;he tends to interpret most of utterances on Nibbana psychologically rather than metaphysically. His main point is that Nibbana is not some mystical sphere out there, or beyond or the absolute, as some commentaries tend to interpret it. ========= dear Cosmique, When we use the word 'commentaries' in Theravada it is usually refering to those edited by Buddhaghosa, Dhammapala and the other ancient monks. Certainly none of these infer that Nibbana is out there anywhere or beyond.. Robertk 43226 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 11:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 1 Hi Andrew L, I was very glad to see your detailed response, raising lots of excellent questions. As I’d like to respond to all of your points, I’ll probably break the post up. Let me just start here with the ‘top’ and ‘tail’ to get started: --- Andrew Levin wrote: > Forgive me for taking another four weeks to reply on the thread, I > sort of felt I couldn't hold my own or express my ideas and hold my > own ground, ... S: No need to apologise and certainly no need to wait til you feel you can hold your ground or express yourself as well as you’d like. To be honest, I do get a little concerned if I don’t hear from you for too long, so consider a brief holding reply to let us know how you’re doing from time to time as well. ... A:>(never mind the extreme mischief mode it seemed my posts > here were in) it is a continuing problem for me but the past few days > I think I've had some more well-being and clarity and so I think I > can get back into the swing of things. Let's see. ... S: that’s good to hear – the ‘well-being and clarity’. Of course, there will always be ups and downs for all of us. I don’t know if you saw a nice post that Andrew T wrote on this subject (7th March) to Maya recently? He wrote: ”For this reason, I think it is a mistake to believe that we *can* direct the waves and currents in the present moment and explain this supposed ability by saying "that's my cetana at work!" Wrong. That's conditions at work. Many times when we are happy and calm, it *looks like* "we" are practising mindfulness or metta or whatever. That we are directing the flow of our consciousness. But that's only an illusion. A water illusion? Our hope is to understand, not to direct.” Also, you may like to look at posts under ‘Discouraged, depressed.....’ in U.P. sometime if you’re having trouble.. ***** To get to the tail: > > S: Would you like to join in an ongoing study corner or start a new > one? > > Or just join in different threads? > A:> Well I kind of haven't been able to study CMA as I did earlier, and > there's no great understanding to be had by trying to force it to > work when it's not, ... S: Agreed – just use it as a reference manual from time to time, perhaps. ... A:> but I would be interested in continuing to > develop and understanding of Abhidhamma from Nina's ADL and post it > here. ... S: Please post any sections you like anytime. Maybe just a paragraph or two at a time with your comments/questions. That would be great and makes it easier for anyone to respond. ... A:>I've read up to the sections on moha and dosa myself, but am > having trouble distinguishing the two. What arises is some kind of > darkness in the mind, and I'm not able to recognize what exactly it > is, so I guess I can re-start posting about the book here for help on > that. It should help me develop understanding or awareness of cittas > or cetasikas that are present in my mind at one point or another, no? ... S: Yes, just start posting a little at a time as a separate thread, perhaps – even just a sentence—with your comments. I know what you mean about just ‘some kind of darkness..’. I think it is a mistake to try to distinguish states, rather than just be aware of what is appearing at that very moment of trying. Dosa is always averse to present dhammas or situations. It can be anything from the mildest irritation or discomfort to extreme anger. Whenever there is any unpleasant mental feeling, dosa is there for sure. Moha accompanies all unwholesome states, but when it appears, its characteristic of ignorance, just not knowing anything can be known. I think for most people, dosa is more obvious, but moha is so very common., for example, when there just seems to be ‘some kind of darkness’. I’ll look forward to any thread or passages you raise for discussion. I know Nina and others will be glad too. Metta, Sarah ===== 43227 From: cosmique Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 0:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha Nature Hello Robert, rjkjp1 wrote: dear Cosmique, When we use the word 'commentaries' in Theravada it is usually refering to those edited by Buddhaghosa, Dhammapala and the other ancient monks. Certainly none of these infer that Nibbana is out there anywhere or beyond.. Robertk Cosmique: My remark as to “the commentaries” is based on Ven. Nyananada’s statements. Since Tep asked me to explain some of the Bhikkhu’s complicated ideas I had to referrer to what Nyananada writes in his sermons on Nibbana. Here are some interesting statements by Nyananada’s from his 1st sermon for your consideration: “It seems that the deeper connotations of the word Nibbàna in the context of pañicca samuppàda were not fully appreciated by the commentators. And that is why they went in search of a new etymology. They were too shy of the implications of the word `extinction'. Probably to avoid the charge of nihilism they felt compelled to reinterpret certain key passages on Nibbàna. They conceived Nibbàna as something existing out there in its own right. They would not say where, but sometimes they would even say that it is everywhere. With an undue grammatical emphasis they would say that it is on coming to that Nibbàna that lust and other defilements are abandoned: Nibbànaü àgamma ràgàdayo khãõàti ekameva nibbànaü ràgakkhayo dosakkhayo mohakkhayo ti vuccati.[27]” “There seems to be some contradiction in the commentarial definitions of Nibbàna. On the one hand we have the definition of Nibbàna as the exit from craving, which is called a `weaving'. And on the other it is said that it is on seeing Nibbàna that craving is destroyed. To project Nibbàna into a distance and to hope that craving will be destroyed only on seeing it, is something like trying to build a stair­case to a palace one cannot yet see. In fact this is a simile which the Buddha had used in his criticism of the Brahmin's point of view.[30]” “According to the Buddha the cessation of existence is Nib­bàna and that means Nibbàna is the realization of the cessation of exis­tence. Existence is said to be an eleven-fold fire. So the entire ex­is­tence is a raging fire. Lust, hate, delusion - all these are fires. There­fore Nibbàna may be best rendered by the word `extinction'. When once the fires are extinguished, what more is needed? But unfortunately Venerable Buddhaghosa was not prepared to appreciate this point of view. In his Visuddhimagga as well as in the commentaries Sàratthappakàsinã and Sammohavinodanã, he gives a long discussion on Nibbàna in the form of an argu­ment with an imagi­nary heretic.[37] Some of his arguments are not in keeping with ei­ther the letter or the spirit of the Dhamma. First of all he gets the heretic to put forward the idea that the destruction of lust, hate and delusion is Nibbàna. Actually the heretic is simply quoting the Buddha word, for in the Nib­bàna­sutta of the Asaïkhata­saüyutta the destruction of lust, hate and delusion is called Nibbàna: Ràgakkhayo, dosakkhayo, mohak­khayo - idaü vuccati nib­bànaü.[38] The words ràgakkhaya, dosakkhaya and mohakkhaya together form a synonym of Nibbàna, but the commentator interprets it as three synonyms. Then he argues out with the imaginary heretic that if Nibbàna is the extinguishing of lust it is something common even to the animals, for they also extinguish their fires of lust through enjoyment of the corresponding objects of sense.[39] This argument ignores the deeper sense of the word extinction, as it is found in the Dhamma. I think when Ven. Nyananda uses the word “commentators” he means exactly those edited by Buddhaghosa, Dhammapala and the other ancient monks. I am not taking sides here for the only thing I can do is to base my opinion only on quotes from the original works made by other authors like Ven. Nyananada. Metta, Cosmique The heaviness of one's burden is due to one's grasping. 43228 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 0:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 Hi AndrewL, (Htoo at the end & All) <...> A:> Right, everything is indeed reliant on causes and conditions, but I > am thinking here that we don't have to be quite so passive in waiting > for them to arise. From what I am reading the way to know > defilements or nama and rupa is to be mindful of them, well, I am > asking now, what kinds of causes do you think can bring up sati? I > have said that intention for it along with a few other causes can be > sufficient, but see more below. .... S: The development of satipatthana is not passive at all, but it’s not ‘we’ that can wait or make them arise. Understanding of what sati is and what namas and rupas are is the way that sati will arise and develop. I think that asking the right questions and carefully considering and reflecting on the teachings as you’re doing here is the main condition or cause for direct awareness and understanding. I like this quote that’s Nina included recently from the commentary to the Cariyapitaka: “Energy devoid of wisdom does not accomplish the purpose desired since it is wrongly aroused, and it is better not to arouse energy at all than to arouse it in the wrong way. But when energy is conjoined with wisdom, there is nothing it cannot accomplish, if equippted with the proper means....” **** S: I think we could replace energy here with intention, wish, concentration and other states which can be wholesome or unwholesome. Any desire or intention of getting particular results with expectations is at best unhelpful and at worst, dangerous, in my view, as others are discussing in another thread about wishing for arahantship. ... A:> OK, so what type of wrong view are we looking at here? Certainly not > wrong view as described as one of the ten unwholesome action, but > still a wrong view holding us back from seeing the true nature of > present nama and rupa, right? Like a wrong view accompanying a > citta, yes? .... S: Just as right views or wisdom (pa~n~naa or samma di.t.thi) can be wholesome courses of action (kamma-patha) through the mind, so wrong views (micha di.t.thi) are likely to be unwholesome courses of action through the mind. In fact, we read that wisdom and the development of satipatthana is the highest kind of wholesome kamma-patha. Conversely, while we know about the dangers of unwholesome bodily actions and so on, we forget that wrong view is the grossest kind of attachment that has to be eradicated first. Without wrong view, we would not be susceptible to killing, stealing, lying and so on, for example. In the Atthasalini (translated as the Expositor), it says it has ‘unwise conviction as characteristic’ and ‘should be regarded as the highest fault’. Also, it says ‘in *wrong* intention, etc, only the term *wrong* is distinctive. The remainder should be understood in the same way as under the head of moral consciousness.’ So, I think wrong views about practice and about present namas and rupas, such as when we take them for ‘self,’ shouldn’t be underestimated. Of course, there are degrees as you suggest. The most serious kind of wrong view is apparently that which denies kamma and its result. Without a clear understanding of conditions and kamma, don’t we all have this kind of wrong view from time to time? Maybe a lot more often than we’d care to admit. For example, when we think others are responsible for our good and bad experiences in life or that world leaders are responsible for the suffering people endure, aren't we denying the results of kamma? By understanding more and more that any situation really is only citta, cetasika and rupa arising because of their own conditions including kamma, the easier it is to develop metta and other wholesome states instead of dosa (aversion), no matter how others behave, for example. Back to the subtleties of wrong views, I’d like to quote a couple of passages Ken H wrote recently which I thought were good and hopefully relevant here: K:“When we deliberately look out the window, pick up a cup or type a letter, we may not be aware that there are only conditioned dhammas (so we may not have right view), but nor are we *denying* there are only conditioned dhammas (so we don't have wrong view). However, when we deliberately try to practise the Buddha's teaching (deliberately try to have right view), we are denying his teaching that there are only conditioned dhammas - no self in control.” ...... K:“I doubt the decision to deliberately practice satipatthana can ever be kusala. Satipatthana involves direct knowledge of paramattha dhammas, which come and go in less than a billionth of a second. How could we ever expect to deliberately know paramattha dhammas?” ... S: It may not seem so harmful when we deliberately try to practice satipatthana and so on in this way and I’m certainly not suggesting that all fleeting moments of wrong view are akusala kamma patha, but the danger is in the accumulation and tendency to more and more of the same when we think it’s right. So instead of developing the right path, we are really developing the wrong path. RobertK, recently quoted the following: R:>Anguttara Nikaya Book of the tens XI (iii) 103 Wrongness "From wrong view proceeds wrong thinking; .. .. from that wrong effort. From wrong effort proceeds wrong mindfulness; from that wrong concentration. From wrong concentration proceeds wrong knowledge. From wrong knowledge proceeds wrong release......" ***** S: I think it's very easy to take wrong effort and wrong mindfulenss for 'right'. In the Atthasalini again under ‘Immoral Consciousness’, we read the following: ”Do men of false opinions not remember an act done by themselves? They do. But that is not mindfulness. The procedure of immoral consciousness is due to such mere mode of remembering. Therefore mindfulness has not been taken. Then why is it said, ‘wrong mindfulness’ in the Sutta [e.g D iii 254, 287 etc]? In the Sutta the discourse is made by the explanatory method so as to complete the ‘Wrong Path’ and the notion ‘wrongness’ because of the immoral aggregates being exempt from and opposed to mindfulness. But in the absolute method (of Abhidhamma) in immoral consciousness there is no mindfulness; therefore it has not been taken.” I think it's helpful for us all to reflect on these issues you've raised, so I thank you sincerely. Metta, Sarah p.s [S: the last part of this para was for Htoo’s benefit as it related to an earlier thread]. ======================= 43229 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 1:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 3 Hi Andrew L, > The Buddha described mindful awareness as one of the steps in the > gradual training, going along with guarding the sense doors, > morality, and contentment. ... S: yes, this is just how I see it too – they develop together. I wouldn’t separate them. The development of satipatthana is the guarding of the sense doors and this is the development of morality and contentment – learing to be satisfied or detached from whatever dhamma is conditioned to arise. As K.Sujin reminded us, when there is the development of satipatthana, we are not troubled by any situation. We understand there are only namas and rupas. .... >On my mindfulness walks (basically one > main aspect of my practise) it is just this mindfulness that is > supposed to see the true nature of things. How, now, does this > differ from the type of mindfulness of realities that you know, and > if it is the same, sati, would you be willing to accept that it has > come about through the causes of intention to be mindful, of reading > a book with instructions to be mindful, describing mindfulness? .... S: When we talk about ‘seeing the true nature of things’ we need to be clear about what we mean. Please elaborate. I think that the development of sati that we read about in the texts refers to the awareness of seeing, visible object, hearing, sound, attachment, aversion and so on. In other words, it’s awareness of dhammas appearing now, not of concepts or ideas. I think that mindfulness comes about by understanding what it is (at first in theory of course) and by understanding what the objects are, ie what namas and rupas are. I don’t think it ever comes about by intending to be mindful or by following instructions on how to be mindful. This is how I see it, Andrew. Others here will share the ideas you’ve expressed. .... > As for the three characteristics, I gained some direct vision of them > in physical realities from a 20 minute sitting meditation session, > not sati, as one would think.. Mysterious, huh? ..... S::-) Very mysterious! .... > From the (Maha-)Satipatthana sutta, mindfulness of posture is one of > the objects to be known with mindfulness. Certainly it is not an > ultimate reality but there must be some benefit from it for the > Buddha to instruct people to follow it. .... S: Please read the commentary notes carefully with the sutta. Also see posts under ‘posture’ and ‘Satipathana Sutta’ in U.P. Instead of being some benefit, as I read the texts, they suggest it is the idea of ‘posture’ and ‘wholeness’ that cover up those same three characteristics. When there is an idea of ‘body’, ‘sitting’ or ‘standing’, there is no awareness of hardness, motion, heat or cold appearing through the body or other elements. We can read many suttas about the elements or khandhas – the purpose is to help us understand these dhammas, not to cling more to an idea of awareness of ‘wholes’. There are so many similes given in the Satipatthana Sutta to stress the ‘parts’ or elements rather than the ‘postures’ or ‘wholes’. We can discuss them further if you like. .... >Of course, not too far after > mindfulness of posture comes mindfulness of the four elements, but > still, posture may.. ehh. as I've read, help one to see the selfless > nature of the mind/body complex especially if it is accompanied by > awareness of intention to walk (so you see for example there is > intention and going, no 'self' who is doing the walking, sounds > right, doesn't it?). .... S: From the commentary:“There can be nothing apart from the qualities of primary and derived materiality, in a body. Indeed the character of contemplating the collection of major and the minor corporeal members, is like the seeing of the constituents of a cart.” Primary and derived materiality refers to the 4 primary and 24 derived rupas of course. Whatever we read in the suttas when we read the conventional language, has to be understood in terms of cittas, cetasikas and rupas. When there’s an idea of ‘awareness of intention to walk’, it’s fine if we’re just talking conventionally. But if we really think that this is the development of satipatthana, we have to what the present dhammas – namas and rupas really are at such a moment. Andrew, I know you’re reading/listening to different ideas. In the end, the proof will be in the testing out of what is appearing right now at the present moment, not by trying to have a special experience of mindfulness. ... <...> > Fair, there are situations that have caused me to have compassion > spontaneously, however, I do believe in the idea of using loving- > kindness meditations or instructions to cultivate metta. For > example, one day going to the beach with my friends I continually > wished for each of them "May he be well, happy, and peaceful. May he > have no problems. May he have no pain." and so on. This was enough > to generate metta, .. <..> S: I’m glad to read that you’ve been out with your friends and have been feeling so friendly and kindly towards them. I’d just say it’s very easy to cling to metta and take it for ‘my metta’ or to any other of the Perfections for that matter. I think it helps to consider and reflect and develop it when there are opportunities. Most importantly, we need to understand it as a conditioned dhamma too, so that it doesn’t lead to more attachment to a self with metta. ... > Let me jump in here-- certainly trying to develop detachment is one > of the goals here, as being opposed to greed or attachment, (right > intention, focused on renunciation, detachment, or generosity instead > of lust for sensuality, if this makes sense)-- but are you saying we > should do it not by trying [intentionally]? I can't understand your > statement if so. ... S: My last sentence was: ‘Just develop more awareness, understanding and detachment, but not by trying to do anything.’ What I mean is let it happen however quickly or slowly conditions dictate. If *you* try to do something to induce awareness like walking in a particular way or focusing on posture, it will impede its development. It will lead to a stronger idea of self and control rather than to detachment of all those elements. ‘Develop...’ means that by reflecting and considering as we’re doing now, understanding can gradually develop when one sees the value and urgency of the Path, I believe. Excellent questions and comments. I’ll look forward to any of your responses or quotes/extracts for further consideration. I’m behind on a number of other threads, so I may not get back to any of your responses til next week, but others may contribute in the meantime. Metta, Sarah ======== 43230 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Matheesha. --- djmathi wrote: > > > Hi Nina, > > Does abhidhamma contain any instructions on practice techniques? I > have seen many lists there and it put me off reading the abhidhamma, > even though i do enjoy the suttas with its dialogue. I somehow feel > that my dharma knowledge is incomplete without knowing the > abhidhamma but at the same time i feel it is an needless > complication as well as much can be understood through practice > itself. ... S: Welcome to DSG. I believe this was your first letter here. You raised these good questions and Nina responded. I hope you'll continue the discussion with her and also introduce a little about yourself, such as where you live. You may like to look at some save posts under 'Abhidhamma- beginners' in 'useful posts' in the Files section. I think they'll help with these concerns. I don't think we have to use the word 'abhidhamma' even. Dhamma is dhamma whichever Pitaka it's in. It just depends what can be tested out and known at this moment and what we read which is relevant to this, I think. Anyway, please join in any threads of interest to you and leave aside any which aren't for now. I hope to hear more of your comments and good feedback as you gave here. Metta, Sarah ======== 43231 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Adinava e Nekkhamma Dear Enio, --- Enio César wrote: > > > Dear Sara and Nina, > > I sent an email to the Michael, telling him that his absence has being > felt in this list. I am sure he will answer you soon! ... S: thanks for that. I know he's busy with his website and travels a lot too. ... > I loved the idea to make public the topic-to-topic discussion about the > gradual teaching. However, I'm afraid that it will not be possible, > because all the texts are already in Portuguese and I would spend too > much time to translate them to English (and my translations are always > terrible!). ... S: You could just give your comments with the references and we could help to find them. Also, you may find the suttas on the English ATI site. I'm sure many people here will be happy to help with this. ... > I will talk about it with Michael. He's always very busy, but maybe he > would help me to translate the texts and make this public discussion > possible, in order to improve the texts and to correct my errors of > interpretation or translation. ... S: Anyway that works will be good. You could also just use a line or two at a time with your own translation and then we can discuss further. of most interest are your own comments, of course. I thought of you when I posted the following extract from Nina's book, 'Cetasikas' on nekkhama. Do you have any comments? "One may wonder whether nekkhamma, renunciation, is the same as retirement from worldly life and whether it therefore pertains in particular to monks. Although a monk’s life should be a life of contentment with little, he may not be cultivating nekkhamma. Whoever has not eradicated attachment to sense objects has still conditions for “thought of sense-pleasures”, no matter whether he is a monk or a layman. When a monk receives delicious almsfood, is attachment not likely to arise? There are many degrees of nekkhamma and not only monks should cultivate it, but laypeople as well. Actually, all kusala dhammas are nekkhamma 1. When we perform dåna, observe síla or apply ourselves to mental development, we are at such moments not absorbed in sense-pleasures, there is renunciation." **** Metta, Sarah ======== 43232 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:25am Subject: RE: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Selamat, I'm always glad to read your letters to Nina too. I remember you've been corresponding with her for a long time now (since the 70s if I recall correctly). It's great to hear about all your activities and the keen interest of your group. --- nanapalo wrote: <...> > By the way, I would like to forward Mrs Sujata Tjiomas's regards to you. > She is more than 80 years old woman and is still active learning and > discussing Abhidhamma with me. Now her eyes are not so good as before, > so mainly she doesn’t read books anymore. ... S:As she has such keen interest and has appreciated A.Sujin's and Nina's books, she might appreciate listening to recordings of discussions with A.Sujin, Nina and friends. Does she understand English? If so, you could either try downloading these recent recordings from our discussions in India to be found at this link: http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ Alternatively, we can send you an mp3 with the recording if she has an mp3 player available for use. You already gave your address - pls let if you'd like a copy. If anyone else wasn't following the list at the time I mentioned it before, the same offer applies. (Just let me know your address off-list if it's difficult for you to download and you'd like a copy). Metta, Sarah ========= 43233 From: Joop Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:45am Subject: Dependent origination in daily life (Was Re: To Connie: BB's Article --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Bhikkhu Bodhi follows the traditional intepretation of DO as > exlained by Buddhaghosa. > Nanavira (and Buddhadasa) have introduced radically new > interpretations of DO. Both Nanavira and Buddhadas are "out of the > box" thinkers. > I feel that I am not yet conversant enough with the traditional > intepretation to properly evaluate either Nanavira or Buddhadasa. I > feel that I have to first properly and deeply understand the > traditional interpretation before evaluating modern alternatives. > Metta, > Rob M :-) I do feel conversant enough with my own buddhistic path to prefer modern alternatives! I did't know Buddhadasa has talked about DO: I found some texts with google, thanks Rob Metta Joop 43234 From: nanapalo Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 5:09am Subject: RE: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Ms. Sarah, Anumodana for your kind attention. I wrote to Nina since 87s while my group asked her permission for translation of Buddhism in daily life. At that time Mrs Sujata and I just 1 year studied Abhidhamma in Jakarta from. She was 70 and I was 24 years old. Mrs Sujata understands both English and Netherland language. In the daily life, her concern regarding Philosophy, and psychology in relation to life is so deep. Of course she will be happy if she could hear recording of the discussions. I will try to download the file. I will inform you off the list if I fail downloading the file. Anumodana. Kind regards, selamat -----Original Message----- From: sarah abbott [mailto:sarahprocterabbott@y...] Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 5:26 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Selamat, I'm always glad to read your letters to Nina too. I remember you've been corresponding with her for a long time now (since the 70s if I recall correctly). It's great to hear about all your activities and the keen interest of your group. --- nanapalo wrote: <...> > By the way, I would like to forward Mrs Sujata Tjiomas's regards to you. > She is more than 80 years old woman and is still active learning and > discussing Abhidhamma with me. Now her eyes are not so good as before, > so mainly she doesn’t read books anymore. ... S:As she has such keen interest and has appreciated A.Sujin's and Nina's books, she might appreciate listening to recordings of discussions with A.Sujin, Nina and friends. Does she understand English? If so, you could either try downloading these recent recordings from our discussions in India to be found at this link: http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ Alternatively, we can send you an mp3 with the recording if she has an mp3 player available for use. You already gave your address - pls let if you'd like a copy. If anyone else wasn't following the list at the time I mentioned it before, the same offer applies. (Just let me know your address off-list if it's difficult for you to download and you'd like a copy). Metta, Sarah ========= 43235 From: nanapalo Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 5:30am Subject: RE: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Mrs Nina, I am sorry to hear your father condition. It is the reflection of Anatta, no one could hold him though we want him stay more time. Anumodana for your kind attention also. To share a brief info regarding our mood in a bank, below is my brief topic of discussion: In a bank there are activities to provide services to their customers, not only the external (real) customers, but to internal customers also which are other divisions such as the business group, the product group, the stakeholders, the audit group, the finance group, etc. The challenge of the employees is how to reach the customer fulfillment in many aspects with a certain service level. To achieve these challenges, they have to manage time, people, risk, reputation, service level, manage change in turbulent and variety needs with quite great pressure, and so on. We try to discuss and share some issues concerning managing people, managing change etc as above and to map them through the application of Abhidhamma, how to manage the bad habit / mood (akusala cetasikas and cittas) of ours and of others; and how to rise and improve our kusala cetasika and citta to face the bad conditions. Interesting enough to discuss but quite hard to apply the sobhana in daily life I will share the topics and result to this group after our discussion this Saturday. Anumodana. Kind regards, Selamat -----Original Message----- From: Nina van Gorkom [mailto:vangorko@x...] Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2005 4:54 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Selamat, I am delighted with your letter and all the news. See below, op 12-03-2005 06:12 schreef nanapalo op nana_palo@c...: > Recently Dhamma Study Group Bogor has additional classes for bringing > Abhidhamma at 7.30 am every Saturday, ... N:Just wonderful to see all your activities. > Selamat: Point 1 discussion members will extend the hour for discussing the > Application of Abhidhamma in Management soft skill, either in Bank, > Company etc. But we have no other references for this purpose other than > your books. Greatly appreciate if you could give me some information > regarding this. N: As I understand, people like to know how to apply Abhidhamma in their work? They must face now and then difficult situations, contrarious people. It is good if they can give some examples of these to me, so that I can say more on this subject. What helps most of all: seeing one's own lobha, dosa and moha. These are the source of all problems in life, not the other people, not the situation. We like to blame others for our problems, but then we have aversion, dosa, while doing so. We have to be very patient and learn more about our different cittas. They arise and fall away so fast. Often we delude ourselves and believe that cittas are kusala, but immediately after kusala citta there is bound to be akusala citta, such as attachment to our kusala. This is really hard to see. The Abhidhamma helps us to see our hidden defilements. Yes, the Abhidhamma is for application, otherwise it would not be very useful. Good to hear more input from those working in a Bank! > S: By the way, I would like to forward Mrs Sujata Tjiomas's regards to you. > She is more than 80 years old woman and is still active learning and > discussing Abhidhamma with me. N: Yes, I was thinking of her and meant to ask you. A wonderful person, anumodana for her interest. My husband and I are well, but I lost my father recently, age 104. This is dukkha to us. My warmest regards and anumodana to you and your group, Nina. 43236 From: Joop Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:36am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi, Connie (also, James, RobertK, Nina, Sarah, Howard, KenO) - > > Thank you so much for your long message (#43192) that is 'good to the > last drop'. ... Hallo Tep and all In my buddhistic intuition the concept 'Buddha-ature', as used by Mahayanists, is a perfect example of atta-belief. Perhaps belief in a high kind of atta, a Atta wit a capital, but still a concept not compatible with the anatta-doctrine. I the texts used by Mahayanists is never seen an explanation with the words of (one of the) Abhidharmas, so I doubt that the way Connie and Tep try to unite Theravada with this aspect of Mahayana, will have success. In the book 'Pruning the Bodhi Tree' some Japanase buddhologists (with Zen- and thus Mahayana-roots) adhere the socalled 'Critical Buddhism'. In the chapter 'The doctrine of Tathagata-garbha is not Buddhist' Matsumoto Shiro explains why the concept 'uddha-ature' (Tathagata-garbha) is an essentialist philosophy closely akin to the monism of the Upanisads. It's not compatible with the anti- essentialist principle of paticcasamuppada (I think both in the Buddhagosian as in the early and modern interpretation of DO). One strange aspect of the comparison Theravada - Mahayana. One of the quotes of the discussion in this book is from the socalled Mahaparinirvana Sutra: "all sentient beings possess Buddha-Nature". (the discussion is if this means the same as the standpoint from the Lotus Sutra: "all sentient beings will attain Buddhahood) I'm rather sure this can not be found in the Parinibbana Sutta of the Pali Canon but still they have the same name; I'm curious how this is possible. Metta Joop 43237 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 10:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Lisa, op 14-03-2005 02:33 schreef lisa_herawati@j... op lisa_herawati@j...: > For Nina, I've a live that up and down. And I admit that sometime I can't > except that yet. N: We can learn to accept this by being patient. There are many more akusala cittas in a day than kusala cittas, but if we had not come into contact with the Dhamma we would not even know this. It is a great gain to have more understanding of our life, understanding of the different cittas. Therefore, we should be very grateful to the Buddha who taught us the Dhamma. When we are grateful and appreciate the Dhamma the cittas are kusala. Understanding and kusala can be accumulated little by little. L:I try to walk in Buddha's way but I think my path still twisting. N: All of us, worldlings, are the same. We do not walk straight yet, but it can be learnt by the development of understanding. The Buddha taught us the way: satipatthana. Mindfulness of all dhammas appearing one at a time through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind-door. We can begin now to learn to walk straight. There is seeing and we think straightaway of I who is seeing. But it is only a citta that arises and falls away immediately. It does not belong to us. We believe that we see people, but seeing sees only visible object, a rupa that is experienced through the eyesense. We can learn the truth about our life. Nina. 43238 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 10:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha Nature Hi Connie and Larry, op 14-03-2005 01:26 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > I doubt if the sutta was talking about the bhavanga citta. That's not a > sutta thing. My guess is that the "luminous" characteristic applies to > all consciousnesses. N: As we discussed long ago, in one context in the sutta there was allusion to the bhavangacitta, but in other texts it is also said that the "luminous" characteristic applies to all consciousnesses, as Larry explained. Rob M also spoke about this. Citta merely cognizes an object, in this sense it is pure. The akusala cetasikas cause it to be defiled. Nina. 43239 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 10:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Larry, I am sorry you were thinking all day, that is rather tiring. I do not know whether I can be of any help. op 14-03-2005 01:49 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > I don't know. I've been thinking about this all day and haven't come to > a conclusion. It has to do with what is an object of consciousness. One > thought is that experience is only consciousness of an object. N: Can we put it this way: citta cognizes an object. Also the accompanying cetasikas experience that object, but each in their own specific way with their own tasks. Citta is the chief in knowing. L: What this means is that when I experience desire for a tomato, that desire is an > object of consciousness. N: Right, citta knows that there was desire, cognizes desire. That desire has just fallen away and then another process, a mind-door process arises, with cittas that have desire as object. Desire is nama and nama can only be experienced through the mind-door. L: If that is the case it would seem that desire for a tomato arose and ceased as unexperienced javana citta and then became an object of consciousness. N: Right. The concept tomatoe, or perhaps the thought of that flavour was an object of citta with desire, and that citta was at that moment not experienced, not an object of another citta, since the concept tomatoe was the object. L: But that unexperienced javana citta had an object too (the tomato), N: Right. L: so we are still left with two kinds of object, experienced and unexperienced, N: Here is a tricky point. An object is object when it is experienced. The unexperienced javanacitta was not an object. This should solve your dilemma. L: and possibly a different kind of citta process called "experience". This doesn't seem like a very satisfactory solution but I can't think of anything else right now. N: It is not so complicated when you keep in mind that there are different processes of citta, that the cittas of one process all experience the same object, and that only one object at a time can be experienced during one process. A citta can be experienced by another citta, arising later on, and this arises in another process, a mind-door process. We also have to remember that processes pass so fast, what are in reality many cittas seem to be only one moment. We can be easily deluded. This is the way to entangle what seems complicated at first. Nina. 43240 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 11:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Selamat, Thank you for your letter and offering a summary of your discussions. Many here on this list will also be interested. How to face difficult situations at work, to face akusala cittas, develop kusala cittas. A good topic. We cannot control others' cittas, thus, the client's cittas, but we can do our work with metta and karuna. The Brahmaviharas practised in daily life can help much. How to practise them? In knowing our own cittas more. Not deluding ourselves and erroneously take for kusala what is in reality akusala. Subtle lobha we often do not notice. These are just a few thoughts. Best wishes, Nina. op 14-03-2005 14:30 schreef nanapalo op nana_palo@c...: > We try to discuss and share some issues concerning managing people, > managing change etc as above and to map them through the application of > Abhidhamma, how to manage the bad habit / mood (akusala cetasikas and > cittas) of ours and of others; and how to rise and improve our kusala > cetasika and citta to face the bad conditions. Interesting enough to > discuss but quite hard to apply the sobhana in daily life > > I will share the topics and result to this group after our discussion > this Saturday. 43241 From: connie Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 11:53am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hi, Joop, J: One strange aspect of the comparison Theravada - Mahayana. One of the quotes of the discussion in this book is from the socalled Mahaparinirvana Sutra: "all sentient beings possess Buddha-Nature". (the discussion is if this means the same as the standpoint from the Lotus Sutra: "all sentient beings will attain Buddhahood) I'm rather sure this can not be found in the Parinibbana Sutta of the Pali Canon but still they have the same name; I'm curious how this is possible. C: I spent some time trying to find all of Nichiren's Nirvana quotes I could without success and have been told there is no English translation of the Mahayana Nirvana Sutra, but several versions in Chinese, translated from Sanskrit. I do still find myself looking for ways to reconcile the various traditions, but doubt it's going to happen. My thinking is that if it's not in the Pali texts, it's not Dhamma-Vinaya, but (and I don't really buy it) it's ok for people to call themselves 'Buddhist' anyway. Paula sent me the article out of concern because I have no wish to go to more meetings where I either sit in silent disapproval/disagreement or am disruptive and 'slanderous', but not heard. I prefer typing. My whole point to my enchanted friend was that, in my understanding, Buddha nature is not Buddhist but Atta. I just thought it was interesting that the author chose that quote to support the concept. I still think some (so-called) Thera Buddhists have an idea relating to Buddha Nature as Nibaana, but that's my interpretation. See what you think of the following quotes from Bhikkhu Khemavamsa's "CONTEMPLATION OF THE MIND: Practising Cittanupassana" [http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/cittanupassana5.pdf]. peace, connie 43242 From: connie Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 11:53am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hi, Larry, C: last page: "The Buddha nature that all these beings possess is called by the name Myoho-renge-kyo ... summoned forth and manifested by our chanting..." L: This reminds me of the Buddha's words of encouragement to the bhikkhus. Buddha nature could mean simply "kusala citta". Do you know what "Myoho-renge-kyo" means? C: "Mystic Law". Japanese pronunciation of Chinese title for "Lotus Sutra" (Kumarajiva's translation). On and on go the explanations. Myoho - mystic; life/death. Renge - lotus; simultaneity of cause & effect; purity. Kyo - sound; sutra. [Nam - devotion; fusion] "The ultimate law or reality permeating all phenomena". Some Lotus schools' version of DO, I guess. As I understand my friends' world, plants, rocks and all are potential Buddhas. I think, maybe like Joop, that it's another All is One & Atta thing, but will save my ranting for another list. [...] L: From Jaran's and Suan's messages that you mention below I see that the commentaries do say luminous mind is either bhavanga or rebirth citta, but I couldn't find what sutta they referred to. Anyway, seems like a bit of a stretch for me. The Buddha didn't talk about things like that. Our modern commentators (RobertK, Howard, and TG) seemed to think luminous mind referred to nibbana. Could it possibly refer to nirodha samapatti? C: Adding the pali to Uppalawanna's translation [www.bdcu.org.au/BDDR/bddr12no3/anguttara.html]: 48. “Naaha.m bhikkhave, a~n~na.m ekadhammampi samanupassaami ya.m eva.m lahuparivatta.m yathayida.m citta.m. Yaava~ncida.m, bhikkhave, upamaapi na sukaraa yaava lahuparivatta.m cittanâ€?ti. A.t.thama.m. 48. Bhikkhus, the mind changes quickly. There is no comparison to the quickly changing nature of the mind. It's the eighth. 49. “Pabhassaramida.m, bhikkhave, citta.m. Ta~nca kho aagantukehi upakkilesehi upakkili.t.thanâ€?ti. Navama.m. 49. Bhikkhus, the mind is effulgent, it is defiled by external defilement. 50. “Pabhassaramida.m, bhikkhave, citta.m. Ta~nca kho aagantukehi upakkilesehi vippamuttanâ€?ti. Dasama.m. 50. Bhikkhus, the mind is effulgent, when released from external defilement. 51. “Pabhassaramida.m bhikkhave, citta.m. Ta~nca kho aagantukehi upakkilesehi upakkili.t.tha.m. Ta.m assutavaa puthujjano yathaabhuuta.m nappajaanaati. Tasmaa ‘assutavato puthujjanassa cittabhaavanaa natthii’ti vadaamiiâ€?ti. Pa.thama.m. 51.Bhikkhus, the mind is effulgent, it is defiled by external defilement. The not learned ordinary man does not know this and he has no development of the mind. This is the first. 52. “Pabhassaramida.m bhikkhave, citta.m. Ta~nca kho aagantukehi upakkilesehi vippamutta.m. Ta.m sutavaa ariyasaavako yathaabhuuta.m pajaanaati. Tasmaa ‘sutavato ariyasaavakassa cittabhaavanaa atthii’ti vadaamiiâ€?ti. Dutiya.m. 52. Bhikkhus. the mind is effulgent, when released from external defilement. The learned noble disciple knows this and there is development of mind to him. This is the second. See dsg 10218 for comments on TB's thoughts [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an01-049.html] about this pabhassara mind. Personally, I don't think the pabhassara is as important as the aagantukehi upakkilesehi / vippamuttan, so I'm agreeing with the commentarial: bhavanga. Maybe I should read some old guests and robbers posts. L: Taking Jaran's advice to stick to what is within our capabilities I think we can look to bare attention as being luminous, pure, and totally empty. I know this doesn't fit the categories, but look and see for yourself. Does bare attention have any objective content at all? When you look at an emotional outburst, what is the nature of that looking? C: I don't know what 'bare attention' means. 'Noting without labelling'? Manasikaara? Sati? "Consciousness without feature"? Likewise, 'empty': interdependent and impermanent? without an object? bare? of it's own distinct characteristics/functions/nature? Whenever I look at anything, there is always a story going on... no drama queen outside of that. Whenever a mindstate sees, it must attend to some thing, some object(ive). Yesterday at work, I looked up just before one of the housekeepers walked in & her manner said to me 'anger, sulking' and then I ignored her. No real outburst or words, but still drama. Thinking about what Christine said the other day about mindstates and physical actions, lobha and dosa just do what they do and don't care what they do it in relation to. Everything is good and sticky to lobha and repugnant to dosa. In the conventional version, I like dark chocolate, but I think what accumulates is just lobha and more tendency for it to attach to this or that flavour, color, texture in anything that arises. LOL... I think part of Buddha's warning the monks so much about women is because there is a word association between (sense) object/aarama.na and woman/rama.nii. But that's just me. peace, connie 43243 From: Andrew Levin Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:19pm Subject: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: No need to apologise and certainly no need to wait til you feel you can > hold your ground or express yourself as well as you'd like. To be honest, > I do get a little concerned if I don't hear from you for too long, so > consider a brief holding reply to let us know how you're doing from time > to time as well. Fair enough. It is a pattern with me and things whether I get them done or not so I don't think this is too much to ask. > ... > A:>(never mind the extreme mischief mode it seemed my posts > > here were in) it is a continuing problem for me but the past few days > > I think I've had some more well-being and clarity and so I think I > > can get back into the swing of things. Let's see. > ... > S: that's good to hear – the `well-being and clarity'. Of course, there > will always be ups and downs for all of us. I don't know if you saw a nice > post that Andrew T wrote on this subject (7th March) to Maya recently? > > He wrote: > "For this reason, I think it is a mistake to believe that we *can* > direct the waves and currents in the present moment and explain this > supposed ability by saying "that's my cetana at work!" Wrong. > That's conditions at work. Many times when we are happy and calm, it > *looks like* "we" are practising mindfulness or metta or whatever. > That we are directing the flow of our consciousness. But that's only > an illusion. A water illusion? > > Our hope is to understand, not to direct." WELL can't metta be practised intentionally by one after reading a book on how to arouse metta?? (Incidentally, the conditions of other people 'being' should be enough to extend metta, whether they are within one's sight or not). This is reasonable, just as it is reasonable to say it might take a little bit more than that, more conditions, but I'd say it's all fair game. Finding Buddhism and studying meditation from a particular meditation manual that emphasized 'loving-friendliness' and the generous help of others towards my welfare were the conditions for generating metta. These days it seems like going through the motions, wishing each person metta through the same sentences 'May he be well, happy, and peaceful. May no harm come to him, ... etc' is a little dry and tiring, but I'm going to be looking to practise metta in the future. It's one root of virtuous action, as I am reading (one particular mode of non-hate). > > Also, you may like to look at posts under `Discouraged, depressed.....' in > U.P. sometime if you're having trouble.. KK. I get caught up in reading U.P. posts for long times sometimes. I think it could just be having to wait until I get out more for things to make sense, sitting online a lot doesn't conduce to the words of an exchange feel meaningful. > ***** > To get to the tail: > > > S: Would you like to join in an ongoing study corner or start a new > > one? > > > Or just join in different threads? > > > A:> Well I kind of haven't been able to study CMA as I did earlier, and > > there's no great understanding to be had by trying to force it to > > work when it's not, > ... > S: Agreed – just use it as a reference manual from time to time, perhaps. Well I will relay one experience, I should probably tell you, I am reading Bhikkhu Bodhi's "The Noble Eightfold Path" and I had some material printed out Friday from it, and it talked about delusion being a thick coat of insensitivity from reality, and I sort of noticed the reality of this. It got me thinking to the Buddha's saying of "Abandon delusion as one quality, monks, and I guarantee you non-return." I didn't go that far, but I think I gained an understanding of what delusion was about. Following that, and sitting in the hallway distressed and having a nurse check up on me, I was in the last group of the day sitting patiently and talking a little back & forth with the guy next to me about the computer field and IT market (this is the one time my treatment has really felt like treatment) and some clothes on the lady in front of me began to be apparent as absolute realities. I had wished I had done the contemplation of the body as the four great elements so I could then compare it to what had I saw outside of my body (as I have read is the one facet of this meditation that can really 'depersonalize' your experience of the body). It also got me wishing I knew the derived types of matter too but I knew the book was off-limits for studying at least for now. Sort of a point where you realize "have read so much of the books, still not completely there yet" and a "here is something ive been studying" realization, but you don't feel 1:1 correspondence because you can't predict (and thus study) what you're going to see. We go by chapters, not lines of what will become apparent in the day to come. Re: Abhidhamma and moha & dosa > S: Yes, just start posting a little at a time as a separate thread, > perhaps – even just a sentence—with your comments. I know what you mean > about just `some kind of darkness..'. I think it is a mistake to try to > distinguish states, rather than just be aware of what is appearing at that > very moment of trying. Well I have no good response for this Isn't being able to tell whether it's dosa or moha part of seeing the reality? And thus study to clear up the issue a legitimate pursuit? > > Dosa is always averse to present dhammas or situations. It can be anything > from the mildest irritation or discomfort to extreme anger. Whenever there > is any unpleasant mental feeling, dosa is there for sure. Moha accompanies > all unwholesome states, but when it appears, its characteristic of > ignorance, just not knowing anything can be known. I think for most > people, dosa is more obvious, but moha is so very common., for example, > when there just seems to be `some kind of darkness'. > > I'll look forward to any thread or passages you raise for discussion. I > know Nina and others will be glad too. > This makes me think.. what kind of ignorance are we talking about here? Can ignorance of the true nature of reality manifest as delusion, that is, a skewed view of some objects, instead of a proper one, or is that part of ignorance itself. When I feel that darkness is it ignorance built up of the true nature of realities, manifesting as just (dark) non-knowledge of the way things are? > Metta, > > Sarah > ===== peeace, A.L. 43244 From: Andrew Levin Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:47pm Subject: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi AndrewL, (Htoo at the end & All) > > <...> > A:> Right, everything is indeed reliant on causes and conditions, but I > > am thinking here that we don't have to be quite so passive in waiting > > for them to arise. From what I am reading the way to know > > defilements or nama and rupa is to be mindful of them, well, I am > > asking now, what kinds of causes do you think can bring up sati? I > > have said that intention for it along with a few other causes can be > > sufficient, but see more below. > .... > S: The development of satipatthana is not passive at all, but it's not > `we' that can wait or make them arise. Understanding of what sati is and > what namas and rupas are is the way that sati will arise and develop. I > think that asking the right questions and carefully considering and > reflecting on the teachings as you're doing here is the main condition or > cause for direct awareness and understanding. OK so then let me ask: What is sati? And are you saying reflecting on a particular nama or rupa can condition sati for that bit? That holds pretty good implications for the course of practise. > S: I think we could replace energy here with intention, wish, > concentration and other states which can be wholesome or unwholesome. Any > desire or intention of getting particular results with expectations is at > best unhelpful and at worst, dangerous, in my view, as others are > discussing in another thread about wishing for arahantship. Well it's been helpful! I believe I've cultivated sati by following meditation techniques in the bestseller "Mindfulness in Plain English," with which I assume many readers here are familiar. > ... > A:> OK, so what type of wrong view are we looking at here? Certainly not > > wrong view as described as one of the ten unwholesome action, but > > still a wrong view holding us back from seeing the true nature of > > present nama and rupa, right? Like a wrong view accompanying a > > citta, yes? > .... > S: Just as right views or wisdom (pa~n~naa or samma di.t.thi) can be > wholesome courses of action (kamma-patha) through the mind, so wrong views > (micha di.t.thi) are likely to be unwholesome courses of action through > the mind. In fact, we read that wisdom and the development of satipatthana > is the highest kind of wholesome kamma-patha. Sarah I can't agree with you that wrong view based on self can be unwholesome kamma-patha. The Buddha really described wrong view as more of a general view of things, even conventionally using the term 'beings' numerous times in it. That the type of wrong view you describe is a hindrance to practise at all times, I am not decided on yet. I have seen a lot leading one to use the terms 'you' and 'being' suggesting a view of self to do some rudimentary practise tasks, and I really think the Buddha taught that there are some things we can consciously decide to do. > > For example, when we think others are responsible for our good and bad > experiences in life or that world leaders are responsible for the > suffering people endure, aren't we denying the results of kamma? By > understanding more and more that any situation really is only citta, > cetasika and rupa arising because of their own conditions including kamma, > the easier it is to develop metta and other wholesome states instead of > dosa (aversion), no matter how others behave, for example. > Aren't there greater forces at work than just kamma? I mean was it the kamma of 6 million Jews and 2 million others to be incinerated or have other methods of torture or persecutions put on them so much? Explain to me how karma can work if I, say, got an organization together to decrease penalties for marijuana laws and was later ticketed for using. Had I not done that, I might have been arrested and subjected to criminal charges. Was my activism good karma or destructive karma that ruined the kamma of being put in jail or did it merely put off when that karma will be experienced? There are so many things that could demonstrate this. I could do either idle chatter here hours on end day after day week after week and go outside and take a walk down the same stretch of road between 6 and 7 pm, or instead discuss dharma and do programming work. Assuming this karma can generate vipaka in this life, how can what I hear, see and feel in terms of pleasant or painful or neither-pleasant-nor-painful during that daily walk possibly be related to or a consequence of, what I did online at my computer hours earlier? > Back to the subtleties of wrong views, I'd like to quote a couple of > passages Ken H wrote recently which I thought were good and hopefully > relevant here: > > K:"When we deliberately look out the window, pick up a cup or type a > letter, we may not be aware that there are only conditioned dhammas > (so we may not have right view), but nor are we *denying* there are > only conditioned dhammas (so we don't have wrong view). However, > when we deliberately try to practise the Buddha's teaching > (deliberately try to have right view), we are denying his teaching > that there are only conditioned dhammas - no self in control." To which I would reply, there is the apsect of volition that a 'person' may execute or call upon during the course of his life due to different causes and conditions, such as reading a book, hearing a dharma talk, having personal inclinations and preferences, so seemingly a lot can be done from this heap of aggregates. > ...... > K:"I doubt the decision to deliberately practice satipatthana can ever > be kusala. Satipatthana involves direct knowledge of paramattha > dhammas, which come and go in less than a billionth of a second. How > could we ever expect to deliberately know paramattha dhammas?" How can we expect to non-deliberately know paramattha dhammas? We can see them when they are arising and passing away for what they are, maybe not in total clarity, registering every moment, but we can get a general picture. Why not? We take videos of actions happening in sequence, and we are able to extract enough information to make connections in our mind based on that, why not the same with the six senses? > S: It may not seem so harmful when we deliberately try to practice > satipatthana and so on in this way and I'm certainly not suggesting that > all fleeting moments of wrong view are akusala kamma patha, but the danger > is in the accumulation and tendency to more and more of the same when we > think it's right. So instead of developing the right path, we are really > developing the wrong path. > > RobertK, recently quoted the following: > > R:>Anguttara Nikaya Book of the tens XI (iii) 103 Wrongness > > "From wrong view proceeds wrong thinking; .. .. from that wrong > effort. From wrong effort proceeds wrong mindfulness; from that > wrong concentration. From wrong concentration proceeds wrong > knowledge. From wrong knowledge proceeds wrong release......" > ***** > S: I think it's very easy to take wrong effort and wrong mindfulenss for > 'right'. In the Atthasalini again under `Immoral Consciousness', we read > the following: > > "Do men of false opinions not remember an act done by themselves? They do. > But that is not mindfulness. The procedure of immoral consciousness is due > to such mere mode of remembering. Therefore mindfulness has not been > taken. Then why is it said, `wrong mindfulness' in the Sutta [e.g D iii > 254, 287 etc]? In the Sutta the discourse is made by the explanatory > method so as to complete the `Wrong Path' and the notion `wrongness' > because of the immoral aggregates being exempt from and opposed to > mindfulness. But in the absolute method (of Abhidhamma) in immoral > consciousness there is no mindfulness; therefore it has not been taken." > > I think it's helpful for us all to reflect on these issues you've raised, > so I thank you sincerely. > > Metta, > > Sarah > > p.s [S: the last part of this para was for Htoo's benefit as it related to > an earlier thread]. > ======================= Take care, Sarah, I think I'm going on that kamma-vipaka walk now. :-) 43245 From: mnease Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 3:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 8:26 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) > N: We have to know that sati cannot be directed to specific objects. > > M: Even when supported by jhaana? N: It is different in samatha, you are right. M quotes: N: That > sati cannot be induced. > > M: Not induced, but aroused? I'm thinking of "...[a bhikkhu] Nisidati > pallankam abhujitva ujum kayam panidhaya parimukham satim upatthapetva so > satova assasati sato passasati = "Sits down, bends in his legs crosswise on > his lap, keeps is body erect, and arouses mindfulness in the object of > meditation, namely, the breath which is in front of him."* N: It is good you bring this up, this is a point for many people. The terms induced or aroused can create misunderstandings. For samatha and for vipassana paññaa which knows the right conditions for the right results is necessary. M: Right-- Thus, anapanasati is not just trying to induce concentration at will, paññaa is indispensable. Pañña and sati are necessary to know precisely when there is kusala citta with calm and when lobha. Understanding has to be emphasized all the time. M: Understood-- > M: Since the Buddha > plainly says here, "...a bhikkhu...arouses mindfulness...", aren't we just > talking about different modes of expression or different methods of > explanation? Let me add that I don't think this passage is meant as an > instruction to a present-day layperson or that there really is 'a bhikkhu' > except as a designation or formation. In other words, I think that > anattataa is implicit in this and all texts (where it isn't explicit). > N: Yes, he has to know the right conditions, otherwise nobody in the world can > arouse sati whenever he wants it. > N: The more one wants it the less chance for its > arising. > > M: Of course it can't arise with craving. This reminded me of an > interesting passage in PTS's Dispeller, from the Classification of the > Structure of Conditions (3) Profitable, Rooted in a Formation: > > "...994. Herein, because in a single conscious moment there is no ignorance > together with a profitable formation, therefore instead of saying that, > kusalamuula.m...("profitable root") is said because it is the root of > profitable states, as ignorance is of unprofitable states; and, because of > the absence of craving and clinging, in the place of craving, "trust" > (pasaada), which is engrossed in the object like craving is said; and in the > place of clinging, "determination", which has a strong impact is said." > > Do you think this is pertinent to the arousing of mindfulness without > craving or clinging? N: it is said of kusala citta. Passaada, this means purity and the footnote says: saddhaa, confidence. This reminds me of the passage on saddhaa in Vis. XIV, 140: Text Vis.: Its characteristic is having faith, or its characteristic is trusting. And also of the Tiika: ...the opposite of faithlessness is decision, resolution that is pure. The Tiika states that this is not the same as adhimokkha, determination, that is among the Owhat-so-evers¹ or supplementary factors, yevapannakas, mentioned in the list of dhammas in the Dhammasangani. M: Interesting, I had assumed that Cousins meant 'adhimokkha' as that's the translation for 'determination' in the glossary. N: Here, the term resolution (adhimutti) is used to describe the manifestation of faith or confidence in wholesomeness.> This refers to the first type of mahaakusala citta with paññaa, and thus it can also pertain to the development of satipatthana. M: So in the Dispeller excerpt, 'trust' and 'determination' are more or less synonymous? Thanks, Nina-- mike 43246 From: mnease Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 -Appliedthinking/Vitakka,Jotipala. Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 8:26 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 -Appliedthinking/Vitakka,Jotipala. > M: By the way, is vicaara necessarily conditioned by > immediately previous vicaara? Since vitakka and vicaara each last only a > moment, their difference is hard to understand otherwise. I thought maybe, > disappearence and contiguity? N:Sampaticchanacitta which is accompanied by vitakka and vicaara follows upon one of the five sense-cognitions that are without them. The sampaticchanacitta conditions the following santiranacitta by way of anantara-paccaya, samanatarapaccaya, absence condition, disaoppearance-condition. When we say citta, we also include the accompanying cetasikas. But I do not see this as a means to know their difference. First the difference between nama and rupa has to be realized. M: Oh. It is not sure that everybody will know the difference between vitakka and vicaara. M: Guess that would be me... > N: In fact the Bodhisatta must have been aware of them, how otherwise > would he realize their presence? > > M: Of course--this awareness would have been after the fact though, I > think--in > reviewing. Or do you think these were cases of cittas with awareness taking > immediately fallen-away vitakkas as objects? > > N: I think both cases. Otherwise he could not acquire tender insight. M: Yes, that makes sense I think. N: I would like to add: one cannot count how immediate awareness of an object is. Its characteristic can appear to sati sampajañña, but this can be in a following process, processes of cittas follow upon each other very fast. Awareness in vipassanaa is not reviewing by thinking about a reality. M: I didn't think so. But in the texts, doesn't 'reviewing' (usually?) refer to thinking about past realities and also past thoughts? mike 43247 From: mnease Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 1. Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 8:26 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 1. > >>N: Adosa with regard to an object > >> that is not a living being can be described as patience. There can be > >> patience with regard to unpleasant objects such as heat, cold, or bodily > >> pain. > > M: Thanks, I hadn't heard this before. Is this synonymous with 'khanti'? I'd > > never made a connection between the root adosa and khanti. > N: Yes. There may be irritation or annoyance about any object, also a person > or concept such as the wheather. But instead of annoyance there can be > endurance of what is unpleasant, or patience. Kh. Sujin explained to us that > there is also patience when there is non-attachment to a pleasant object. M: Understood-- > N: When there is viriya for kusala there is also khanti. But khanti is not a > specific cetasika. M: I should've known that! Thanks again. mike 43248 From: mnease Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbaana Object, for Nina Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 12:32 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbaana Object, for Nina > > M: Is nibbaana the object of the mundane path? Does this occur with insight > > prior to stream-entry? > N: It is not the object of the Path that is lokiya, but change-of-lineage, > gotrabhuu, that is still lokiya citta, has as object nibbaana. However, it > does not eradicate defilements. After that lokuttara cittas arise. > Gotrabhuu is intermediate between lokiya and lokuttara. See T.A. p. 356: > "After that, with nibbaana as its object, the change of lineage > consciousness occurs, overcoming the lineage of the ordinary person and > arriving at the lineage of the noble ones." > Gotta is the clan, lineage of the ancestry. Bhuu: he has become. He becomes > another person, as we could say in conventional language. M: Thanks, I had misunderstood a passage in the Dispeller. mike 43249 From: mnease Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbaana Object, for Nina Hi Azita and Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "gazita2002" To: Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2005 10:57 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbaana Object, for Nina > Hello Mike and Nina, > This is very interesting. I had an idea that once nibbana was > experienced "one" became a sotapanna, but did not know so much detail. > > Maybe this clears up our discussion about the subject, Mike. Yes it does, my mistake! > thank you for all your detailed posts, Nina. I find them so > helpful. Agreed, I feel very fortunate to have such good friends. mike 43250 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Nina, I'm still confused about the experience of desire for a tomatoe. For one thing, what desire desires is to experience a tomatoe; so desire doesn't experience the object of its desire. [addendum: unless we say when desire experiences its object it doesn't experience itself, is that it?] I believe you said when desire for a tomatoe arises as javana citta, that javana citta is not experienced until it is an object of consciousness in another mind-door process. What kind of consciousness takes this desire as object? It seems like it would be another javana series, and this second javana series, itself, would not be experienced until it (the second javana series) became the object of another mind-door process. What would be the experience of the first javana series in which tomatoe (an idea let's say) is the object of desire? Would it be just the perception of the idea of tomatoe? It would seem that a lot of what we think of as present experience is actually experiencing of unexperienced elements (of all kinds) of past mental processes. To say that experience is the object of javana and not the javana itself (unless it is an object) is a new way of looking at citta process for me. I'm going to have to meditate on this for a while. Larry 43251 From: Andrew Levin Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:51pm Subject: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 3 & a q Hi, Sarah, Reply to your post, a question pertaining to the previous post, and a comment. You wrote: I am familiar with this idea and how the Buddha spoke about it. He said a person with wrong view could go so far as to commit parricide. He could regard formations as permanent, as self. Whereas, someone with right view, could not commit parricide, it is an impossibility, Buddha said. It is also impossible that one of right view could treat any formation as permanent, or as self. So this gets me thinking, maybe wrong view of self is indeed a significant matter when it comes to wrong view, moreso than I thought. This makes me think right view is something more significant than I had thought. As I have told you in the last post, I am reading Bhikkhu Bodhi's "The Noble Eightfold Path." Since the work is too small to have a complete description of each path factor and what putting it into place entails, he gives a list of supplementary reading. I have read some of it, including "The Four Noble Truths" by Francis Story, and "Karma and Rebirth" by Byanatiloka Mahathera. It seemed right to be, however it didn't really get a lively reality-encompassing view of things into my mind. Bhikku Bodhi suggests that through reflection and recognition of certain principles such as that of a moral law of cause and effect, we can come to possess right view. This sort of gets me because, while it does seem that there is a 'view' to be had, it does say recognition of the principal of karma can constitute part of right view. I have to say I don't know how this can be the case because for all I know I have accepted the theory of karma for long, if nothing else but on faith, but I can't say it feels like it fits into what would comprise Right View (having known wrong view in my mind on one occasion and possibly seeing a projection of it unto reality), and even reflection on certain principals like how the four Noble Truths work in our lives, regardless that they constitute a 'right view' it still seems possible that one could engage in some of the ten unwholesome actions out of habit, circumstance, peer pressure, or any number of other things, that it does not constitute that solid and concrete sounding right view described by the Buddha that makes it an impossibility to commit the five heinous crimes, even to regard any formation as permanent. Especially the latter part seems like it should be supramundane right view, because if we start the path off with this, we are still far from seeing the three characteristics of reality in any number of cases, never mind absolutely everything. So I guess I mean to ask, how can we work with right view, to create it? Is there a specific model right view must follow, and if so, how can we bring it to its perfection? Or is having our views 'straightened out' to be generally in line with the dhamma good enough, all considered? How do we know, if reflecting on, and/or accepting certain ideas, if we have this 'unshakeable' right view? Your thoughts? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Andrew L, > > > The Buddha described mindful awareness as one of the steps in the > > gradual training, going along with guarding the sense doors, > > morality, and contentment. > ... > S: yes, this is just how I see it too – they develop together. I wouldn't > separate them. The development of satipatthana is the guarding of the > sense doors and this is the development of morality and contentment – > learing to be satisfied or detached from whatever dhamma is conditioned to > arise. As K.Sujin reminded us, when there is the development of > satipatthana, we are not troubled by any situation. We understand there > are only namas and rupas. Hmm.. guarding the sense doors as a cause of morality? I hadn't thought of that, but now I guess I can try it out. In the past, I have behaved with morality after reading how it is practised by those gone forth, emulating the behavior described, with regard to speech, keeping the precepts, and so forth (practising compassion for beings is another feat in and of itself but I got most of it). > .... > >On my mindfulness walks (basically one > > main aspect of my practise) it is just this mindfulness that is > > supposed to see the true nature of things. How, now, does this > > differ from the type of mindfulness of realities that you know, and > > if it is the same, sati, would you be willing to accept that it has > > come about through the causes of intention to be mindful, of reading > > a book with instructions to be mindful, describing mindfulness? > .... > S: When we talk about `seeing the true nature of things' we need to be > clear about what we mean. Please elaborate. I think that the development > of sati that we read about in the texts refers to the awareness of seeing, > visible object, hearing, sound, attachment, aversion and so on. In other > words, it's awareness of dhammas appearing now, not of concepts or ideas. > > I think that mindfulness comes about by understanding what it is (at first > in theory of course) and by understanding what the objects are, ie what > namas and rupas are. I don't think it ever comes about by intending to be > mindful or by following instructions on how to be mindful. This is how I > see it, Andrew. Others here will share the ideas you've expressed. Well there is not so much more to elaborate, I basically have gone on the street and practised some mindfulness of body and/or feelings 'walks' where I am only trying to be mindful of the realities described in the work on the four foundations of mindfulness I own. The book describes how we must be mindful of small deportments of posture, otherwise we may cling to them with craving or wrong views (wrong views of permanency and so forth). Mindfulness of dhammas includes a lot of what you mentioned, sense bases and their objects, fetters, so it is a lot of the same deal. ... If you base your understanding on the idea that all of these objects, nama and rupa, are impermanent, suffering, and not-self, and go on to be mindful, this is what I would be describing. However, I have not discerned the three characteristics of the aforementioned realities so much, but I have had a mindfulness of them, a knowing that they are there, a deep knowing, a sort of 'not forgetting' kind of thing which I read about... and in book I've tried practising of, the mindful awareness, which as part of the gradual training, was described in a few sentences, and I went on to thoroughly know my body, tried to apply clear comprehension of purpose, and so on. As the author suggested, mindfulness inside & outside (formal sitting) meditation go hand in hand. Another example of this would be where the author states if you're crossing a street, or for example answering a phone, you dont keep your mindfulness or attention on the body, but focus on what are you going to say, and the interaction. At one point I have shifted awareness to answering a phone call and there was a deep knowing of my faculties at that point, what I was doing, and expecting to say or hear. This is the type of mindfulness I have experienced. I ask how mindfulness as you know it is 'mindful of' certain realities, not just ones you study, but ones that appear prominent at any given time. I can say that this is a type of mindfulness, too, having seen realities come to the fore or become very apparent in and of themselves on occasion. And I don't know how to reconcile the two with each other or the term sati. > .... > > As for the three characteristics, I gained some direct vision of them > > in physical realities from a 20 minute sitting meditation session, > > not sati, as one would think.. Mysterious, huh? > ..... > S::-) Very mysterious! > .... > > From the (Maha-)Satipatthana sutta, mindfulness of posture is one of > > the objects to be known with mindfulness. Certainly it is not an > > ultimate reality but there must be some benefit from it for the > > Buddha to instruct people to follow it. > .... > S: Please read the commentary notes carefully with the sutta. Also see > posts under `posture' and `Satipathana Sutta' in U.P. Instead of being > some benefit, as I read the texts, they suggest it is the idea of > `posture' and `wholeness' that cover up those same three characteristics. > When there is an idea of `body', `sitting' or `standing', there is no > awareness of hardness, motion, heat or cold appearing through the body or > other elements. We can read many suttas about the elements or khandhas – > the purpose is to help us understand these dhammas, not to cling more to > an idea of awareness of `wholes'. There are so many similes given in the > Satipatthana Sutta to stress the `parts' or elements rather than the > `postures' or `wholes'. We can discuss them further if you like. Sarah, these are nearly interchangeable. I have read Bhikkhu Bodhi assert that mindfulness of posture illuminates the selfless nature of the body as it is in different positions- so whether or not this is the case, I could just as well be doing mindfulness of the four elements in my practise. In fact, sooner or later, I will be. I have read a little from the U.P. Satipatthana section, but I still think that the four foundations are to be practised sequentially, for long periods of time. Sati conditions more sati, but can't sati be cultivated? We can cultivate faith, to be honest I don't know if the mindfulness I describe using is sati or whether it is something different but mindfulness has the four foundations of mindfulness as its proximate cause, right? It seems that them being there, and beginning to be aware of them, is enough. To be fair, however, I remember one occasion a reality seemed extra-real, it was in my left arm, I think, the elements or just realityness became very viewable as satipatthana. Hence the subject. But then again, even the high monk at my local Vihara tells me how I can practise satipatthana, and he suggests one can 'do' the four foundations of mindfulness just as I do, to me (and has given me a little bit of advice on it at the same time). And back to the gradual training, how is most of it done but by 'doing' it? E.g. Contentment. One has to foster a sense of contentment at the instructor's words. Even in some of the UP Satipatthana 4 posts there is support for my notion of practise, as the Buddha describes how mindfulness of breathing is of great fruit when developed, and then goes on to give instructions for it. Heck, what about the Noble Eightfold Path? There's even a path factor called Right Intention. It would be hard to truthfully dispute that intentions need to be made on the path and practise has to be done. > .... > S: From the commentary:"There can be nothing apart from the qualities of > primary and derived materiality, in a body. > > Indeed the character of contemplating the collection of major and the > minor corporeal members, is like the seeing of the constituents of a > cart." > > Primary and derived materiality refers to the 4 primary and 24 derived > rupas of course. Whatever we read in the suttas when we read the > conventional language, has to be understood in terms of cittas, cetasikas > and rupas. When there's an idea of `awareness of intention to walk', it's > fine if we're just talking conventionally. But if we really think that > this is the development of satipatthana, we have to what the present > dhammas – namas and rupas really are at such a moment. > Sarah, you may be right on this. I have heard different ideas on how one can become a sotapanna and in at least one article seeing intention and going in their conventional terms are part of the picture. But it does make sense to know ultimate realities. Perhaps we can study Abhidhamma well and know these realities for what they really are. > Andrew, I know you're reading/listening to different ideas. In the end, > the proof will be in the testing out of what is appearing right now at the > present moment, not by trying to have a special experience of mindfulness. Sarah, or my successful, or unsuccessful practise of the Noble Eightfold Path, which includes the practise of the four foundations of mindfulness, the proximate cause of mindfulness, whether 'special' or of type A B or C (well actually it may be one and only one of these types, let's see if we can make some progress towards agreement or seeing if we can get any convergement on views. > ... > <...> > > Fair, there are situations that have caused me to have compassion > > spontaneously, however, I do believe in the idea of using loving- > > kindness meditations or instructions to cultivate metta. For > > example, one day going to the beach with my friends I continually > > wished for each of them "May he be well, happy, and peaceful. May he > > have no problems. May he have no pain." and so on. This was enough > > to generate metta, .. > <..> > S: I'm glad to read that you've been out with your friends and have been > feeling so friendly and kindly towards them. > > I'd just say it's very easy to cling to metta and take it for `my metta' > or to any other of the Perfections for that matter. I think it helps to > consider and reflect and develop it when there are opportunities. Most > importantly, we need to understand it as a conditioned dhamma too, so that > it doesn't lead to more attachment to a self with metta. I don't think I've taken it to be 'my' metta. It is just loving-kindness that can be given or applied to anyone. Metta and compassion are a hard task. Here's hoping that they can be successfully developed by us all. > ... > > Let me jump in here-- certainly trying to develop detachment is one > > of the goals here, as being opposed to greed or attachment, (right > > intention, focused on renunciation, detachment, or generosity instead > > of lust for sensuality, if this makes sense)-- but are you saying we > > should do it not by trying [intentionally]? I can't understand your > > statement if so. > ... > S: My last sentence was: `Just develop more awareness, understanding and > detachment, but not by trying to do anything.' What I mean is let it > happen however quickly or slowly conditions dictate. If *you* try to do > something to induce awareness like walking in a particular way or focusing > on posture, it will impede its development. It will lead to a stronger > idea of self and control rather than to detachment of all those elements. > `Develop...' means that by reflecting and considering as we're doing now, > understanding can gradually develop when one sees the value and urgency of > the Path, I believe. > Alright. Detachment has come before, I think I see its significance in relation to the path and so will allow it to achieve its peak when it comes next time. > Excellent questions and comments. I'll look forward to any of your > responses or quotes/extracts for further consideration. > > I'm behind on a number of other threads, so I may not get back to any of > your responses til next week, but others may contribute in the meantime. Yup! Have a good one, A.L. 43252 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi Connie, My view on religion in general is that it is a good idea (kusala citta), but there is usually a lot of clinging to views that goes along with it. So we have to separate the kusala from the ditthi, so to speak. Connie: "I don't know what 'bare attention' means. 'Noting without labelling'?" L: Yes. No need to label it manasikara or sati. What is interesting is that the noting isn't what is being noted, and also that this "bare attention" is a very subtle consciousness. When I notice the manifestation of an agitated state, the noticing itself isn't agitated, doesn't even have an opinion on the drama. It is difficult at first for noticing to become an object of consciousness but it can be cultivated with a little practice. Noticing noticing is somewhat similar to peripheral vision (out of the corner of your mind's eye). Larry 43253 From: matheesha Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:34pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Nina, Yes, I can see the value of it from what you tell me. The idea of attachment to all sense objects is very interesting. I was under the impression that unpleasant stimuli gives rise to aversion, pleasant stimuli to attachment and equanimous stimuli contain delusion - these being the aspects which needed to be worked on. Would you say that there is attachment regardless? There is a lot going on in this list and no doubt many topics had been covered. But I am also under the impression that there are descrepancies between sutta and abhidhamma in a few rare places. I heard that the abhidhamma speaks of 9 jhanas, rather than the 8 in the suttas? There was also this idea in one of the suttas that aversion lasts a little time but the kamma vipaka is stronger, desire lasts a longer time and the kamma vipaka is less (comapared to each other) and that delusion lasts the longest and has the worst kamma vipaka. I would be interested in discussing some areas which could do with some abhidhamma input if that is alright with you. metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Djmathi, > op 12-03-2005 09:32 schreef djmathi op matheeshag@h...: > > Does abhidhamma contain any instructions on practice techniques? > N: I would not call it techniques, that sounds too much like a rule: you > have to do this or that. Whereas in reality citta, consciousness, arises > just for a moment because of its own conditions and then it falls away. > As I wrote to Selamat: are kusala, but immediately after kusala citta there is bound to be akusala > citta, such as attachment to our kusala.> > > D:I have seen many lists there and it put me off reading the abhidhamma, > even though i do enjoy the suttas with its dialogue. > N: You do not have to read all the Abhidhamma classifications, but you could > take just a few lines at a time. Moreover, there are not only lists in the > Abhidhamma, also descriptions. For example, we learn that citta rooted in > attachment can be accompanied by happy feeling. Here we have something to > consider. ... 43254 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:26pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: >Our modern commentators (RobertK, Howard, and TG) seemed to think > luminous mind referred to nibbana. Could it possibly refer to nirodha > samapatti? > > ======== Dear Larry, I am not a commentator, that term should be reserved for the ancient monks whose works are recited at the Councils. I don't think I have said that luminous mind refers to nibbana. Robertk 43255 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:39pm Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hello,Connie Please note : "Soka Gakkai" is considered in Japan to be a very powerful well- established cult religion ,never to be authentic Maha-yana except by their followers. They have even their own political party which forms the current ruling coalition. One of the best merit(good kamma)-making ,they believe ,is to increase the number of the followers. So They approach anybody near and around ,often in disguise of a "enchanted friend " One of the worst demerit-making is ,they believe ,is to decrease the number.So they try evrery possible way to prevent their peer's withdrawal from membership, often very aggressively. You might have some idea about how they are regarded as on http://www.geocities.jp/mksutra/associationframe.html ----------------------------------------------------------- By the way, You can get some clew on "pabhassaramidam bhikkhave cittam" in "The Teachings of Phra Ajaan Mun Bhuridatta Thera" on http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/mun/released.html *excerpt* Section 10. The primal mind is radiant and clear by nature, but is darkened because of corruptions. //pabhassaramidam bhikkhave cittam tanca kho agantukehi upakkilesehi upakkilittham//: 'Monks, this mind is originally radiant and clear, but because passing corruptions and defilements come and obscure it, it doesn't show its radiance.' This has been compared to a tree in the poem that runs, A tall tree with 6,000 branches: Big chameleons swarm it each day by the hundreds, Small chameleons, each day by the thousands. If the owner doesn't watch out, They'll bring along more and more of their friends every day. This can be explained as follows: The tall tree with 6,000 branches -- if we cut off the three zeroes, this leaves us with six, which stands for the six sense doors, the entry way for the chameleons, i.e., things that are counterfeit, not things that are genuine. Defilements aren't genuine. They are simply things that come drifting in through the sense doors by the hundreds and thousands. Not only that, defilements that haven't yet arisen will arise more and more every day as long as we don't find a means for rectifying the nature of the mind. The mind is something more radiant than anything else can be, but because counterfeits -- passing defilements -- come and obscure it, it loses its radiance, like the sun when obscured by clouds. Don't go thinking that the sun goes after the clouds. Instead, the clouds come drifting along and obscure the sun. So meditators, when they know in this manner, should do away with these counterfeits by analyzing them shrewdly, as explained in the strategies of clear insight, Section 9. When they develop the mind to the stage of the primal mind, this will mean that all counterfeits are destroyed, or rather, counterfeit things won't be able to reach into the primal mind, because the bridge making the connection will have been destroyed. Even though the mind may then still have to come into contact with the preoccupations of the world, its contact will be like that of a bead of water rolling over a lotus leaf. **************** Section 6. The root instigator of the cycle of death and rebirth. //thitibhutam avijja-paccaya sankhara...upadanam...bhavo...jati...// Each and every one of us born as a human being has a birthplace: we have our parents as our birthplace. So why did the Buddha formulate the teaching on sustained conditions only from the factor of unawareness onwards? What unawareness comes from, he didn't say. Unawareness has to have a mother and father just as we do, and we learn from the above line that //thitibhutam// is its mother and father. //Thitibhutam// refers to the primal mind. When the primal mind is imbued with delusion, there is a sustaining factor: the condition of unawareness. Once there is unawareness, it acts as the sustenance for the fashioning of //sankhara//, mental fashionings, together with the act of clinging to them, which gives rise to states of becoming and birth. In other words, these things will have to keep on arising and giving rise to each other continually. They are thus called sustained or sustaining conditions because they support and sustain one another. Awareness and unawareness both come from //thitibhutam//. When //thitibhutam// is imbued with unawareness, it isn't wise to its conditions; but when it is imbued with awareness, it realizes its conditions for what they really are. This is how the matter appears when considered with the clear insight leading to emergence (//vutthana-gamini vipassana//). To summarize: //Thitibhutam// is the primal instigator of the cycle of death and rebirth. Thus it is called the root source of the three (see Section 12). When we are to cut the cycle of death and rebirth so that it disconnects and vanishes into nothingness, we have to train the primal instigator to develop awareness, alert to all conditions for what they really are. It will then recover from its delusion and never give rise to any conditions again. //Thitibhutam//, the root instigator, will stop spinning, and this will end our circling through the cycle of death and rebirth. ****************************** The following is from "Acariya Mun Bhuridatta - A Spiritual Biography" at http://www.buddhanet.net/ebooks_hist_art.htm Appendix II The following comments about the nature of the citta have been excerpted from several discourses given by Ãcariya Mahã Boowa. Of foremost importance is the citta, the mind's essential knowing nature. It consists of pure and simple awareness: the citta simply knows. Awareness of good and evil, and the critical judgements that result, are merely activities of the citta. At times, these activities may manifest as mindfulness; at other times, wisdom. But the true citta does not exhibit any activities or manifest any conditions at all. It only knows. Those activities that arise in the citta, such as awareness of good and evil, or happiness and suffering, or praise and blame, are all conditions of the consciousness that flows out from the citta. Since it represents activities and conditions of the citta that are, by their very nature, constantly arising and ceasing, this sort of consciousness is always unstable and unreliable. The conscious acknowledgement of phenomena as they arise and cease is called viññãõa. For instance, viññãõa acknowledges and registers the sense impressions that are produced when sights, sounds, smells, tastes, and tactile sensations contact the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, and body respectively. Each such contact between an external sense sphere and its corresponding internal base gives rise to a specific consciousness that registers the moment at which each interaction takes place, and then promptly ceases at the same moment that the contact passes. Viññãõa, therefore, is consciousness as a condition of the citta. Sankhãra, or thoughts and imagination, is also a condition of the citta. Once the citta has given expression to these conditions, they tend to proliferate without limit. On the other hand, when no conditions arise at all, only the citta's inherent quality of knowing is apparent.Still, the essential knowing of the average person's mind is very different from the essential knowing of an Arahant. The average person's knowing nature is contaminated from within. Arahants, being khïõãsava, are free of all contamination. Their knowing is a pure and simple awareness without any adulteration. Pure awareness, devoid of all contaminants, is supreme awareness: a truly amazing quality of knowing that bestows perfect happiness, as befits the Arahant's state of absolute purity. This Supreme Happiness always remains constant. It never changes or varies like conditioned phenomena of the world, which are always burdened with anicca, dukkha, and anattã. Such mundane characteristics cannot possibly enter into the citta of someone who has cleansed it until it is absolutely pure.The citta forms the very foundation of saÿsãra; it is the essence of being that wanders from birth to birth. It is the instigator of the cycle of existence and the prime mover in the round of repeated birth and death. Saÿsãra is said to be a cycle because death and rebirth recur regularly according to the immutable law of kamma. The citta is governed by kamma, so it is obliged to revolve perpetually in this cycle following kamma's dictates. As long as the citta remains under the jurisdiction of kamma, this will always be the case. The citta of the Arahant is the sole exception, for his citta has completely transcended kamma's domain. Since he has also transcended all conventional connections, not a single aspect of relative, conventional reality can possibly become involved with the Arahant's citta. At the level of Arahant, the citta has absolutely no involvement with anything.Once the citta is totally pure, it simply knows according to its own inherent nature. It is here that the citta reaches it culmination; it attains perfection at the level of absolute purity. Here the continuous migration from one birth to the next finally comes to an end. Here the perpetual journey from the higher realms of existence to the lower ones and back again, through the repetitive cycle of birth, ageing, sickness, and death, totally ceases. Why does it cease here? Because those hidden, defiling elements that normally permeate the citta and cause it to spin around have been completely eliminated. All that remains is the pure citta, which will never again experience birth and death. Rebirth is inevitable, however, for the citta that has yet to reach that level of purity. One may be tempted to deny that rebirth follows death, or one may doggedly hold to the nihilistic viewpoint that rejects all possibility of life after death, but such convictions cannot alter the truth. One's essential knowing nature is not governed by speculation; nor is it influenced by people's views and opinions. Its preeminence within one's own being, coupled with the supreme authority of kamma, completely override all speculative considerations. As a consequence, all living beings are compelled to move from one life to the next, experiencing both gross incarnations, like the creatures of land, sea and air, and the more refined incarnations of ghosts, devas and brahmas. Although the later are so ethereal as to be invisible to the human eye, the citta has no difficulty taking birth in their realms. The appropriate kamma is all that is required. Kamma is the determining factor; it is the power that propels the citta on its ceaseless journey in saÿsãra. The citta is something so extremely subtle that it is difficult to comprehend what actually constitutes the citta. It is only when the citta attains a state of meditative calm that its true nature becomes apparent. Even experienced meditators who are intent on understanding the citta are unable to know its true nature until they have attained the meditative calm of samãdhi. Even though the citta resides within the body, we are nevertheless unable to detect it. That's how very subtle it is. Because it is dispersed throughout the physical body, we cannot tell which part or which aspect is actually the true citta. It is so subtle that only the practice of meditation can detect its presence and differentiate it from all the other aspects associated with the body. Through the practice of meditation we can separate them out, seeing that the body is one thing and the citta is another. This is one level of separation, the level of the citta that is experienced in samãdhi, but its duration is limited to the time spent practicing samãdhi. At the next level, the citta can totally separate itself from the physical body, but it cannot yet disengage from the mental components of personality: vedanã, saññã, sankhãra, and viññãõa. When the citta reaches this level, one can use wisdom to separate out the body and eventually become detached forever from the belief that one's body is oneself, but one is still unable to separate the mental factors of feeling, memory, thoughts, and consciousness from the citta. By using wisdom to investigate further, these mental factors can also be detached from the citta. We then see clearly for ourselves - sandiååhiko - that all five khandhas are realities separate from the citta. This is the third level of separation. At the final level, our attention turns to the original cause of all delusion, that extremely subtle pervasion of ignorance we call avijjã. We know avijjã's name, but we fail to realize that it is concealed there within the citta. In fact, it permeates the citta like an insidious poison. We cannot see it yet, but it's there. At this stage, we must rely on the superior strength of our mindfulness, wisdom, and perseverance to extract the poison. Eventually, by employing the full power of mindfulness and wisdom, even avijjã can be separated from the citta. When everything permeating the citta has finally been removed, we have reached the ultimate stage. Separation at this level is a permanent and total disengagement that requires no further effort to maintain. This is true freedom for the citta. When the body suffers illness, we know clearly that only the physical elements are affected, so we are not concerned or upset by the symptoms. Ordinarily, bodily discomfort causes mental stress. But once the citta is truly free, one remains supremely happy even amid intense physical suffering. The body and the pain are known to be phenomena separate from the citta, so the citta does not participate in the distress. Having relinquished them unequivocally, body and feelings can never again intermix with the citta. This is the citta's absolute freedom. Being intrinsically bright and clear, the citta is always ready to make contact with everything of every nature. Although all conditioned phenomena without exception are governed by the three universal laws of anicca, dukkha, and anattã, the citta's true nature is not subject to these laws. The citta is conditioned by anicca, dukkha, and anattã only because things that are subject to these laws come spinning in to become involved with the citta and so cause it to spin along with them. However, though it spins in unison with conditioned phenomena, the citta never disintegrates or falls apart. It spins following the influence of those forces which have the power to make it spin, but the true power of the citta's own nature is that it knows and does not die. This deathlessness is a quality that lies beyond disintegration. Being beyond disintegration, it also lies beyond the range of anicca, dukkha, and anattã and the universal laws of nature. But we remain unaware of this truth because the conventional realities that involve themselves with the citta have completely surrounded it, making the citta's nature thoroughly conform to theirs.Birth and death have always been conditions of the citta that is infected by kilesas. But, since kilesas themselves are the cause of our ignorance, we are unaware of this truth. Birth and death are problems arising from the kilesas. Our real problem, our one fundamental problem – which is also the citta's fundamental problem – is that we lack the power needed to be our own true self. Instead, we have always taken counterfeit things to be the essence of who we really are, so that the citta's behavior is never in harmony with its true nature. Rather, it expresses itself through the kilesas' cunning deceits, which cause it to feel anxious and frightened of virtually everything. It dreads living, and dreads dying. Whatever happens – slight pain, severe pain – it becomes afraid. It's perturbed by even the smallest disturbances. As a result, the citta is forever full of worries and fears. And although fear and worry are not intrinsic to the citta, they still manage to produce apprehension there.When the citta has been cleansed so that it is absolutely pure and free of all involvement, only then will we see a citta devoid of all fear. Then, neither fear nor courage appear, only the citta's true nature, existing naturally alone on its own, forever independent of time and space. Only that appears – nothing else. This is the genuine citta. The term "genuine citta" refers solely to the absolute purity, or the sa-upãdisesa- nibbãna, of the Arahant. Nothing else can wholeheartedly and without reservations be called the "genuine citta". I myself would be embarrassed to use the term in any other way. only because things that are subject to these laws come spinning in to become involved with the citta and so cause it to spin along with them. However, though it spins in unison with conditioned phenomena, the citta never disintegrates or falls apart. It spins following the influence of those forces which have the power to make it spin, but the true power of the citta's own nature is that it knows and does not die. This deathlessness is a quality that lies beyond disintegration. Being beyond disintegration, it also lies beyond the range of anicca, dukkha, and anattã and the universal laws of nature. But we remain unaware of this truth because the conventional realities that involve themselves with the citta have completely surrounded it, making the citta's nature thoroughly conform to theirs.Birth and death have always been conditions of the citta that is infected by kilesas. But, since kilesas themselves are the cause of our ignorance, we are unaware of this truth. Birth and death are problems arising from the kilesas. Our real problem, our one fundamental problem – which is also the citta's fundamental problem – is that we lack the power needed to be our own true self. Instead, we have always taken counterfeit things to be the essence of who we really are, so that the citta's behavior is never in harmony with its true nature. Rather, it expresses itself through the kilesas' cunning deceits, which cause it to feel anxious and frightened of virtually everything. It dreads living, and dreads dying. Whatever happens – slight pain, severe pain – it becomes afraid. It's perturbed by even the smallest disturbances. As a result, the citta is forever full of worries and fears. And although fear and worry are not intrinsic to the citta, they still manage to produce apprehension there.When the citta has been cleansed so that it is absolutely pure and free of all involvement, only then will we see a citta devoid of all fear. Then, neither fear nor courage appear, only the citta's true nature, existing naturally alone on its own, forever independent of time and space. Only that appears – nothing else. This is the genuine citta. The term "genuine citta" refers solely to the absolute purity, or the sa-upãdisesa- nibbãna, of the Arahant. Nothing else can wholeheartedly and without reservations be called the "genuine citta". I myself would be embarrassed to use the term in any other way. Seeming to exist independent of the physical body, this kind of extremely refined awareness stands out exclusively within the citta. Due to the subtle and pronounced nature of the citta at this stage, its knowing nature completely predominates. No images or visions appear there at all. It is an awareness that stands out exclusively on its own. This is one aspect of the citta.Another aspect is seen when this well-cleansed citta enters meditative calm, not thinking or imagining anything. Ceasing all activity, all movement, it simply rests for awhile. All thought and imagination within the citta come to a complete halt. This is called "the citta entering a state of total calm." Then, the citta's essential knowing nature is all that remains. Except for this very refined awareness – an awareness that seems to blanket the entire cosmos – absolutely nothing else appears. For unlike a beam of light, whose range is limited, reaching either near or far depending on the strength of the light, the flow of the citta has no limits, no "near" or "far". For instance, the brightness of an electric light depends on its wattage. If the wattage is high, it shines a long distance; if low, a short distance. But the flow of the citta is very different. Distance is not a factor. To be precise, the citta is beyond the conditions of time and space, which allows it to blanket everything. Far is like near, for concepts of space do not apply. All that appears is a very refined awareness suffusing everything throughout the entire universe. The whole world seems to be filled by this subtle quality of knowing, as though nothing else exists, though things still exist in the world as they always have. The all-encompassing flow of the citta that has been cleansed of the things that cloud and obscure it, this is the citta's true power.The citta that is absolutely pure is even more difficult to describe. Since it is something that defies definition, I don't know how I could characterize it. It cannot be expressed in the same way that conventional things in general can be, simply because it is not a conventional phenomenon. It is the sole province of those who have transcended all aspects of conventional reality, and thus realize within themselves that non-conventional nature. For this reason, words cannot describe it. Why do we speak of a "conventional" citta and an "absolutely pure" citta? Are they actually two different cittas? Not at all. It remains the same citta. When it is controlled by conventional realities, such as kilesas and ãsavas, that is one condition of the citta. But when the faculty of wisdom has scrubbed it clean until this condition has totally disintegrated, the true citta, the true Dhamma, the one that can stand the test, will not disintegrate and disappear along with it. Only the conditions of anicca, dukkha and anattã, which infiltrate the citta, actually disappear.No matter how subtle the kilesas may be, they are still conditioned by anicca, dukkha, and anattã, and therefore, must be conventional phenomena. Once these things have completely disintegrated, the true citta, the one that has transcended conventional reality, becomes fully apparent. This is called the citta's Absolute Freedom, or the citta' s Absolute Purity. All connections continuing from the citta's previous condition have been severed forever. Now utterly pure, the citta's essential knowing nature remains alone on its own.We cannot say where in the body this essential knowing nature is centered. Previously, with the conventional citta, it formed a prominent point that we could clearly see and know. For example, in samãdhi we knew that it was centered in the middle of the chest because the knowing quality of our awareness stood out prominently there. The calm, the brightness, and the radiance appeared to emanate conspicuously from that point. We could see this for ourselves. All meditators whose level of calm has reached the very base of samãdhi realize that the center of "what knows" stands out prominently in the region of the heart. They will not argue that it is centered in the brain, as those who have no experience in the practice of samãdhi are always claiming.But when the same citta has been cleansed until it is pure, that center then disappears. One can no longer say that the citta is located above or below, or that it is situated at any specific point in the body. It is now pure awareness, a knowing quality that is so subtle and refined that it transcends all conventional designations whatsoever. Still, in saying that it is "exceedingly refined", we are obliged to use a conventional figure of speech that cannot possibly express the truth; for, of course, the notion of extreme refinement is itself a convention. Since this refined awareness does not have a point or a center, it is impossible to specifically locate its position. There is only that essential knowing, with absolutely nothing infiltrating it. Although it still exists amid the same khandhas with which it used to intermix, it no longer shares any common characteristics with them. It is a world apart. Only then do we know clearly that the body, the khandhas, and the citta are all distinct and separate realities. 43256 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:53pm Subject: Thanks / Nibbanam-Vinnanam ? Dear Robert K, Nina and Suan Thanks a lot for all your kind posts They are very conductive to deepen my understanding of Buddhism However, I still wish Suan follow up the matter. from LK 43257 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 7:31pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Charles, Thanks for your reply: I can see it is not easy to fit DSG posts into your busy schedule. One of the points you raised related to language and terminology. While neither of us is likely to learn Pali as a language we can still benefit by adopting some Pali terminology. As I was saying earlier, Pali terminology and phrasing can indicate that namas and rupas are being referred to. So, for example, if someone were to say 'I am enjoying this cup of coffee' we would know they were talking conventionally. But if they were to say, "Lobha experiences an object," then we would know they were talking about the Buddha's teaching, in which attachment is an absolute reality of the variety, cetasika. I might add that it is seldom helpful to mix the two terminologies except in a very informal way. So it is not very helpful to say, "I am experiencing lobha for a cup of coffee." Lobha is a conditioned dhamma: it is not 'mine' or 'yours' and it is misleading to claim direct awareness of any particular dhamma. By the time we can think we are aware of a dhamma, it has already fallen away and been replaced by a long series of other dhammas. You were also talking about various realities, and we agree there are more than one of them. There are two forms of absolute reality - the unconditioned and the conditioned - and then there is "conventional reality." Conventional reality is illusory and does not exist in absolute reality. Worldlings can mistake it for being a part of absolute reality, but arahants are never caught out by it. Arahants use conventional terms such as I, you, they, chariot etc., purely for practical purposes (e.g., for communication). ---------------------------- C: > When you said: "... he also dispelled the wrong view, 'The self exists.'" I would say, "he also dispelled the wrong view, 'The self exists as an eternal (permanent and unchanging) soul, something uncompounded (the essence), some thing that you have complete control over. He also taught, how the self exist; and how thoughts, speech, and acts effect others (other selves). All I have been trying to say is that the Buddha actually taught how to view the self, and not to remain attached to it. ----------------------------- If you are referring to the five khandhas when you say "the self" then we basically agree. However, you do give the impression that there is some absolute reality apart from the five khandhas and Nibbana. For example, you say: ------------------------------------------------- C: > The Buddha never taught that conventional wisdom or reality should be as though of non-existent or unreal. --------------------------------------------------- It is true that we should not mix our terminologies, and it is not helpful to say, "I do not exist," or, "That brick wall does not exist." But when we are talking about the reality taught by the Buddha, we can say, "There is no self here," or, "There are only dhammas." ----------------------------- C: > If he did then there would be no need for Morality ----------------------------- There is a need for morality, but there is no self who is in need. Even if the five khandhas were to continue to be conditioned for another billion lifetimes, there would be no self that suffered. ----------------------------------------------- C: > (i.e., Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood). Actually there would be no need for the 8-Fold path because suffering would not exist either (since there is no-one to suffer). ---------------------------------------------- As the ancient commentaries say: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it; The Path is, but no traveller on it is seen." ------------ C: > In reality the Buddha did dispel a myth about self, that myth was about the nature of its existence. After all, if he did teach that there are no-selves, no not even one, then the teachings about all those realms of existence that Abidharmmist like to talk about would be a lie, and most of the other teachings too ... ------------ No, they would not be a lie: those teachings describe the different sets of natural laws that can apply to the five khandhas. In a hell realm, for example, the laws of nature do not allow for the arising of pleasant sense objects. In a heaven realm, no unpleasant sense objects can arise, and in an arupa realm, the laws of nature do not allow for any physical phenomena at all. -------------------- KH: > > Even though we refer to a particular set of five khandhas as you or me (etc.) there is no you or me outside of the momentary existence of those present five khandhas. > ......... C: > You would be completely right if you replace "self" with the following: attman (eternal soul), uncompounded-ness, permanence, something that can be controlled, ... swell as change "momentary existence" to relative existence. The concept of "Self" (that is devoid of these things and seen as a source of suffering) is a Right View. But like I said, I do know and understand your perspective; however, I attribute it to incomplete translations (the other concepts being summarized and thus called the self). > ---------------------- Sorry, but I don't understand what you are telling me here; nor at other places where you have tried to describe the self. E.g., where you wrote: -------- > I think you mistake the self for something uncompounded, having an essence, something unchanging, etc... so I assume that is why you dismiss it. Am I wrong? To me the self is a label I give to "my mind & form/flesh." And by "my mind & form/flesh," I mean something that is still subject to ... and is used to identify "this" being as opposed to another being. My view gives me the ability to dance through the relative and as the absolute. So, I exist when I exist, and don't exist when not existing. > -------- Please try again to describe this "self" that I am not aware of because of "incomplete translation." --------------------- KH: > > the Buddha taught that conditioned reality was the five khandhas. So, when he said [in the suttas or elsewhere] that rebirth was real, he could only have been referring to a particular, momentary arising of the five khandhas. >.......................... C: > This makes me assume you do not believe in reincarnation, is that true? ------------ Like all reality, reincarnation (better known as rebirth) is a momentary occurrence of the five khandhas. There is one moment of rebirth (patisandhi) and one moment of death (cuti) in every cycle of life. In between, there are untold trillions of momentary existences of the five khandhas, and they are known as seeing, hearing, touching, thinking and so on. Conditioned existence is always just the present, fleeting existence of the five khandhas. So you are not strictly correct when you say: -------------- > Objects can "persists" from moment to moment, but they are forever changing (the rates and amounts of change are relative), and as I stated before, objects can exist for up to eons (look at the teachings about the God Realm) or do you believe the God realm and gods do not exist? (the teachings are just fables) > -------- Conditioned existence is basically the same in all realms: there is a moment of birth and a moment of death and many moments in between. Gods have more moments in between than we do. Ken H 43258 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 7:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature RobertK: "Dear Larry, I am not a commentator, that term should be reserved for the ancient monks whose works are recited at the Councils. I don't think I have said that luminous mind refers to nibbana." Hi Robert, This is what I was refering to. I'm not sure what sutta Connie was refering to but she was arguing that luminous mind is bhavanga citta. In this thread you, Howard, and TG all seem to agree that the Buddha is talking about nibbana and some word is being translated as "luminous-all-around". Don't know what sutta this is from either. Seems to me, if you make a comment, you are a commentator, but maybe not "ancient". Such is identity. Larry -------------------------------------- Message #41422 From: upasaka@a... Date: Fri Jan 28, 2005 4:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana and Abhidhamma/ Hi, Robert (and TG) - In a message dated 1/27/05 8:19:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > Dear TG, > A couple of weeks ago you explained that you think Abhidhamma was > invented by later monks but that you do trust that the Nikayas are > really Buddha vacca. > I take these quotes from the Digha Nikaya: > The Digha Nikaya says Nibbana is > "Vinnanam anidassanam anantam sabbato pabbam" - Section 499, > Kevatta Suttam, > Silakkhandhavagga, > ------------------------------------------- Howard: Robert, I never expected to see the day that you would be quoting that consciousness-unmanifestive-luminous-all-around material in defense of anything! ;-) I agree that nibbana might well be thought of as a mode of luminous, boundless experience with no manifestation of knowing subject. And that would be nama. ----------------------------------------- > If that is said in the suttas why would are you concerned about it > being classified under nama in Abhidhamma? > It is classfied as nama only in that sense that it is known by > citta, by vinnana, that is all. Just as in the sutta it is called > vinnanam for this same reason. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Here I disagree. Hardness and sights are known by citta as well, right? So they should also be classified as nama by that line of reasoning. ----------------------------------------- > Robert > ===================== With metta, Howard 43259 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 3:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi, Robert (and Larry) - In a message dated 3/14/05 9:28:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > >Our modern commentators (RobertK, Howard, and TG) seemed to think > >luminous mind referred to nibbana. Could it possibly refer to > nirodha > >samapatti? > > > >======== > Dear Larry, > I am not a commentator, that term should be reserved for the ancient > monks whose works are recited at the Councils. > I don't think I have said that luminous mind refers to nibbana. > Robertk > ========================= Well, the "commentator" business was just being cute, I think! ;-) As to the other point, I also don't believe I said luminous mind refers to nibbana either, though I admit to having considered the possibility of so called "unmanifestive consciousness" referring to it. As regards "luminous mind", I consider it to be mind in its natural state, freed of all defilements - that is, the mind of an arahant. What makes luminous mind a possibility is that the defilements are adventitious and extrinsic. Were they intrinsic to mind, liberation would be impossible. The full and final realization of nibbana, or *freedom, results in the uprooting of all remnants of defilements, leaving the mind in its natural, luminous state. With metta, Howard *There is nothing whatsoever, anywhere, at any time, that is graspable even for a moment, and so our situation is one of straining to grasp ungraspable phantoms, terrified of the ground being swept out from under our feet. And the irony is that we are free to begin with, though we don't know it. There is no ground beneath our feet, nor was there ever! Nibbana is right here, but we don't see it. We are free of everything, there being nothing to be grasped, and no one to do the grasping. Our true circumstance is that of freedom, and true peace lies in realizing that and in letting go, letting go of everything. /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) 43260 From: connie Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 9:16pm Subject: Re: Buddha Nature ...she was arguing that luminous mind is bhavanga citta. Hi, Larry, I should strive for more precision in my communications. I meant to be arguing that the clean and luminous mind is the bhavanga cittas; also the defiled by adventitious guests mind is luminous. I was looking at AN I 48-52, end of ch.v and beginning of vi. peace, connie 43261 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 9:32pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Dear Larry, If you think I'm a commentator who am I to disagree. Just note that I am very opposed to being labelled as such. Still mystified as to why you think I believe nibbana is a luminous mind? RobertK In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > RobertK: "Dear Larry, > I am not a commentator, that term should be reserved for the ancient > monks whose works are recited at the Councils. I don't think I have said > that luminous mind refers to nibbana." > > > Hi Robert, > > This is what I was refering to. I'm not sure what sutta Connie was > refering to but she was arguing that luminous mind is bhavanga citta. In > this thread you, Howard, and TG all seem to agree that the Buddha is > talking about nibbana and some word is being translated as > "luminous-all-around". Don't know what sutta this is from either. > > Seems to me, if you make a comment, you are a commentator, but maybe not > "ancient". Such is identity. > > Larry > -------------------------------------- > Message #41422 > > From: upasaka@a... > Date: Fri Jan 28, 2005 4:59 pm > Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana and Abhidhamma/ > > Hi, Robert (and TG) - > In a message dated 1/27/05 8:19:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... > writes: > > Dear TG, > > A couple of weeks ago you explained that you think Abhidhamma was > > invented by later monks but that you do trust that the Nikayas are > > really Buddha vacca. > > I take these quotes from the Digha Nikaya: > > The Digha Nikaya says Nibbana is > > "Vinnanam anidassanam anantam sabbato pabbam" - Section 499, > > Kevatta Suttam, > > Silakkhandhavagga, > > > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Robert, I never expected to see the day that you would be quoting that > consciousness-unmanifestive-luminous-all-around material in defense of > anything! ;-) > I agree that nibbana might well be thought of as a mode of luminous, > boundless experience with no manifestation of knowing subject. And that > would > be nama. > ----------------------------------------- > > If that is said in the suttas why would are you concerned about it > > being classified under nama in Abhidhamma? > > It is classfied as nama only in that sense that it is known by > > citta, by vinnana, that is all. Just as in the sutta it is called > > vinnanam for this same reason. > ----------------------------------------- > Howard: > Here I disagree. Hardness and sights are known by citta as well, > right? So they should also be classified as nama by that line of > reasoning. > ----------------------------------------- > > Robert > > ===================== > With metta, > Howard 43262 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 9:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Larry: "Seems to me, if you make a comment, you are a commentator" Hi again Robert, You are right, I misconceived the linguistics. One who makes a comment is a commenter. One who writes a commentary is a commentator. A commentary is a more formal document than a comment, or even many comments. In Theravada circles "commentary" refers to the ancient commentaries although it is conceivable there are some not so ancient commentaries. As far as I know, there are only a few commentaries that have been translated. Many more remain untranslated. I'm not calling Visuddhimagga or Abhidhammattha Sangaha commentaries because they don't explain a text line by line. What Nina is doing with the Vism. thread might be considered to be a commentary, but Nina isn't ancient, yet. Also, the role of translators is debatable. Some think a translation is practically a commentary. Larry 43263 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 9:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi Connie, Thanks for the clarification even though it was my oversight. Larry 43264 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 10:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Robert: "Still mystified as to why you think I believe nibbana is a luminous mind?" Hi Robert, you wrote, "The Digha Nikaya says Nibbana is "Vinnanam anidassanam anantam sabbato pabbam" - ". I put this together with "Robert, I never expected to see the day that you would be quoting that consciousness-unmanifestive-luminous-all-around material in defense of anything! ;-)" which Howard wrote. I don't know the Pali so maybe I'm misunderstanding. I didn't think DN explicitly said "Nibbana is...", so this was an interpretation, albeit reasonable. I was searching the archives for "luminous" and that is what came up. Larry 43265 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 10:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Mrs. Nina, Brahmaviharas are good for all of us, we should try to develop them in our daily activities at work so we always have a positive thinking. What many employees experience is the negative mood regarding sloth and torpor (thina-middha) when they are under great pressure or other moods are not so good for them. Suggestion needed for how to rise and develop energy while the situations are not good enough for this. some of them said that many theoritical matters but this is the facts of the job. they know that this conditions are anicca intelectually, but they always fail to face the situations. with metta, selamat 43266 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 0:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Citta Hi Joop, (James & All), --- Joop wrote: >S: "When we read in the suttas and especially the oft-quoted Sutta > Nipata verses about the need to give up all views, it is the wrong > views we hold that are being referred to." > Joop:> An response to my message "Having no opinion" I send some hours after yours (43092) ! > I know this was not the first time and I admire your patient to > repeat some discussions year after year in this DSG. ... S: Not at all. I was glad to see your message and am always happy to return to topics, but unless posts are addressed to me specifically, I generally prefer to wait and see what others have to say first:-). (Also glad to see your discussions on D.O) ... Joop:>Still I want to > say I don't agree with you. The Paramatthaka Sutta (Sutta-Nipata, IV- > 5) is about having no view at all (I hope you accept that I > use 'view' and 'opinion' as synomyms), not only socalled wrong ones. .... S: This sutta is quoted a lot and usually in support of the same ‘view’ about having no opinions which you hold. Let me share some of my reflections here. 1. I understand that the views referred to in the sutta are wrong views (micha ditthi). The Pali given is ‘di.t.thi’, translated as ‘dogmatic view’ by Saddhatissa. Unless di.t.thi is modified by samma, it nearly always refers to wrong views. For example, we read that “the Perfect One is free from any theory or view(ditthigata)”. Of course this refers to wrong views. (see dictionary notes below*). As it says in the dictionary “The rejection of speculative views and theories is a prominent feature in A chapter of the Sutta-Nipáta, the Atthaka-Vagga.” This is the chapter of Eights which the Paramatthaka Sutta is from. 2. When there is samma ditthi (right view), there is of course no speculation, conceit or greed involved, but instead the direct knowledge (or panna, understanding) of paramatha dhammas (highest truths). 3. Of course, even when we are talking about right views or wisdom, attachment to these is unwholesome and to be eradicated, just like attachment to the raft that we read about so often. (see:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/24878) In other words, it is not the right views or wisdom that is to be discarded, but the attachment to such. 4. I’d like to stress that samma ditthi (right view) is a synonym for panna (right understanding). In other words, right view is not a speculative opinion of any kind, but direct knowledge of dhammas. So, I agree with James when he said that the Buddha and his arahants didn’t have “views” -- if views are taken here as referring to wrong views or speculative views -- they had “direct knowledge”. Samma ditthi should be understood as such. Of course there are many degrees and kinds of panna or right view, not just direct insight. Reflecting wisely on kamma or on the Truths, even at a theoretical level can be with right view or panna. This is pariyatti (wise reflecting and consideration) which has to develop in order for patipatti(direct knowledge or understanding) to arise and develop. .... Joop: > I know it's easy for me to say so because this is what I experience > more and more as the effect of my vipassana- (insight-) > meditation. > insight, there is nobody who can have a view anymore! ... S: True, there's no one who can have a view, but both wrong view (di.t.thi) and right view (pa~n~naa) are mental factors which are real and arise. Hopefully the latter will be developing while the former will be reducing. .... Joop:> When I state this, I'm thinking of Nagarjuna words of course: "I have no opinion". ... S: And I’m thinking of the great emphasis placed on right view/wisdom in the suttas: “ Bhikkhus, just as the dawn is the forerunner and first indication of the rising of the sun, so is right view the forerunner and first indication of wholesome states. For one of right view, bhikkhus, right intention springs up. For one of right intention, right speech springs up. For one of right speech, right action springs up. For one of right action, right livelihood springs up. For one of right livelihood, right effort springs up. For one of right effort, right mindfulness springs up. For one of right mindfulness, right concentration springs up. For one of right concentration, right knowledge springs up. For one of right knowledge, right deliverance springs up." Anguttara Nikaya 10:121 I look forward to any further discussion. Metta, Sara ******************** *From Nyantiloka’s dictionary,the entry for *Di.t.thi*: ditthi (lit. 'sight'; Ö dis, to see): view, belief, speculative opinion, insight. If not qualified by sammá, 'right', it mostly refers to wrong and evil view or opinion, and only in a few instances to right view, understanding or insight (e.g. ditthi-ppatta, q.v.; ditthi-visuddhi, purification of insight; ditthi-sampanna, possessed of insight). Wrong or evil views (ditthi or micchá-ditthi) are declared as utterly rejectable for being a source of wrong and evil aspirations and conduct, and liable at times to lead man to the deepest abysses of depravity, as it is said in A. I, 22: "No other thing than evil views do I know, o monks, whereby to such an extent the unwholesome things not yet arisen arise, and the unwholesome things already arisen are brought to growth and fullness. No other thing than evil views do I know, whereby to such an extent the wholesome things not yet arisen are hindered in their arising, and the wholesome things already arisen disappear. No other thing than evil views do I know, whereby to such an extent human beings at the dissolution of the body, at death, are passing to a way of suffering, into a world of woe, into hell." <...> From the Abhidhamma (Dhs) it may be inferred that evil views, whenever They arise, are associated with greed (s. Tab. I. 22, 23, 26, 27). <...> "The Perfect One is free from any theory (ditthigata), for the Perfect One has seen what corporeality is, and how it arises and passes away. He has seen what feeling ... perception ... mental formations ... consciousness are, and how they arise and pass away. Therefore I say that the Perfect One has won complete deliverance through the extinction, fading away, disappearance, rejection and casting out of all imaginings and conjectures, of all inclination to the 'vain-glory of 'I' and 'mine." (M. 72). ***The rejection of speculative views and theories is a prominent feature in a chapter of the Sutta-Nipáta, the Atthaka-Vagga.*** <...> ====================================================== 43267 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 0:32am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 146 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(p) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** The more we study the realities which are taught in the Abhidhamma, the more we see that there are many different phenomena which each have their own characteristic. They appear one at a time, but when we try to name them there is thinking of a concept instead of mindfulness of a characteristic. Sometimes a reality which thinks may appear and then we may doubt whether it is vitakka or vicåra. It is useless to try to find out which reality appears because at such a moment there is no awareness. Thinking has a characteristic which can be realized when it appears and then there is no need to name it vitakka or vicåra. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43268 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 1:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Water, Life, and Death Dear Maya, Thanks for kindly responding further and considering all the comments. --- Waters Illusion wrote: > Thank you for your answer. I think you are right, it seems like my sati > is weak > and I am trying to strengthen it. Perhaps too much insight and not > enough > sati? I will however take a satipatthana course this june...hopefully > that'll help > me. .... S: I’m not sure there can be‘too much insight and not enough sati’. Perhaps you can elaborate a little. As I understand, satipatthana refers to the development of awareness and insight. In other words, there cannot be insight without awareness. This is why we read about sati-sampaja~n~na, where the latter term refers to the development of wisdom or insight. Often the insights we refer to normally, of course, have little to do with the insights into dhammas (realities). So I think the key here, is understanding more about what these dhammas are, so that sati can learn to be aware of them. What do you consider these terms refer to? Metta, p.s. What and where is the course you are taking? ======== 43269 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 1:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo Dear Ven Dhammanando, Thank you for your helpful comments on the descriptions Htoo mentioned and which I queeried. I have the Jataka volumes out, but need some time to follow the references. I’m always grateful for your familiarity and help with all the texts. I’m also interested in the other book you mentioned, the translation of the Traibhuumikathaa and will look out for a copy. Thank you. --- Dhammanando Bhikkhu wrote: > > Dear Sarah and everyone, > > I have just returned from a trip to the north of Thailand with some > Icelandic friends and am now catching up with the dsg digests. So far > I have noticed two posts addressed to me and will try to reply to them > tomorrow. ... S: Any comments anytime it’s convenient are most welcome. Like Jon (Jonothan as he might be remembered), I was also glad to hear your good news about Sayadaw Dhammananda and also would like to thank you for putting the pictures in the album*. I’ve just pulled out a picture I must have been given from a visit to Wat Tha Ma O in 1979 I’d guess. He is little changed as far as I can see (my picture is not very clear). A small group of us are sitting in front of him and the other foreign monks (Dhammadharo and Jetanando)whom Jon was supporting. A.Sujin is also with us. Perhaps I’ll get the old pic scanned in sometime. I think I only visited the once, whereas Jon visited quite often I believe. Metta, Sarah p.s *I’ll probably move one or both pictures to the *significant others* album. =========================================================== 43270 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 3:37am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: Hi, All, Thus begins a section on The Origins of the Buddha Nature in an article I was sent by one of my enchanting friends: The Buddha nature concept is a characteristic teaching of Mahayana Buddhism, but its origin can be traced back to early Buddhism. In an early scripture, for example, Shakyamuni talks about the "luminous mind" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Connie, Like you once I thought 'luminous mind' might be 'bhavanga citta'. Once I also asked you the word 'Buddha-nature' of Mahayana. Now you bring the topic of ''Buddha-nature''. It is citta who is luminous. I think Larry and Nina have already explained on the matter. This nature resides in all existing cittas. You may ask what about 'akusala cittas' ? It is citta who is luminous. Akusala is not luminous. It becomes akusala because of defiling cetasikas. So akusala cittas are also luminous. But this is hardly seen. But I do not think Mahayanists' thought would be like this. They might have the idea that Joop suggested. That is atta. This atta is totally opposite to anatta. With Metta, Htoo Naing 43271 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 4:47am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Dear Htoo Naing "pabhassaramidam bhikkhave cittam " According to my recollection, Pa auk sayadaw says in 4th chapter of his book titled "The light of wisdom " that Buddha refers to Bhavanga citta in the verse and luminous is not Bhavanga citta itself but cittaja kalapa produced by Bhavanga citta." I can not give you the accurate quotation because I do not have the book at hand. You might be able to get the original Myanmar version ,or to ask Pa auk sayadaw himself about it . Now He must be leading his Spring 2005 retreat there in the U.S. http://paauk.org/public/blogs/paupdate.html from LK >Once I also asked you the word 'Buddha-nature' of Mahayana. Now you > bring the topic of ''Buddha-nature''. > > It is citta who is luminous. I think Larry and Nina have already > explained on the matter. > > This nature resides in all existing cittas. You may ask what > about 'akusala cittas' ? > > It is citta who is luminous. Akusala is not luminous. It becomes > akusala because of defiling cetasikas. > > So akusala cittas are also luminous. But this is hardly seen. > > But I do not think Mahayanists' thought would be like this. They > might have the idea that Joop suggested. That is atta. This atta is > totally opposite to anatta. > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing 43272 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 5:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Larry LBIDD@w... wrote: >I don't know. I've been thinking about this all day and haven't come to >a conclusion. It has to do with what is an object of consciousness. One >thought is that experience is only consciousness of an object. What this >means is that when I experience desire for a tomato, that desire is an >object of consciousness. > I'm not sure why you see desire as being the object of consciousness in that scenario. I would have thought that when there is desire for a tomato, there is consciousness accompanied by desire that has (concept of) tomato as its object. Besides, is there really any point in trying to conceptualise so much? There is consciousness with object occurring all the time, and we read in the suttas that understanding of the consciousnesses of the various doorways and their objects is key. Jon >If that is the case it would seem that desire >for a tomato arose and ceased as unexperienced javana citta and then >became an object of consciousness. But that unexperienced javana citta >had an object too (the tomato), so we are still left with two kinds of >object, experienced and unexperienced, and possibly a different kind of >citta process called "experience". This doesn't seem like a very >satisfactory solution but I can't think of anything else right now. > >Larry > > 43273 From: Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 1:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Jon (And Larry) - In a message dated 3/15/05 9:00:27 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > > I'm not sure why you see desire as being the object of consciousness in > that scenario. I would have thought that when there is desire for a > tomato, there is consciousness accompanied by desire that has (concept > of) tomato as its object. > > Besides, is there really any point in trying to conceptualise so much? > There is consciousness with object occurring all the time, and we read > in the suttas that understanding of the consciousnesses of the various > doorways and their objects is key. > > Jon > ========================== I agree that in mindstates in which there conventionally is desire for a tomato, it is certainly not the desiring that is the object (objective content). However I see it as only in a manner of speaking that "a tomato" is the object. It seems to me that "desiring a tomato" is a name we apply to a huge complex of mindstates, many of which involve desiring, though not all, and in which the actual objects in the states accompanied by desire are actual mind-door dhammas that typically, and for the most part, are recollections of particular tastes, smells, and sights. (These states are interspersed with other states which as a group carry out operations of naming and conceptual projection.) 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) 43274 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 7:49am Subject: To Connie: BB's Article 2 Hi Connie, Just to pick up where I left off (I have been quite busy these last few days so there was some delay). The first argument that BB levies against Nanavira is this: "Repeatedly in the Suttas we see the Buddha teaching PS in order to lay bare the structure of conditions that underlies the origination and cessation of dukkha. However, in order to understand how pa.ticca-samuppaada fulfils this function, we should focus on the question: What is the meaning of the dukkha that the Buddha's Teaching is designed to liberate us from? Ven. ~Naa.naviira contends that this dukkha is the anxiety and stress that pervades our present existence, and hence he interprets all the terms of the standard PS formula in a way that lends support to this contention. But if we read the Suttas on their own terms, in their totality, we would find that Ven. ~Naa.naviira's understanding of dukkha falls far short of the vision of the first noble truth that the Buddha wishes to impart to us. Of course, dukkha does include "existential anxiety," and there are several suttas which define the conditions for the arising and removal of such dukkha. An unbiased and complete survey of the Nikaayas, however, would reveal that the problem of dukkha to which the Buddha's Teaching is addressed is not primarily existential anxiety, nor even the distorted sense of self of which such anxiety may be symptomatic. The primary problem of dukkha with which the Buddha is concerned, in its most comprehensive and fundamental dimensions, is the problem of our bondage to sa.msaara -- the round of repeated birth, aging, and death. And, as I will show presently, these terms are intended quite literally as signifying biological birth, aging, and death, not our anxiety over being born, growing old, and dying." James: I find this to be a rather unsatisfying argument against DO occurring within one lifetime. First, I find the statement "The primary problem of dukkha with which the Buddha is concerned" to be odd. Dukkha is dukkha and the Buddha didn't invent dukkha nor did he have a specific `concern' having to do with it. The teaching of DO is supposed to be a fact of existence, not a method of argument to bring about a desired result. Therefore, the Buddha was describing something that was either related to one life or to several lives (or both)- that is the question and the issue. Secondly, if one looks at this issue objectively, I think it is fair to say that dukkha is predominately a problem on a personal level, moment to moment, or as Nanaivira puts it "existential anxiety", rather than a problem of repeating lifetimes at BB suggests. After all, repeated births wouldn't be a problem if they could all somehow be happy (not a logical possibility, but you should get my point). Not only that, when you consider why it is that humans are more prone to learn and follow the dhamma, as opposed to the higher and lower realms, it is because humans are more aware of their existential dukkha (due to the mixture of pleasure and pain) and thus able to do something about it. Devas, who experience birth and death, are not as concerned because their lives are so blissful and satisfying; and, ghosts, petas, and lower entities, who also experience birth and death, are suffering far too much to consider and practice the dhamma. Therefore, I think the problem of dukkha is more a `here and now' issue rather than a several lifetime issue as proposed by BB. Metta, James 43275 From: Joop Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 8:37am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Hi, Joop, >.... Hallo Connie C: I spent some time trying to find all of Nichiren's Nirvana quotes I could without success and have been told there is no English translation of the Mahayana Nirvana Sutra, but several versions in Chinese, translated from Sanskrit. Joop: I found this one http://nichirenscoffeehouse.net/books/NirvanaSutra12.html It has nothing to do with the (Pali) Parinibbana Sutta. C: I do still find myself looking for ways to reconcile the various traditions, but doubt it's going to happen. My thinking is that if it's not in the Pali texts, it's not Dhamma-Vinaya, but (and I don't really buy it) it's ok for people to call themselves 'Buddhist' anyway. Joop: So do I; "reconcile" is a big word, I like to have fruitful discussions with my Mahayana-friends. In the book I quoted yesterday (Pruning the Bodhi Tree) Sallie B. King has written a chapter "The doctrine of Buddha-Nature is Impeccably Buddhist". She tries to proof that by analysing the "Buddha-Nature Treatise" written by Vasubandhu or the Chinese 'translater' Paramartha. But nearly none of the arguments are based on Suttas. For example: "Why did the Buddha speak of Buddha-Nature? The tathagata said that All sentient beings universaly possess Buddha- nature in order to help people overcome five errors and give rise to five virtues …" But where did the Buddha speak on this way? That is not said. Another example is the use of paradoxes: "atmaparamita = anatmaparamita = the tue, essential nature of all things." I like paradoxes but not when they are used as arguments. Perhaps the strongest argument is that (according Sallie King) the author of the Treatise completely accepts pratityasamutpada teachings and build upon them to construct Buddha-nature thought. He examines the concept of an "own-nature", in order to distinguish the latter from Buddha-Nature. Sallie Kings states that it are pratityasamutpada- arguments: "a dynamic type of argument in which the emphasis is upon causation: this being the case, that follows. Note that it is precisely because the world is conceived as dynamic, as a series of processes, rather than constructed of entities, that life as we know it, is possible. … Note that Buddha-nature is being described solely in terms of its functions. Thus far, there is no conflict between pratityasamutpada and Buddha-nature thought." (p. 177) I'm afraid there is a big gap between this Mahayana way of looking at the functioning of pratityasamutpada and paticca samuppada of the Pali Canon (both as understood by Buddhaghosa or as understood by modern commentators as RobM and I discussed yesterday in #43211 and 215 en 233) C: My whole point to my enchanted friend was that, in my understanding, Buddha nature is not Buddhist but Atta. Joop: That seems correct C: I still think some (so-called) Thera Buddhists have an idea relating to Buddha Nature as Nibaana, but that's my interpretation. See what you think of the following quotes from Bhikkhu Khemavamsa's "CONTEMPLATION OF THE MIND: Practising Cittanupassana" [http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/cittanupassana5.pdf]. … Joop: A beautiful contemplation but I think Nibbana as understood by Thera's and 'Buddha Nature' as understood by Mahayanists are different things. (I think, but I have not really studied till now what 'Nibbana' is or what it can mean to me, perhaps later in my life). Metta Joop 43276 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Mike, op 15-03-2005 00:57 schreef mnease op mlnease@z...: quotes> Here, the term resolution (adhimutti) is used to describe the manifestation of faith or confidence in wholesomeness.> > This refers to the first type of mahaakusala citta with paññaa, and thus it > can also pertain to the development of satipatthana. > > M: So in the Dispeeller excerpt, 'trust' and 'determination' are more or less synonymous? N: Trust is a translation of saddhaa, confidence in wholesomeness. For determination or resolution, adhimutti, we have to look at the context. It is all in the context of saddhaa. We can look at glossaries, but for the right meaning we need the context. Nina. 43277 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Matheesha, You cover quite a few points here. op 14-03-2005 23:34 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: The idea of > attachment to all sense objects is very interesting. I was under the > impression that unpleasant stimuli gives rise to aversion, pleasant > stimuli to attachment and equanimous stimuli contain delusion - > these being the aspects which needed to be worked on. Would you say > that there is attachment regardless? N: The above is treated also under the aspect of feelings that arise. When the object is unpleasant, unpleasant feeling accompanying citta with aversion arises. Aversion is conditioned by attachment and ignorance. When we do not get what we like, dislike tends to arise. When indifferent feeling arises, there is often ignorance. This feeling is not easy to know. M: . I > heard that the abhidhamma speaks of 9 jhanas, rather than the 8 in > the suttas? There are two systems of counting rupa-jhana. In the fivefold system (you find mostly in the Abhidhamma), applied thinking has been abandoned at the second stage, sustained thinking at the third stage, and the other jhanafactors at the following stages, and then there are five stages. In the fourfold system, applied thinking and sustained thinking have been abandoned at the second stage and then there are four stages. This we find in the suttas. There are four stages of immaterial jhana. This is not a contradiction, but a matter of classifying and emphasis. Evenso in the Abhidhamma you will also find six instead of five hindrances, ignorance being counted as a hindrance. In the suttas conceit is classified as three, in the Book of Analysis as nine. The Buddha knew endless methods of teaching Dhamma. In the Abhidhamma you will find more detailed classifications. But also in the suttas there are different classifications, for example of feelings: as three, as five, as eighteen, as thirtysix, as onehundred and eight. M: There was also this idea in one of the suttas that > aversion lasts a little time but the kamma vipaka is stronger, > desire lasts a longer time and the kamma vipaka is less (compared > to each other) and that delusion lasts the longest and has the worst > kamma vipaka. N: Aversion is eradicated at the third stage of enlightenment, desire at the fourth and last stage. Aversion can take the form of violence, harming others, and this brings a bad result, vipaaka. Ignorance is eradicated at the stage of the arahat. It is very dangerous, leads to many kinds of akusala. Perhaps you can find the sutta? M: I would be interested in discussing some areas which could do with > some abhidhamma input if that is alright with you. N: You are welcome, Nina. 43278 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 -Appliedthinking/Vitakka,Jotipala. Hi Mike, op 15-03-2005 01:02 schreef mnease op mlnease@z...: quotes N: I would like to add: one cannot count how immediate awareness of an > object is. Its characteristic can appear to sati sampajañña, but this can be > in a following process, processes of cittas follow upon each other very > fast. Awareness in vipassanaa is not reviewing by thinking about a reality. > > M: I didn't think so. But in the texts, doesn't 'reviewing' (usually?) > refer to thinking about past realities and also past thoughts? N: retrospective knowledge, paccavekkha.na ñaa.na, is a kind of understanding, not thinking. It occurs after jhana and also after phalacitta. Understanding reviews in a mind-door process the path, fruition, abandoned defilements, remaining defilements and nibbaana. Nina. 43279 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi Connie and Larry, just a quick note. I just see, Connie also posted this. The Sutta: A.N. I, 51-52. We worked so hard with Jim on the long co. Here is the beginning: 49. navame pabhassaranti pa.n.dara.m parisuddha.m. cittanti bhava"ngacitta.m. ki.m pana cittassa va.n.no naama atthiiti? natthi. N: As to the ninth (?),² luminous². Luminous is clear, pure. citta is the life-continuum. But how does there exist indeed a colour of citta? No, it does not. niilaadiina~nhi a~n~natarava.n.na.m vaa hotu ava.n.na.m vaa ya.mki~nci parisuddhataaya ``pabhassara''nti vuccati. N: For anything which may be a certain colour, beginning with blue, or without colour, is called luminous because of its purity. idampi nirupakkilesataaya parisuddhanti pabhassara.m. ta~nca khoti ta.m bhava"ngacitta.m. N: It is also pure, because it is unsoiled (by defilements); thus luminous. That indeed, meaning, that life-continuum. aagantukehiiti asahajaatehi pacchaa javanakkha.ne uppajjanakehi. N: ³ by oncoming ³(defilements). by those that are not conascent with it, but arise later at the moment of impulsion (javana). upakkilesehiiti raagaadiihi upakkili.t.thattaa upakkili.t.tha.m naamaati vuccati. N: ³by defilements². By being soiled by desire etc. it is indeed called defiled. Nina. op 14-03-2005 20:53 schreef connie op connieparker@i...: > L: From Jaran's and Suan's messages that you mention below I see that > the commentaries do say luminous mind is either bhavanga or rebirth > citta, but I couldn't find what sutta they referred to. Anyway, seems > like a bit of a stretch for me. 43280 From: nina Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:08am Subject: Visuddhimagga XIV, 144 and Tiika. Visuddhimagga XIV, 144 and Tiika. Intro: In the following paragraphs, the Visuddhimagga deals with six pairs of sobhana cetasikas that arise with each sobhana citta. Of each pair one cetasika is a quality pertaining to the accompanying cetasikas (kaaya or the mental body), and one a quality pertaining to citta. They perform their functions so that kusala citta and cetasikas can apply themselves to daana, siila or bhaavana. They are indispensable for the performing of kusala, they support the kusala citta, each in their own way. The first pair is tranquillity of body, kaaya-passaddhi, and tranquillity of citta, citta-passaddhi. Tranquillity or calm is not only necessary for samatha, but it has to accompany each kusala citta. Calm is opposed to restlessness, uddhacca, which prevents the arising of kusala citta. When there are conditions for kusala citta, calm performs its function while it accompanies kusala citta. There is no need to aim for calm first as a condition for kusala citta. It arises already when kusala citta arises. The Commentary to the ŒAbhidhammattha Sangaha¹ (T.A. p 64) mentions that calm of cetasikas also conditions bodily phenomena: *** Text Vis. : (xvi)-(xvii) The tranquilizing of the body is 'tranquility of the body'. The tranquilizing of consciousness is 'tranquility of consciousness'. And here 'body' means the three [mental] aggregates, feeling, [perception and formations] (see Dhs.40). N: The Tiika explains that tranquilizing (passambhana.m) means the calming of anxiety. It states that the term body, kaayo, denotes a group, and it refers to the Dhammasangani which mentions the tranquillity of the khandhas of feeling, remembrance (saññaa) and the formations. With reference to these three khandhas that include the cetasikas, the word body, kaayo, is used. Text Vis.: But both tranquility of the body and of consciousness have, together, the characteristic of quieting disturbance of the body and of consciousness. N: The Tiika refers here to anger or impetuosity (saarambho). This is a term for the defilements of restlessness etc. which are a condition for unpleasant feeling. Restlessness or agitation accompanies each akusala citta. Worry or regret, kukkucca, arises together with citta rooted in dosa, and this is accompanied by unpleasant feeling. At the moment of dosa-muulacitta one is disturbed and anxious, not calm. But tranquillity quiets such disturbances or anxieties. Text Vis.: Their function is to crush disturbance of the [mental] body and of consciousness. They are manifested as inactivity and coolness of the [mental] body and consciousness. N: Kaaya passadhi, calm of body, has the function of calming cetasikas, and citta passadhi has the function of calming citta. The Tiika explains that by crushing disturbance they are manifested as being unwavering, without agitation and as coolness. Text Vis.: Their proximate cause is the [mental] body and consciousness. They should be regarded as opposed to the defilements of agitation, etc., which cause unpeacefulness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. N: As to the expression the defilements of agitation, etc., the Tiika explains these as the defilements with agitation or restlessness (uddhacca) as the foremost, or, that all defilements to begin with restlessness are included. **** When one performs daana which also includes the appreciation of someone else¹s kusala, there are calm of citta and cetasikas. One is not disturbed by stinginess or jealousy, defilements that are accompanied by unpleasant feeling. When one observes siila, one is not disturbed by remorse, there is calm. In samatha calm is developed to a high degree so that jhaana can be attained. Calm suppresses the hindrances and it is opposed to restlessness, uddhacca. The aim of samatha is to be free from sense impressions that are bound up with defilements. Right understanding is necssary for the development of calm, there has to be precise understanding of the characteristic of calm so that it is known when kusala citta with calm arises and when there is attachment to calm. There is also calm in the development of insight. When there is right understanding of naama and ruupa, the six doors are guarded at that moment. One is not disturbed by unwholesome thoughts about persons and situations when right understanding of dhammas is developed, one begins to see them as impersonal elements devoid of self. Calm is one of the factors of enlightenment. As right understanding develops, the enlightenment factor of calm develops as well. Insight leads to the eradication of defilements. The arahat has reached the highest calm that cannot be disturbed anymore by defilements. **** Nina. 43281 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Larry, op 15-03-2005 01:33 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > I'm still confused about the experience of desire for a tomatoe. For one > thing, what desire desires is to experience a tomatoe; so desire doesn't > experience the object of its desire. N: OK, but it thinks with desire of the concept tomatoe. L:[addendum: unless we say when > desire experiences its object it doesn't experience itself, is that it?] N: I think this is the clue. L: I believe you said when desire for a tomatoe arises as javana citta, > that javana citta is not experienced until it is an object of > consciousness in another mind-door process. N: There need not be any problem if we remember that each citta has only one object. The desire arises always with javanacitta. There is not any citta that experiences itself as an object. L:What kind of consciousness > takes this desire as object? It seems like it would be another javana > series, and this second javana series, itself, would not be experienced > until it (the second javana series) became the object of another > mind-door process. N: Yes, a citta in a javanaseries can only be taken as object in a following javana series. The citta which takes desire that previously arose as object: can reflect on it with irritation for example, or, there can be a citta with insight that realizes desire as only a kind of nama element. L: What would be the experience of the first javana > series in which tomatoe (an idea let's say) is the object of desire? > Would it be just the perception of the idea of tomatoe? N: that citta clings to tomatoe, it is lobha-muulacitta. L It would seem that a lot of what we think of as present experience is > actually experiencing of unexperienced elements (of all kinds) of past > mental processes. To say that experience is the object of javana and not > the javana itself (unless it is an object) is a new way of looking at > citta process for me. I'm going to have to meditate on this for a while. N: We cannot say that javanacitta itself is not en experience, it is. It is citta. But it can only be *object* of another citta arising afterwards. It all goes on as in a flash of lightning and therefore we take for one moment what are many moments. Only through insight there can be a clearer understanding of different cittas. But you can verify that there is not the experience of two objects at a time. Can you think at the same time of tomatoe and of desire? Nina. 43282 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Selamat, by the way do not call me Mrs. , just Nina. op 15-03-2005 07:48 schreef nana_palo@c... op nana_palo@c...: > Dear Mrs. Nina, > Brahmaviharas are good for all of us, we should try to develop them in our > daily activities at work so we always have a positive thinking. > > What many employees experience is the negative mood regarding sloth and > torpor (thina-middha) when they are under great pressure or other moods > are not so good for them. N: What the employees experience is what we all have, at work or at home. It is natural that there are more akusala cittas than kusala cittas since we have accumulated akusala for aeons and aeons. How could it be otherwise? But we can learn to understand akusala citta, sloth and torpor etc. as not mine, only conditioned elements. S: Suggestion needed for how to rise and develop > energy while the situations are not good enough for this. N: Understanding should be emphasized above all, understanding is essential. When this arises, it is accompanied by energy already. Energy for kusala. We do not have to aim just for energy, than it may be the wrong energy with lobha, or with clinging to my energy. That is a great danger. S: some of them said that many theoritical matters but this is the facts of the job. they > know that this conditions are anicca intelectually, but they always fail > to face the situations. N: We may have intellectual understanding, but it is difficult to apply this in the situation of life. For all of us. Still, the intellectual understanding helps to clear up the situations of our life. It is a basis. It comes from listening, study and considering. When we study Dhamma there are conditions to think of Dhamma more often than of other matters which are not helpful. And then we can see that thinking of Dhamma is not ours, it also arises because of conditions, because of our study and listening. So everyone does his best to live according to the Dhamma and develop more understanding as far as he is able to and he should not overreach, trying to go beyond his capacities. That means, that one should not be distressed about distractions, lack of energy for kusala, unfavorable situations. Being in this or that situation has been conditioned. Often we cannot change the situation, certainly not at will. Most important is seeing the benefit of the Buddha's teaching. Nobody can take that away from us. Nina. 43283 From: matheesha Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 2:21pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hello Nina, N: Aversion is conditioned by attachment and ignorance. When > we do not get what we like, dislike tends to arise. M: Did you mean for the latter sentence to exaplain the former? I can understand how aversion would arise in the explanation you give above, but it can also arise on its own like you mentioned- ie as in eating something unpleasant you will have dislike. It's difficult to bring in the other two to explain its arising here I would think. One might say that desire and aversion are two sides of the same coin but at the point of desire arising or aversion arising I do not sense any involvement of the other. It would also make the staggered dissappearance of desire and aversion in the different stages improbable. However I can see how ignorance plays a part. Desire and aversion exists because the three characteristics pertaining to everything arent well grasped and integrated into thinking. N: When indifferent feeling > arises, there is often ignorance. This feeling is not easy to know. M: I think since we have always been in ignorance we do not know anything other than it -so it is difficult to know unless it falls away. A man who is enlightened is said to know it (a sutta says) like a man who has his leg cut off knows its not there anymore. If a person suppresses his sense of self for even a few minutes there will be some understanding of what this is all about I think. Its possibly also about not thinking in terms of permanence and satisfactoriness, but im just guessing here. > M: . I > > heard that the abhidhamma speaks of 9 jhanas, rather than the 8 in > > the suttas? >N: There are two systems of counting rupa-jhana. In the fivefold system (you > find mostly.... M:Classification is possible in many ways. It is fair to say for example that people can be classified in many ways acording to the charchteristics they do/do not possess. However the number of people inhabiting say a particalar area is constant at a given time. Similarly I would think that hindernaces, vedana etc can be classified in many ways as the categories are only concepts, jhana are not just concepts but actual states of consciousness. In my experience and those of others there are only 8. So i wonder if abhidhamma is an predominantly theoretical body of work commenting on the actual. You mentioned that 6 hinderances are mentioned - interesting. > N: Aversion is eradicated at the third stage of enlightenment, desire at the > fourth and last stage. Aversion can take the form of violence, harming > others, and this brings a bad result, vipaaka. > Ignorance is eradicated at the stage of the arahat. It is very dangerous, > leads to many kinds of akusala. M: Yes, I do like your interpretation of it - I was thinking more in terms of how long the actual thought of aversion/desire lasts (delusion being the longest?). The sutta is in the AN. I will post it when i come across it but I have my doubts of finding it as I dont remember the name nor the general area in which I read it. metta matheesha 43284 From: Illusion Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 2:48pm Subject: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada Copyright © 1997 Thanissaro Bhikkhu. The author gives permission to re-format and redistribute his work for use on computers and computer networks, provided that you charge no fees for its distribution or use. Otherwise, all rights reserved. The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada A life-affirming Buddhism that teaches us to find happiness by opening to the richness of our everyday lives. That's what we want -- or so we're told by the people who try to sell us a mainstreamlined Buddhism. But is it what we need? And is it Buddhism? Think back for a moment on the story of the young Prince Siddhartha and his first encounters with aging, illness, death, and a wandering contemplative. It's one of the most accessible chapters in the Buddhist tradition, largely because of the direct, true-to-the-heart quality of the young prince's emotions. He saw aging, illness, and death as an absolute terror, and pinned all his hopes on the contemplative forest life as his only escape. As Asvaghosa, the great Buddhist poet, depicts the story, the young prince had no lack of friends and family members who tried to talk him out of those perceptions, and Asvaghosa was wise enough to show their life-affirming advice in a very appealing light. Still, the prince realized that if he were to give in to their advice, he would be betraying his heart. Only by remaining true to his honest emotions was he able to embark on the path that led away from the ordinary values of his society and toward an unsurpassed Awakening into the Deathless. This is hardly a life-affirming story in the ordinary sense of the term, but it does affirm something more important than life: the truth of the heart when it aspires to a happiness absolutely pure. The power of this aspiration depends on two emotions, called in Pali samvega and pasada. Very few of us have heard of them, but they're the emotions most basic to the Buddhist tradition. Not only did they inspire the young prince in his quest for Awakening, but even after he became the Buddha he advised his followers to cultivate them on a daily basis. In fact, the way he handled these emotions is so distinctive that it may be one of the most important contributions his teachings have to offer to American culture today. Samvega was what the young Prince Siddhartha felt on his first exposure to aging, illness, and death. It's a hard word to translate because it covers such a complex range -- at least three clusters of feelings at once: the oppressive sense of shock, dismay, and alienation that come with realizing the futility and meaninglessness of life as it's normally lived; a chastening sense of our own complacency and foolishness in having let ourselves live so blindly; and an anxious sense of urgency in trying to find a way out of the meaningless cycle. This is a cluster of feelings we've all experienced at one time or another in the process of growing up, but I don't know of a single English term that adequately covers all three. It would be useful to have such a term, and maybe that's reason enough for simply adopting the word samvega into our language. But more than providing a useful term, Buddhism also offers an effective strategy for dealing with the feelings behind it -- feelings that our own culture finds threatening and handles very poorly. Ours, of course, is not the only culture threatened by feelings of samvega. In the Siddhartha story, the father's reaction to the young prince's discovery stands for the way most cultures try to deal with these feelings: He tried to convince the prince that his standards for happiness were impossibly high, at the same time trying to distract him with relationships and every sensual pleasure imaginable. To put it simply, the strategy was to get the prince to lower his aims and to find satisfaction in a happiness that was less than absolute and not especially pure. If the young prince were living in America today, the father would have other tools for dealing with the prince's dissatisfaction, but the basic strategy would be essentially the same. We can easily imagine him taking the prince to a religious counselor who would teach him to believe that God's creation is basically good and not to focus on any aspects of life that would cast doubt on that belief. Or he might take him to a psychotherapist who would treat feelings of samvega as an inability to accept reality. If talking therapies didn't get results, the therapist would probably prescribe mood-altering drugs to dull the feeling out of the young man's system so that he could become a productive, well-adjusted member of society. If the father were really up on current trends, he might find a Dharma teacher who would counsel the prince to find happiness in life's little miraculous pleasures -- a cup of tea, a walk in the woods, social activism, easing another person's pain. Never mind that these forms of happiness would still be cut short by aging, illness, and death, he would be told. The present moment is all we have, so we should try to appreciate the bittersweet opportunity of relishing but not holding on to brief joys as they pass. It's unlikely that the lion-hearted prince we know from the story would take to any of this well-meant advice. He'd see it as propaganda for a life of quiet desperation, asking him to be a traitor to his heart. But if he found no solace from these sources, where in our society would he go? Unlike the India of his time, we don't have any well-established, socially accepted alternatives to being economically productive members of society. Even our contemplative religious orders are prized for their ability to provide bread, honey, and wine for the marketplace. So the prince would probably find no alternative but to join the drifters and dropouts, the radicals and revolutionaries, the subsistence hunters and survivalists consigned to the social fringe. He'd discover many fine minds and sensitive spirits in these groups, but no accumulated body of proven and profound alternative wisdom to draw on. Someone might give him a book by Thoreau or Muir, but their writings would offer him no satisfactory analysis of aging, illness, and death, and no recommendations for how to go beyond them. And because there's hardly any safety net for people on the fringe, he'd find himself putting an inordinate amount of his energy into issues of basic survival, with little time or energy left over to find his own solution to the problem of samvega. He would end up disappearing, his Buddhahood aborted -- perhaps in the Utah canyon country, perhaps in a Yukon forest -- without trace. Fortunately for us, however, the prince was born in a society that did provide support and respect for its dropouts. This was what gave him the opportunity to find a solution to the problem of samvega that did justice to the truths of his heart. The first step in that solution is symbolized in the Siddhartha story by the prince's reaction to the fourth person he saw on his travels outside of the palace: the wandering forest contemplative. The emotion he felt at this point is termed pasada, another complex set of feelings usually translated as "clarity and serene confidence." It's what keeps samvega from turning into despair. In the prince's case, he gained a clear sense of his predicament and of the way out of it, leading to something beyond aging, illness, and death, at the same time feeling confident that the way would work. As the early Buddhist teachings freely admit, the predicament is that the cycle of birth, aging, and death is meaningless. They don't try to deny this fact and so don't ask us to be dishonest with ourselves or to close our eyes to reality. As one teacher has put it, the Buddhist recognition of the reality of suffering -- so important that suffering is honored as the first noble truth -- is a gift, in that it confirms our most sensitive and direct experience of things, an experience that many other traditions try to deny. From there, the early teachings ask us to become even more sensitive, to the point where we see that the true cause of suffering is not out there -- in society or some outside being -- but in here, in the craving present in each individual mind. They then confirm that there is an end to suffering, a release from the cycle. And they show the way to that release, through developing noble qualities already latent in the mind to the point where they cast craving aside and open onto Deathlessness. Thus the predicament has a practical solution, a solution within the powers of every human being. It's also a solution open to critical scrutiny and testing -- an indication of how confident the Buddha was in the solution he found to the problem of samvega. This is one of the aspects of authentic Buddhism that most attracts people who are tired of being told that they should try to deny the insights that inspired their sense of samvega in the first place. In fact, early Buddhism is not only confident that it can handle feelings of samvega but it's also one of the few religions that actively cultivates them to a radical extent. Its solution to the problems of life demand so much dedicated effort that only strong samvega will keep the practicing Buddhist from slipping back into his or her old ways. Hence the recommendation that all Buddhists, both men and women, lay or ordained, should reflect daily on the facts of aging, illness, separation, and death -- to develop feelings of samvega -- and on the power of one's own actions, to take samvega one step further, to pasada. For people whose sense of samvega is so strong that they want to abandon any social ties that prevent them from following the path to the end of suffering, Buddhism offers both a long-proven body of wisdom for them to draw from, as well as a safety net: the monastic sangha, an institution that enables them to leave lay society without having to waste time worrying about basic survival. For those who can't leave their social ties, Buddhist teaching offers a way to live in the world without being overcome by the world, following a life of generosity, virtue, and meditation to strengthen the noble qualities of the mind that will lead to the end of suffering. The symbiotic relationship designed for these two branches of the Buddhist parisa, or community, guarantees that each will benefit from contact with the other. The support of the laity guarantees that the monastics will not need to be overly concerned about food, clothing, and shelter; the gratitude that the monastics inevitably feel for the freely-offered generosity of the laity helps to keep them from turning into misfits and misanthropes. At the same time, contact with the monastics helps the laity foster the proper perspective on life that nurtures the energy of samvega and pasada they need to keep from becoming dulled and numbed by the materialistic propaganda of the mainstream economy. So the Buddhist attitude toward life cultivates samvega -- a clear acceptance of the meaninglessness of the cycle of birth, aging, and death -- and develops it into pasada: a confident path to the Deathless. That path includes not only time-proven guidance, but also a social institution that nurtures it and keeps it alive. These are all things that our society desperately needs. It's a shame that, in our current efforts at mainstreaming Buddhism, they are aspects of the Buddhist tradition usually ignored. We keep forgetting that one source of Buddhism's strength is its ability to keep one foot out of the mainstream, and that the traditional metaphor for the practice is that it crosses over the stream to the further shore. My hope is that we will begin calling these things to mind and taking them to heart, so that in our drive to find a Buddhism that sells, we don't end up selling ourselves short. []\/[]aya []Dutra {ô_ô} "I am nothing but the constituents of the clinging aggregates that is subject to change and unsatisfaction." 43285 From: Matthew Miller Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 4:12pm Subject: Sweet & Salty Sounds Here's an article from last week's Economist magazine about a woman who can taste sounds (a synaesthete) -- "a major third sounds sweet. A minor third, salty. A fourth has the flavour of mown grass. Only an octave is tasteless." How would the abhidhamma explain this phenomenon? *** Musical Taste Mar 3rd 2005 From The Economist print edition IN THE long tradition of neurological research, she is known only by her initials, to protect her anonymity. But ES is not ill. Indeed, she is almost the opposite of ill. For she is a professional musician who is able, literally, to taste what she hears. Almost every musical interval provokes a gustatory sensation in her. A major third sounds sweet. A minor third, salty. A fourth has the flavour of mown grass. Only an octave is tasteless. Synaesthesia, as the stimulation of one sensory perception by another is known, is not that unusual. But the stimulated sensation is usually colour vision. Words or numbers, for example, take on reliable hues. In ES's case, that happens too. Individual tones have their own colours: C is red, F-sharp is violet. But her perception of intervals as flavours, reported in this week's Nature by Gian Beeli and his colleagues at the University of Zurich, is a phenomenon recorded only once before. In the previous case, the individual in question, known as S, had no musical training, and tended to experience what the researchers refer to as "blended gustatory sensations"—in other words, entire meals rather than particular flavours. Dr Beeli speculates that ES's musical training has helped her to focus her synaesthesia on particular flavours. Whether the musical training focused the synaesthesia, or the synaesthesia provoked the passion for music, it is definitely the case that ES makes specific use of her synaesthesia to assist her professional life. For her, music truly is the food of love. 43286 From: Tep Sastri Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 6:03pm Subject: Re: Buddha Nature / Luminous Mind Hi, Connie - The following is from our earlier dialogue: Tep: Items 1) and 3) tell me that the objective for following the Teachings, which is described very well in 9), is to attain "that mind" which is cleansed of taints. The result is a luminous mind that no longer changes. The "no longer changes" description implies that "that mind" is unconditioned and lasting -- Nibbana. Connie: ... .... "Monks, I know not of any other single thing so quick to change as the mind: insomuch that it is no easy thing to illustrate how quick to change it is." I don't equate any mind/citta with Nibbaana. A Buddha still has changing cittas or mind(stream). I don't know of anything to support saying "Buddha's citta has become Nibbaana." Is that what you are saying? --------------------------------------------- Yes, that is what I have said. The reason is that "the luminous mind that is no longer changing" means it lasts. > Connie: Are you (also) saying that the quote is not talking about the > bhavanga cittas? Yes, Connie, because it is "the consciousness of the arahant, which is non-manifestative, infinite, and all lustrous". Again, thank you for bringing up this topic. I am waiting for the right time to connect this discussion back to Acariya Mun's biography in order to try to answer some of your doubts. Kindest regards, Tep ============ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Hi, Tep, Cosmique, Rob, All, > 43287 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 6:21pm Subject: Re: Sweet & Salty Sounds --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > Here's an article from last week's Economist magazine about a woman > who can taste sounds (a synaesthete) -- "a major third sounds sweet. A > minor third, salty. A fourth has the flavour of mown grass. Only an > octave is tasteless." > > How would the abhidhamma explain this phenomenon? > ================= Dear Matthew Avijja. Robertk > 43288 From: Tep Sastri Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 6:51pm Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hi LokuttaraCitta (and Connie) - Is the 'primal mind' according to Acariya Mun same as "this mind" or is it the same as "that mind" (as described in Connie's first message on "Buddha Nature")? In the Appendix 2 of your quoted article there is a description of the mind of the Arahant, called Supreme Happiness among other things: "Pure awareness, devoid of all contaminants, is supreme awareness: a truly amazing quality of knowing that bestows perfect happiness, as befits the Arahant's state of absolute purity. This Supreme Happiness always remains constant. It never changes or varies like conditioned phenomena of the world, which are always burdened with anicca, dukkha, and anatta". "But when the faculty of wisdom has scrubbed it clean until this condition has totally disintegrated, the true citta, the true Dhamma, the one that can stand the test, will not disintegrate and disappear along with it. Only the conditions of anicca, dukkha and anatta, which infiltrate the citta, actually disappear.No matter how subtle the kilesas may be, they are still conditioned by anicca, dukkha, and anatta, and therefore, must be conventional phenomena. "Once these things have completely disintegrated, the true citta, the one that has transcended conventional reality, becomes fully apparent. This is called the citta's Absolute Freedom, or the citta' s Absolute Purity. All connections continuing from the citta's previous condition have been severed forever. Now utterly pure, the citta's essential knowing nature remains alone on its own. [endquote] Is this permanent, never changing, mind of the Arahant same as "that mind" in Connie's message? Further, is it an Atta? Is it Nibbana? What do you think? Since both of us don't know this "citta", please feel free to guess. Kindest regards, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > Hello,Connie > > Please note : > > "Soka Gakkai" is considered in Japan to be a very powerful well- > established cult religion ,never to be authentic Maha-yana except by > their followers. They have even their own political party which forms > the current ruling coalition. > 43289 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 7:07pm Subject: To James: Re: To Connie: BB's Article 2 Hi James, In the past, you have mentioned your experiences in school debating teams. I suspect you miss the old days, and this post of yours is more about debating than it is about getting to the truth. At the risk of being thrashed, I will join in: ------------ James: > I find this to be a rather unsatisfying argument against DO occurring within one lifetime. First, I find the statement "The primary problem of dukkha with which the Buddha is concerned" to be odd. ------------- The word "odd" does cast BB's argument in a bad light. But, rather than being swayed by words, we should see if you substantiate your finding of oddity: ------------------------------- J: > Dukkha is dukkha and the Buddha didn't invent dukkha ------------------------------ That's true, and BB has not suggested otherwise (so there's no oddity so far). But does the beginning of your sentence support its conclusion? ------------------------------ J: > nor did he have a specific `concern' having to do with it. ------------------------------ No, there is no connection between those motherhood statements and your conclusion that the Buddha did not have a specific concern with dukkha. Having criticised BB for saying there was "a primary problem of dukkha with which the Buddha is concerned" you say, three sentences later, there actually is a predominant problem with dukkha: ------------------------------------------------ J: > if one looks at this issue objectively, I think it is fair to say that dukkha is predominately a problem on a personal level, moment to moment, or as Nanaivira puts it "existential anxiety", rather than a problem of repeating lifetimes at BB suggests. ------------------------------------------------ So there is no oddity, and we are back where we started: BB says D.O. is about successive lives, while you and Nanaivira say it is only about the present life. ----------------------------------- J: > After all, repeated births wouldn't be a problem if they could all somehow be happy (not a logical possibility, but you should get my point). ------------------------------------ If anything, I think the point proves BB's argument. Eternal happiness is not a possibility and so repeated births must be a problem. BB is saying it is the problem specifically addressed by the Buddha in his teaching of D.O. ---------------------------------------------------- J: > Not only that, when you consider why it is that humans are more prone to learn and follow the dhamma, as opposed to the higher and lower realms, it is because humans are more aware of their existential dukkha (due to the mixture of pleasure and pain) and thus able to do something about it. Devas, who experience birth and death, are not as concerned because their lives are so blissful and satisfying; and, ghosts, petas, and lower entities, who also experience birth and death, are suffering far too much to consider and practice the dhamma. Therefore, I think the problem of dukkha is more a `here and now' issue rather than a several lifetime issue as proposed by BB. ------------------------------------------------------ While I disagree with your conclusion, I agree with your arguments: dukkha is less of a problem in this life than it will be in some future (hell, heaven and ghost) lives. So, to use BB's words, "The primary problem of dukkha with which the Buddha is concerned, in its most comprehensive and fundamental dimensions, is the problem of our bondage to sa.msaara -- the round of repeated birth, aging, and death." I hope I haven't been too argumentative (again). :-) Ken H 43290 From: connie Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 7:20pm Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hi, LK, Tep, All Thanks for the link re SGI, LK. I think the Nichirenists consider his teachings on "the true Buddhism" to be an advancement over all earlier schools and separate from Mahayana, rather like the Vajrayana do. I'm more inclined to believe in the decline of the saasana than that Buddha with-held essential truths from the early disciples and intended his teachings to 'evolve' or be 'improved'. Maybe this will connect our other discussion back, Tep. A.Mun says, "All meditators whose level of calm has reached the very base of samaadhi realize that the center of 'what knows' stands out prominently in the region of the heart. They will not argue that it is centered in the brain, as those who have no experience in the practice of samaadhi are always claiming. But when the same citta has been cleansed until it is pure, that center then disappears." Bhikkhu Khemavamsa doesn't come right out and say he's "arrived", but describes going beyond this "moment when one for the first time enjoys total freedom from lobha, dosa and moha and that whole process of arising and ceasing of phenomena. And that gives rise to a totally unprecedented sensation to arise. Totally inexpressible, nameless and certainly not of this world. Felt in the beginning for an instant as the touch of a tiny dot in the middle of the abdomen and disappearing; then gradually expanding from that spot and taking over the whole body, a sensation appears which simply leaves one without any doubt that this is nothing else but a taste of Nibbaana!" I expected him to say "a taste of nausea" and the description offends my preconceived ideas of the lokuttara cittas, yet why? Words have their limits and we're forced to speak of namas using physically descriptive terms like 'luminous' so it does make a certain sense to see the eradication or final outflow of defilements as an upheaval of sickening poisons. Still, it seems to be pushing the idea that the teachings go against the flow and reminds me of heroin junkies speaking highly of the bliss of vomiting. I don't doubt that's their experience, I just don't share the appreciation. My distaste for this description is no grounds for doubting that these monks have had similar experiences, but I don't think it's "a taste of Nibbaana". Bhikkhu Khemavamsa seems to talk about Nibbaana as a creative, loving ground of being and Universal Intelligence underlying all phenomena, making it sound like it's just a matter of returning to our true home, the Deathless within, saying: "That Infinite, Eternal Creating, Unlimited Love And Intelligence Is Who You Really Are!" Reading A. Mun, the supposed arahat's bio, I got the impression that the citta (the primal mind?) somehow transforms into Nibbaana. When he says this purified "citta" that doesn't exhibit or manifest and activities has no involvement with any of the five khandhas nor any outflow of consciousness, I take it this means, in part, that with sa-upaadisesa nibbaana, there is no cetasika at all... not even amoha, adosa or alobha. BK's and A.Mun's Nibbaanas are, to my mind, just more variations on the atta or Buddha Nature theme. As LK quoted A.Mun: "Our real problem, our one fundamental problem – which is also the citta's fundamental problem – is that we lack the power needed to be our own true self. Instead, we have always taken counterfeit things to be the essence of who we really are, so that the citta's behavior is never in harmony with its true nature. " I may be reading things into the phrase 'our own true self', but he also says, "the true power of the citta's own nature is that it knows and does not die. This deathlessness is a quality that lies beyond disintegration. Being beyond disintegration, it also lies beyond the range of anicca, dukkha, and anattaa and the universal laws of nature." I'm not sure what this means. Even Nibbaana is said to be anattaa in the parts of the Tipitaka I've read. My distaste for these descriptions of Nibbaana makes me hesitant to swallow anything these men say. peace, connie 43291 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 9:36pm Subject: Reminder: GIVE LINKS where possible, TRIM, USE A NAME..... Dear All, Thanks to our many regular posters, this is a very active list! For the benefit of all, please keep in mind the list's Guidelines which are occasionally revised and which can be viewed at this link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ Note particularly the following from them: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 7. GIVE LINKS where possible rather than quoting large slabs of material..... [Note: ‘large slabs’ are more than a page or so of quoted material, especially if it is given without your comments. We suggest instead giving a short introduction plus a link for longer text passages. If the material is not available on line and cannot be accessed by a link, consider either posting it in installments (max one a day) or asking Connie or Jon for help. This is out of consideration for other members and also for reasons to do with the archives (limited storage space etc] Also: 5. TRIM your posts (including Yahoo footer material). Always assume that other members have read the post you are replying to, and remove anything that is not essential to understanding your reply. 6. USE A NAME, at the beginning of your post, to indicate who is (mainly) being addressed, and also at the end, to sign off (we encourage members to use a real name.......) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for your cooperation. Any comments or requests for further clarification or assistance, *off-list only*. Jon and Sarah dsgmods@y... 43292 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 10:47pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 147 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(q) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** There is another aspect of vitakka I want to mention. Vitakka is one of the factors of the eightfold Path and as such it is called: sammå-sa"nkappa , right thinking. Sammå-sa"nkappa has to arise together with sammå-di.t.thi, right understanding, in order to be a factor of the eightfold Path (1). *** 1) The factors of the eightfold Path are: right understanding (see Chapter 34), right thinking, right speech, right action and right livelihood ( for the last three see Chapter 32), right effort (see Chapter 10), right mindfulness (see Chapter 26) and right concentration (see Chapter 6). These factors perform each their specific function so that the goal can be attained: the eradication of defilements. The reader will also come across the terms insight or vipassanå and satipaììhåna. The development of vipassanå, the development of satipaììhåna or the development of the eightfold Path, it all amounts to the development of right understanding of nåma and rúpa, of ultimate realities. When a reality appears through one of the six doors there can be a moment of investigation of its characteristic: it can be seen as a nåma or a rúpa, not a person, not a thing. That is the beginning of understanding of its true nature of non-self. At such a moment there is also mindfulness, non-forgetfulness of the reality appearing at the present moment. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43293 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:04pm Subject: Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada Hi Maya, May I ask why you posted this particular article by Bhikkhu Thanissaro? Checking our Useful Posts file, I see that Sarah has written on this exact topic (message 17922) and Nina has commented on samvega (32249). I would love to know your opinions on all three documents. I have written a few posts about the web site, Access To Insight and about the teachings of Thanissaro Bhikkhu. If you can find time to read 34543 and 34782, I would appreciate your opinions on them as well. While I am here, I should make a contribution to the discussion. First, I will quote from the above messages by Sarah and Nina. Sarah: ". . . 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." Nina: "This sutta can remind us that we should not delay the development of understanding of all realities arising at this moment. There is no need to go to a quiet place. We may die before we reach that place. Realities such as seeing, hearing and thinking are the same no matter where we are. All day long dhammas appear through the five sense-doors and through the mind-door, one at a time. Through the eyes visible object is experienced, through the ears sound, through the nose odour, through the tongue flavour, through the bodysense hardness, softness, heat, cold, motion or pressure.." You can see the difference the Abhidhamma makes. While BT, with his belief in self, can only teach the usual platitudes that anyone can teach, an acceptance of the Abhidhamma allows for an understanding that is unique and profoundly different. Ken H 43294 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 0:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sila Visuddhi (purity of sila) Hi Tep, --- Tep Sastri wrote: >My understanding is that practicing the > indriya-samvara-sila conditions satipatthana to be fulfilled later > on when the four foundations of mindfulness are practiced according > to the Maha-satipatthana Sutta. The fulfillment of indriya-samvara- > sila leads to fulfillment of samma-sati in the sequential manner. ... S: I partly agree with you. I believe that the guarding of the senses is only achieved by the development of sati. Of course, there are degrees and kinds of sati and restraint, but as mindfulness develops with understanding and the other path factors, the senses are guarded and this leads eventually to the ‘fulfillment’ or ‘establishment’ of satipatthana. In the context of ‘visuddhi’ or purity, I believe the ‘guarding’ or restraint always refers to satipatthana. .... > This is explained in SN 46.6 Kundaliya Sutta. A summary of this > sutta is available at http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/guide- > tipitaka/guidetipitaka-06.htm > > "The Buddha advises him to cultivate and frequently practise > restraint of the five senses. This will establish the threefold good > conduct in deed, word and thought. When the threefold good conduct > is cultivated and frequently practised, the Four Foundations of > Mindfulness will be established. When the Four Foundations of > Mindfulness are well established, the Seven Factors of Enlightenment > will be developed. When the Seven Factors of Enlightenment are > developed and frequently applied, the. Fruits of the Path and > liberation by knowledge will be achieved". .... S: A good sutta and I appreciate and understand your comments. I believe that when it continues to describe the restraint of the sense faculties, beginning with the seeing of an agreeable form which one isn’t attached to, this has to be with the development of sati and I would suggest satipatthana. There are more quotes and posts which you may like to consider under ‘Guarding the Senses’ in UP – by Nina, Jon, Robert and James also. Here are a few extracts with references from the Visuddhimagga: ..... 1.http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/40128 From ‘Cetasikas’: “The Visuddhimagga mentions in the section on síla (Chapter I, 53-60) the “guarding of the sense-doors”, because this can be considered as an aspect of síla. When there is mindfulness of, for example, visible object and visible object is not taken for a ‘thing’ or a person but is known as only a kind of rúpa appearing through the eyes, the eye-door is guarded. At that moment there is no attachment to visible object, no aversion towards it, no ignorance about it. Later on we may become absorbed in what we see and we may cling to it, but at the moment of mindfulness the doorways are guarded and there is restraint of the senses. Thus, mindfulness of nåma and rúpa, which is a form of bhåvanå (mental development), can also be considered as síla.” ***** 2.http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/30605 Jon, quoting from the Vism: >Meanwhile, here is something further on restraint of sense faculties. In the section dealing with the different ways that virtue can be classified, there is a fourfold classification as 'Patimokkha [monks' rules] restraint, of restraint of sense faculties, of purification of livelihood, and that concerning requisites', and on 'restraint of sense faculties' there is this passage from MN 27 (Simile of the Elephant's Footprint (Shorter)): <> <...> Of particular interest I think are the following: 'He enters upon the way of its restraint': [the meaning is] he enters upon the way of *closing that eye faculty by the door-panel of mindfulness*. It is the same one of whom it is said 'he guards the eye faculty, undertakes the restraint of the eye faculty'. and: But when virtue, etc., [J: i.e., virtue, mindfulness, etc, the opposites of unvirtuousness or forgetfulness or unknowing or impatience or idleness] has arisen in it, then the door too is guarded. I think this confirms that guarding the sense doors is one of the functions performed by mindfulness whenever it arises.< ***** [S: read full message for Vism details and explanations] 3.http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/31015 Jon continues: >I think the passage that I quoted before from Visuddhi-Magga speaks to the power of mindfulness. I like the reference to mindfulness being like a door panel that has the effect of completely blocking the sense-door to any intrusion by defilements. Further on there is another reference to the role of mindfulness in the guarding of the sense doors: <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< 100. (b) And ... restraint of the sense faculties should be undertaken with mindfulness. For that is accomplished by mindfulness, because when the sense faculties’ functions are founded on mindfulness, there is no liability to invasion by covetousness and the rest. <..> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The passage goes on to liken a mind without mindfulness as 'a crop not fenced in with branches' that is then 'raided by the robber defilements as a village with open gates is by thieves', with the result that 'lust leaks into his mind as rain does into a badly-roofed house'.< ***** Tep, I’d be glad if you’d read these and the other messages in full. Apologies for giving you homework again. Nina gives a lot of helpful detail in the first one, I think. I’ll look forward to any more of your comments or those of others. I think you raised good points which I’ll reflect on further. Metta, Sarah ======= 43295 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 0:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] 10 upekkhas Hi Htoo, --- htootintnaing wrote: > There are 10 upekkhas. > > 1. chalangupekkha or equanimity in 6 senses > 2. brahmaviharupekkha or equanimity in metta/karuna/mudita > 3. bojjhangupekkha or equanimity in vipassana cetasikas > 4. viriyupekkha or equanimity in equilibriating samadhi and viriya > 5. sankharupekkha or equanimity in sankhara dhamma > 6. vedanupekkha or equanimity in feeling > 7. vipassanupekkha or equanimity in vipassana dhamma > 8. tatramajjhattatupekkha or equanimity in accompanying cetasikas > 9. jhanupekkha or equanimity in tatiya-jhana > 10.parisuddhupekkha or equanimity in catuttha jhana .... S: I was waiting for you to write a 'series' with more detail or for others to ask for clarifications. Anyway, I was testing myself out and then looked for a little more detail from K.Sujin's text, (appendix section under sobhana cetasikas)which I'll add here in case anyone else was wondering. From memory, we can read about all the different meanings of upekkha in the Vism. in more detail: http://www.abhidhamma.org/survey6.pdf (Nina's translation- note some of the Pali diacriticals don't come out well, but we can refer to your 'names' above): >Equanimity, tatramajjhattatå cetasika, is mental balance, even mindedness, impartiality. It is neutrality (upekkhå) towards the object that is experienced. Ten kinds of Equanimity, Upekkhå* : Sixfold Upekkhå, chaîaòga upekkhå, which is tatramajjhattatå cetasika. This is the even mindedness or neutrality of the arahat towards the objects appearing through the six doors. The equanimity of one of the brahma-vihåras**, brahma-vihårupekkhå. This is tatramajjhattatå cetasika which is even mindedness towards beings. The equanimity that is one of the enlightenment factors, bhojjhangupekkhå. This is tatramajjhattatå cetasika, which is among the enlightenment factors leading to the realization of the four noble Truths. The equanimity of effort, viriyupekkhå. This is viriya cetasika, which is right effort, neither over strenuous nor lax in mental development. The equanimity as to conditioned realities, saòkhårupekkhå. This is paññå cetasika is neutral as it penetrates the three characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anattå of conditioned realities, saòkhåra dhammas. The equanimity of feeling, vedanupekkhå. This is vedanå cetasika, which is indifferent feeling, feeling that is neither unhappy nor happy. Equanimity in vipassanå, vipassanupekkhå. This is paññå cetasika, which is neutral as it investigates the object that arises because of its appropriate conditions. The equanimity of tatramajjhattatå cetasika, tatramajjhattupekkhå. This is tatramajjhattatå cetasika, which effects mental balance, which is devoid of deficiency or excess. The equanimity of jhåna, jhånupekkhå. This is tatramajjhattatå cetasika in the development of jhåna, which abandons interest in the dhammas distracting from calm and mental steadiness. This kind of upekkhå arises with the jhånacitta of the third stage (of the fourfold system) and it abandons the jhåna-factor rapture, píti. Purifying equanimity, parisuddhupekkhå. This is tatramajjhattatå cetasika arising with the jhånacitta of the fourth stage (of the fourfold system). It is the condition for calm and purification of all that opposes calm. At this stage there are no more jhåna-factors to be abandoned. *** *Upekkhå can stand not only for tatramajjhattatå cetasika but also for indifferent feeling, upekkhå vedanå, for paññå cetasika or for viriya cetasika, and this depends on the context. See Visuddhimagga IV, 156-166, where the different aspects of equanimity have been explained. **The other three are mettå, loving-kindness, karuùå , compassion and muditå, sympathetic joy.< ..... Friends raised quite a few questions about upekkha on our recent trip to India. I think it helps to understand the different meanings so as not to confuse, say, indifferent or neutral feeling (upekkha) which can arise with kusala, akusala, vipaka or kiriya cittas with, say, the brahma-vihara of equanimity (upekkha) which of course is always wholesome. Metta, Sarah ======= 43296 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 1:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Matheesha, op 15-03-2005 23:21 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: > N: Aversion is conditioned by attachment and ignorance. When >> we do not get what we like, dislike tends to arise. > > M: Did you mean for the latter sentence to explain the former? I > can understand how aversion would arise in the explanation you give > above, but it can also arise on its own like you mentioned- ie as in > eating something unpleasant you will have dislike. N: We have accumulated so much attachment and ignorance. If there is right understanding an object may be unpleasant but aversion does not necessarily arise. Attachment to pleasant objects that has been accumulated for so long conditions aversion. The non-returner has eradicated attchment to sense objects and also aversion. We see the close connection here. M: It's difficult to > bring in the other two to explain its arising here I would think.... . If a > person suppresses his sense of self for even a few minutes there > will be some understanding of what this is all about I think. Its > possibly also about not thinking in terms of permanence and > satisfactoriness, but im just guessing here. N: A sense of self cannot be supressed. Understanding of realities, seeing them as they are, can be gradually developed. First nama has to be known as nama and rupa as rupa by being aware of them one at a time. Only later on the three characteristics can be penetrated. > M: . I >>> heard that the abhidhamma speaks of 9 jhanas, rather than the 8 > in >>> the suttas? >> N: There are two systems of counting rupa-jhana. In the fivefold > system (you >> find mostly.... > > M:Classification is possible in many ways. It is fair to say for > example that people can be classified in many ways acording to the > charchteristics they do/do not possess. However the number of people > inhabiting say a particalar area is constant at a given time. > Similarly I would think that hindernaces, vedana etc can be > classified in many ways as the categories are only concepts, jhana > are not just concepts but actual states of consciousness. N: Yes, jhana is not a concept. Evenso feeling, and the hindrances: these are realities. Like desire, aversion, and the other hindrances, they are defilements. All these dhammas are mental and the comparison with a number of people being constant does not seem to fit, as I see it. M: In my > experience and those of others there are only 8. So i wonder if > abhidhamma is an predominantly theoretical body of work commenting > on the actual. You mentioned that 6 hinderances are mentioned - > interesting. N: As I see it the Abhidhamma is not theoretical, it only deals with realities: citta, cetasika, rupa and nibbaana. Jhanas as eight or nine: it seems very realistic that some people can abandon vitakka and vicaara together, and others still need vicaara at the second stage of jhana in order to be concentrated on the meditation subject. Some people are more keen, others slower. The Buddha knew endless methods of classifying dhammas. He had compassion on the listeners who had different capabilities. Nina. 43297 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 1:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Joe, I've been hoping you (and maybe the 'friend' you quoted) would continue the discussions on this topic. (I'm just hoping you'll stay around a little longer this time:-)). --- Joe Cummings wrote: > Here's one source that appears to support the notion that the > Abhidhamma was written down during the 3rd Council: > > 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 .... S: Leaving the rest for now, I think this is where the first error is: the statement that 'the Dhamma....becomes established as the Sutta Pitaka'. All the ancient Pali commentaries make it clear that dhamma-vinaya refers to ti-pitaka or three baskets. I wrote a series based on the commentary to the Vinaya with lots of quotes confirming this. Here's a short extract with some quotes and comments Nina and I gave more recently: S:>In both the Bahiranidana and the Atthasalini, detail is given of the explanation in detail of how the 84,000 units of dhamma-vinaya text is formed and this includes how: “Thus as rehearsed at the council, the Abhidhamma is Pitaka by Pitaka classification, Khuddaka-Nikaya by Nikaya classification, Veyyakarana by part classification and constitutes two or three thousand units of text by the classification of textual units and “In the Abhidhamma each trinal or dual classification, as well as each clasification of conscious intervals, forms one unit of text. > ..... Nina: The word of the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Vinaya as taught by him, consists of nine divisions which are: Sutta, Geyya, Veyyåkaraùa, Gåth å,Udåna, Itivuttaka, Jåtaka, Abbhuta and Vedalla. See the 'Expositor', Atthasåliní, Introductory Discourse, 26. The teachings as compiled (not yet written) literature are thus enumerated in the scriptures as nine divisions, for example in the 'Middle Length Sayings' I, no. 22. Sutta, geyya, etc. are nine divisions (angas) of the Tipitaka, and of these: Veyyåkaraùa or 'Exposition' includes the Abhidhamma Pi.taka, the suttas without verses, and the words of the Buddha which are not included in the other eight divisions.< ..... S: Anyway, I know this isn't your 'peeve', but you're merely passing on comments. of course, many people don't accept the commentaries and that's understandable. As Nina, said, it's good to see what the real objections or problems people have with the Abhidhamma are. Usually, I think it's because it seems academic, unrelated to daily life or they think it offers different meanings from the suttas.Personally, I don't find any of these, but then I feel fortunate to have had good friends and to have received good guidance. Hope to see you in Thailand sometime! Metta, Sarah ===== 43298 From: Joop Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 2:13am Subject: Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada Hallo Maya The 'Water" has gone, now your (nick)name is pure 'Illusion' ? I wonder - like Ken - why you did send this message; there must be something special in it that touches you. But what ? What interested me in it, was the quote: " For people whose sense of samvega is so strong that they want to abandon any social ties that prevent them from following the path to the end of suffering, Buddhism offers both a long-proven body of wisdom for them to draw from, as well as a safety net: the monastic sangha, an institution that enables them to leave lay society without having to waste time worrying about basic survival. For those who can't leave their social ties, Buddhist teaching offers a way to live in the world without being overcome by the world, following a life of generosity, virtue, and meditation to strengthen the noble qualities of the mind that will lead to the end of suffering. The symbiotic relationship designed for these two branches of the Buddhist parisa, or community, guarantees that each will benefit from contact with the other. The support of the laity guarantees that the monastics will not need to be overly concerned about food, clothing, and shelter; the gratitude that the monastics inevitably feel for the freely-offered generosity of the laity helps to keep them from turning into misfits and misanthropes. At the same time, contact with the monastics helps the laity foster the proper perspective on life that nurtures the energy of samvega and pasada they need to keep from becoming dulled and numbed by the materialistic propaganda of the mainstream economy." Joop: This is more a social than a spiritual fact. As far as it is a spiritual description, I don't agree totally agree. I cannot understand why it is good for monks that they don't "waste time worrying about basic survival", I think that worrying is good for maintaining the insight that life is dukkha. And not leaving social ties can give a deep and fruitful permanent experience of the absurdity of life (one of the translations of the pali-term samvega). I don't think the only or the main spiritual role of a laypeople is to give food to a monk (and got back gratitude); I think a laypeople can live also a spiritual life combined with a job or with taking care of othper people. I don't think monks abandon all social ties when they went monastic: they got new ties, new social relations, with other monks. I think there are three differences between monks and 'laypeople': - the percentage of time being devoted to get enlightened is higher with monks - young laypeople are sexual active - most of the laypeople had to worry (and work) about basic survival. As far as it is a social description (a culture of a society in which there is a division of labor in the religious dimension between monks and laypeople), I say: this phenomena can change and will change. Maybe in the future there is a group of people, or individual people, who are finding there own new way living detached as far as possible from. And who will in the future (and I think especially of the western world in which I live) "help the laity foster the proper perspective on life that nurtures the energy of samvega and pasada they need to keep from becoming dulled and numbed by the materialistic propaganda of the mainstream economy." ? Because that is an important function and will be more and more important because mainstream economy makes us more and more mad. I think it will not only be - and perhaps not be at all - monastic living people who have that function. Not because I don't want monastic live in the future (in the West); but because I observe buddhism in the West increasing and monastic life not increasing at all So we have to make a new social invention, to create a new structure for that old spiritual social function. I don't know how. Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Maya, > > May I ask why you posted this particular article by Bhikkhu > Thanissaro? Checking our Useful Posts file, I see that Sarah has > written on this exact topic (message 17922) and Nina has commented > on samvega (32249). I would love to know your opinions on all three > documents. > > I have written a few posts about the web site, Access To Insight and > about the teachings of Thanissaro Bhikkhu. If you can find time to > read 34543 and 34782, I would appreciate your opinions on them as > well. > > While I am here, I should make a contribution to the discussion. > First, I will quote from the above messages by Sarah and Nina. > > Sarah: ". . . 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." > > Nina: "This sutta can remind us that we should not delay the > development of understanding of all realities arising at this > moment. There is no need to go to a quiet place. We may die before > we reach that place. Realities such as seeing, hearing and thinking > are the same no matter where we are. All day long dhammas appear > through the five sense-doors and through the mind-door, one at a > time. Through the eyes visible object is experienced, through the > ears sound, through the nose odour, through the tongue flavour, > through the bodysense hardness, softness, heat, cold, motion or > pressure.." > > > > You can see the difference the Abhidhamma makes. While BT, with > his belief in self, can only teach the usual platitudes that anyone > can teach, an acceptance of the Abhidhamma allows for an > understanding that is unique and profoundly different. > > Ken H 43299 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 5:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sweet & Salty Sounds Hi, Matthew Matthew Miller wrote: >Here's an article from last week's Economist magazine about a woman >who can taste sounds (a synaesthete) -- "a major third sounds sweet. A >minor third, salty. A fourth has the flavour of mown grass. Only an >octave is tasteless." > >How would the abhidhamma explain this phenomenon? > > There are probably a number of ways this situation could have come about, and we can only speculate, but the answer must lie in the past, for example, a deliberately cultivated association having been made in a previous lifetime, for what ever reason. As RobK says, there is no doubt a good deal of moha (ignorance) involved at this stage. The sound heard is real, but the taste sensation is likely to be remembered, that is to say, there is no actual experience of an object through the taste door at those moments. Any thoughts of your own on the subject? Jon 43300 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 6:53am Subject: To James: Re: To Connie: BB's Article 2 Hi Ken H, Ken H: In the past, you have mentioned your experiences in school debating teams. I suspect you miss the old days, and this post of yours is more about debating than it is about getting to the truth. James: Now, now…no reason to get personal. Sometimes I regret having revealed personal information in this group because it is occasionally used against me- to discredit my opinion somehow. If you want to tell me that my opinion is wrong, that's okay; but I don't think it is appropriate to tell me that I am a wrong because I am the wrong sort of person. Do you get it? (Sorry for the lecture, but I think you should learn this.) Ken H: At the risk of being thrashed, I will join in: James: Oh no, I am not going to thrash you over this issue. It is a tempest in a teacup, really. Ken H: The word "odd" does cast BB's argument in a bad light. But, rather than being swayed by words,… James: You mean like how you cast me in the bad light as being a `debator uninterested in the truth'? ;-)) Ken H: Having criticised BB for saying there was "a primary problem of dukkha with which the Buddha is concerned" you say, three sentences later, there actually is a predominant problem with dukkha: James: I wouldn't really say that I criticized BB, I just thought it was an odd statement. The oddity comes from the idea that the "Buddha is concerned" with a particular aspect of dukkha and therefore taught for that aspect. I don't think the Buddha was `concerned' about anything- concern means worry and the Buddha didn't worry; the Buddha had compassion but he didn't worry. Now do you understand what I was saying? Maybe I didn't express myself in the best way possible but I didn't want to go on and on about it- it is a very minor issue. Ken H: If anything, I think the point proves BB's argument. Eternal happiness is not a possibility and so repeated births must be a problem. James: I don't understand your reasoning- perhaps you would care to explain more? Metta, James 43301 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 8:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] 10 upekkhas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Htoo, > > --- htootintnaing wrote: > > There are 10 upekkhas. > > > > 1. chalangupekkha or equanimity in 6 senses > > 2. brahmaviharupekkha or equanimity in metta/karuna/mudita > > 3. bojjhangupekkha or equanimity in vipassana cetasikas > > 4. viriyupekkha or equanimity in equilibriating samadhi and viriya > > 5. sankharupekkha or equanimity in sankhara dhamma > > 6. vedanupekkha or equanimity in feeling > > 7. vipassanupekkha or equanimity in vipassana dhamma > > 8. tatramajjhattatupekkha or equanimity in accompanying cetasikas > > 9. jhanupekkha or equanimity in tatiya-jhana > > 10.parisuddhupekkha or equanimity in catuttha jhana > .... > S: I was waiting for you to write a 'series' with more detail or for > others to ask for clarifications. Anyway, I was testing myself out and > then looked for a little more detail from K.Sujin's text, (appendix > section under sobhana cetasikas)which I'll add here in case anyone else > was wondering. From memory, we can read about all the different meanings > of upekkha in the Vism. in more detail: ..snip...snip...> of equanimity (upekkha) which of course is always wholesome. > > Metta, > > Sarah ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Sarah, Thanks for your interest in upekkha. These days I have been very busy. My aim in posting 10 upekkha is to explore about upekkha and then to move to '4 brahmavihaara'. With regards, Htoo Naing PS: Thanks for your 'Vism'. > ======= 43302 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 8:43am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: Dear Htoo Naing "pabhassaramidam bhikkhave cittam " According to my recollection, Pa auk sayadaw says in 4th chapter of his book titled "The light of wisdom " that Buddha refers to Bhavanga citta in the verse and luminous is not Bhavanga citta itself but cittaja kalapa produced by Bhavanga citta." I can not give you the accurate quotation because I do not have the book at hand. You might be able to get the original Myanmar version ,or to ask Pa auk sayadaw himself about it . Now He must be leading his Spring 2005 retreat there in the U.S. http://paauk.org/public/blogs/paupdate.html from LK ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Lokuttaracitta, Long time no hear. I still remember your question of a citta who arises right now and who is also taking itself as its object. Interesting question. Regarding 'Pabhassaramidam..' I am very grateful to you for your suggestion. With Metta, Htoo Naing 43303 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 0:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Hen It really is tough, time wise. One of the problems I have with using Pali is that you increase the possibility of misunderstanding. Even if I knew it there is no granti that we would share the same definition. Therefore, to me it is better to try and said what you mean as simply, clearly, and fully as possible. For example: when you say "namas and rupas " I think -- Mind and body/flesh. And Lobha ??? that does not mean Buddha's teachings, it means what ever you then me define it to be. When I read "'I am enjoying this cup of coffee'" I also think of the Buddha's teachings -- What is "I" ...., How does "I" enjoy ..., does coffee cause enjoyment, ... I could go own for a long while (i.e., in this analysis) To me, "Lobha experiences an object," is less precise then the actual translation of "lobha" that you want me known about. The same goes for cetasika. I am noticing you separate "the conditioned and conventional reality." Why? (This is a new approach to me) ***************** C: > When you said: "... he also dispelled the wrong view, 'The self exists.'" I would say, "he also dispelled the wrong view, 'The self exists as an eternal (permanent and unchanging) soul, something uncompounded (the essence), some thing that you have complete control over. He also taught, how the self exist; and how thoughts, speech, and acts effect others (other selves). All I have been trying to say is that the Buddha actually taught how to view the self, and not to remain attached to it. ----------------------------- K: > If you are referring to the five khandhas when you say "the self" then we basically agree. However, you do give the impression that there is some absolute reality apart from the five khandhas and Nibbana. For example, you say: ................. To me "self" is a label that can refer to much more than the 5 aggregates, and it could refer to much less. e.g., when people go to a grave site they say, "Here lies John, may he rest in peace." here you have flash without mind. The self can also refer to the image one has in there mind. Conventionally speaking all these things can be seen as the self or a reflection there of. So when ever I use it (like most of what I say), it is out of conventional insight. ************************* C: > The Buddha never taught that conventional wisdom or reality should be as though of non-existent or unreal. --------------------------------------------------- K: > It is true that we should not mix our terminologies, and it is not helpful to say, "I do not exist," or, "That brick wall does not exist." But when we are talking about the reality taught by the Buddha, we can say, "There is no self here," or, "There are only dhammas." ........................... This is true. ************************* C: > If he did then there would be no need for Morality ----------------------------- k> There is a need for morality, but there is no self who is in need. Even if the five khandhas were to continue to be conditioned for another billion lifetimes, there would be no self that suffered. ----------------------------------------------- C: > (i.e., Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood). Actually there would be no need for the 8-Fold path because suffering would not exist either (since there is no-one to suffer). ---------------------------------------------- K >As the ancient commentaries say: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it; The Path is, but no traveler on it is seen." ............ If no-one suffers than it is silly to try and end suffering, it effects no-one. But then, are we in agreement that the five aggregates exist? ****************** C: > In reality the Buddha did dispel a myth about self, that myth was about the nature of its existence. After all, if he did teach that there are no-selves, no not even one, then the teachings about all those realms of existence that Abidharmmist like to talk about would be a lie, and most of the other teachings too ... ------------ K> No, they would not be a lie: those teachings describe the different sets of natural laws that can apply to the five khandhas. In a hell realm, for example, the laws of nature do not allow for the arising of pleasant sense objects. In a heaven realm, no unpleasant sense objects can arise, and in an arupa realm, the laws of nature do not allow for any physical phenomena at all. ..................... Are there beings in these realms, or not? ****************** KH: > Even though we refer to a particular set of five khandhas as you or me (etc.) there is no you or me outside of the momentary existence of those present five khandhas. > ......... There are some Buddhist who view the self as the five-aggregate-continuum. I know others who view it as the consciousness-continuum, or the feeling-continuum, etc.... And there are others still, who hold it to be an object of the mind, and/or body. I hold it to be all that. ********************************* C: > You would be completely right if you replace "self" with the following: attman (eternal soul), uncompounded-ness, permanence, something that can be controlled, ... swell as change "momentary existence" to relative existence. The concept of "Self" (that is devoid of these things and seen as a source of suffering) is a Right View. But like I said, I do know and understand your perspective; however, I attribute it to incomplete translations (the other concepts being summarized and thus called the self). > ---------------------- K> Sorry, but I don't understand what you are telling me here; nor at other places where you have tried to describe the self. E.g., where you wrote: ---------------------------------- c> I think you mistake the self for something uncompounded, having an essence, something unchanging, etc... so I assume that is why you dismiss it. Am I wrong? To me the self is a label I give to "my mind & form/flesh." And by "my mind & form/flesh," I mean something that is still subject to ... and is used to identify "this" being as opposed to another being. My view gives me the ability to dance through the relative and as the absolute. So, I exist when I exist, and don't exist when not existing. ----------------------- k> Please try again to describe this "self" that I am not aware of because of "incomplete translation." ................. In time you will understand this. But you will have to start digging into India belief systems around the time of the Buddha. And uncover exactly what were the issues the Buddha debated and why. NOW: It seems to you the self is something permanent or an essence, something we believe you can put your finger on. Therefore it does not exist. Where your problem is, you do not yet see/understand the relationship between the conventional/relative/absolute. They represent the three dimensions of the reality/world we live in. They are one (like a coin). Why do you think the sutras emphasizes detachment more than emptiness (non-existence, no-one to suffer)? *************** KH: > > the Buddha taught that conditioned reality was the five khandhas. So, when he said [in the suttas or elsewhere] that rebirth was real, he could only have been referring to a particular, momentary arising of the five khandhas. ------------------ C: > This makes me assume you do not believe in reincarnation, is that true? ------------ k> Like all reality, reincarnation (better known as rebirth) is a momentary occurrence of the five khandhas. There is one moment of rebirth (patisandhi) and one moment of death (cuti) in every cycle of life. In between, there are untold trillions of momentary existences of the five khandhas, and they are known as seeing, hearing, touching, thinking and so on. .............. So you don't ? *************** k> Conditioned existence is always just the present, fleeting existence of the five khandhas. So you are not strictly correct when you say: -------------- c> Objects can "persists" from moment to moment, but they are forever changing (the rates and amounts of change are relative), and as I stated before, objects can exist for up to eons (look at the teachings about the God Realm) or do you believe the God realm and gods do not exist? (the teachings are just fables) > -------- k> Conditioned existence is basically the same in all realms: there is a moment of birth and a moment of death and many moments in between. Gods have more moments in between than we do. ............ So beings, only exist for a billionth of a second? CharlesD 43304 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 1:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Howard upasaka@a... wrote: > I agree that in mindstates in which there conventionally is desire for >a tomato, it is certainly not the desiring that is the object (objective >content). However I see it as only in a manner of speaking that "a tomato" is the >object. > > I agree. The conventional object 'a tomato' can never be the object of consciousness, since what we take for that object is either perceived as an object experienced through a single sense-door or it is conceived of as 'a tomato' through the mind-door. In the latter case the object of the mind-door consciousness is a concept. > It seems to me that "desiring a tomato" is a name we apply to a huge >complex of mindstates, many of which involve desiring, though not all, and in >which the actual objects in the states accompanied by desire are actual >mind-door dhammas that typically, and for the most part, are recollections of >particular tastes, smells, and sights. (These states are interspersed with other >states which as a group carry out operations of naming and conceptual projection.) > > I agree also with what you say here, except that to my understanding when there is the recollecting of previously experienced tastes, smells and sights the object of the mind-door consciousness will be a concept; that is to say, at such moments there is no experience of just-fallen-away sense-door object, and at the mind-door there is only the recollecting of previous sense-door and mind-door experiences occurring. Jon 43305 From: gazita2002 Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 3:59pm Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga XIV, 142 - Nina Hello Nina, these entries are so helpful: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina wrote: > Visuddhimagga XIV, 142 and Tiika. > > Intro: Visuddhimagga XIV, 142, Hiri and Ottappa. ...snip.... > > As understanding develops we can see the disadvantages of all degrees of > akusala cittas. Hiri and ottappa can become more refined. We learn to see > the danger of ignorance of dhammas. When there is forgetfulness of the namas > and rupas that appear, hiri and ottappa may arise that see the danger of > accumulating ever more ignorance, one sees the danger of the continuation in > the cycle of birth and death. > When kusala citta with right understanding arises of the dhamma that appears > now, it is accompanied by confidence, saddhaa, sati, hiri and ottappa, and > many other sobhana cetasikas. These are all needed to support the citta with > right understanding. > *** > Nina. Azita: You say they bec more refined, so can we say in the beginning Hiri and Ottappa may manifest as 'our conscience' which stops us from gossiping about someone in an unfriendly way? "fear of blame" sounds like dosa, altho you say its not. It also sounds like mana, 'what will they think of me'. Maybe you have already explained it but I would like to understand a little more about this, and I can see from above that it arise with wholesome cittas. Its hard for me to 'match up' what I read and my everyday life, if you know what I mean? Patience, courage and good cheer, [altho I don't seem to be having much of any of the above lately] :-( Azita. 43306 From: Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 4:58pm Subject: Vism.XIV,145 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 145. (xviii)-(xix) The light (quick) state of the [mental] body is 'lightness of the body'. The light (quick) state of consciousness is 'lightness of consciousness'. They have the characteristic of quieting heaviness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. Their function is to crush heaviness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. They are manifested as nonsluggishness of the [mental] body and of consciousness. Their proximate cause is the [mental] body and consciousness. They should be regarded as opposed to the defilements of stiffness and torpor, which cause heaviness in the {mental] body and in consciousness. 43307 From: connie Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 8:04pm Subject: Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada Hi, Joop, Maya, J: And who will in the future (and I think especially of the western world in which I live) "help the laity foster the proper perspective on life that nurtures the energy of samvega and pasada they need to keep from becoming dulled and numbed by the materialistic propaganda of the mainstream economy." ? Because that is an important function and will be more and more important because mainstream economy makes us more and more mad. C: Hopefully, there will still be dinosaurs intent on understanding, preserving & passing on whatever knowledge is still left of the original teachings. Things like 'mainstream economy' and 'propaganda' are great distractions taking attention away from the characteristics of whatever paramattha dhamma is actually present to experience now. The true bad guys behind our madness are and still will be lobha, dosa and moha. Still, I'd say if there's propaganda to fear, it's the promotion of atta, especially if it's disguised as Buddhist. But I guess that's my big hang-up this past week or so. peace, connie 43308 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 8:22pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Charles, --------------- C: > So beings, only exist for a billionth of a second? > --------------- Yes! It can be said that there are ultimately no beings, however, it is still possible to talk about them without contradicting the anatta doctrine. There are several places in the texts where we read, "When the various components that make up a chariot are correctly assembled, a chariot is said to exist. So too, when the five khandhas are correctly assembled (arise together in the same moment) a living being is said to exist." (Or words to that effect. (I can find a reference if you want one.)) Beings have a lifespan of just one moment because there is only the present moment. This is logical when you consider that the past no longer exists and the future has never existed. But it is hard to accept, and so people conveniently put logic aside and say, "Yes, but, there is a continuum and, therefore, there is a sense in which we do continue to exist." An Abhidhamma student would tell them, "No buts! There is only the present moment." ------------------------ C: > when you say "namas and rupas " I think -- Mind and body/flesh. ------------------------ When you say, "Mind and body/flesh," an Abhidhamma student thinks nama and rupa. The difference is; only nama and rupa exist in the present moment. When the mind is thought of as a persistent thing receiving information, processing it and creating ideas, then that mind is a mere concept (which does not exist in ultimate reality). The same applies to flesh: a piece of meat - something that can be seen, touched, smelt and tasted - is a mere idea created by the mind. In the ultimate reality of the present moment, there can be only one object of consciousness. If it is a physical object, it can be a visible rupa, audible rupa, gustatory rupa, olfactory rupa, or one of the three kinds of tactile rupa. -------------------------- C: > And Lobha ??? that does not mean Buddha's teachings, it means what ever you then me define it to be. When I read "'I am enjoying this cup of coffee'" I also think of the Buddha's teachings -- What is "I" ...., How does "I" enjoy ..., does coffee cause enjoyment, -------------------------- When an Abhidhamma student reads, "I am enjoying this cup of coffee," he knows there have been momentary experiences of sense objects and mind objects (one at a time) and moments of thought creation (conceptualising). In many of those moments, the mental factor known as lobha has arisen, performed its function (of attachment to its object) and fallen away. The person who believes he is enjoying a cup of coffee is not being aware of one of those moments of lobha. He is aware of a different (illusory) reality in which there is a human being enjoying a (simultaneously) delicious, hot, aromatic drink. ------------------------------ C: > I am noticing you separate "the conditioned and conventional reality." Why? (This is a new approach to me) ------------------------------- I hope it will be clear by now that conventional reality is illusory - the product of thinking. Conditioned reality is the five khandhas as they arise in this present, fleeting moment. They can arise in one of six ways, or, as the Buddha said, "as one of the six worlds." There is one world for each of the six kinds of consciousness - seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and mentally cognising. In a moment of seeing (the eye world) the vinnana-khandha is represented by eye consciousness, sankhara- khandha is represented by eye contact (and other mental factors), sanna-khandha by perception of visible object, vedana-khandha by feeling arising from eye contact and rupa-khandha by the eye base and visible object. (There might be one or two technical mistakes in that, but you'll get the general picture.) ---------------------------------------------- KH: > >As the ancient commentaries say: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it; The Path is, but no traveler on it is seen." > ............ C: > If no-one suffers than it is silly to try and end suffering, it effects no-one. ------------------ Exactly! When the anatta characteristic has been directly known (not just read about in books), concern for worldly existence and non- existence fades away. Consequently, there will be conditions for Nibbana to become the object of consciousness. When that happens, various causes of suffering will be permanently destroyed. So, trying doesn't enter into it. Suffering is ended by the conditioned dhammas of the Eight-fold Path. ------------------------------------ C: > But then, are we in agreement that the five aggregates exist? ------------------------------------ Of course we are: we have been talking about them for weeks. :-) (I have been calling them the five khandhas.) However, I have been trying to stress that they exist for only the briefest possible moment. Even the Eight-fold Path is just a fleeting moment in which the five khandhas exist in their supramundane form. Ken H 43309 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 9:25pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 148 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(r) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** When there is right understanding of a nåma or rúpa which appears, there are both vitakka and vicåra accompanying the citta, but vicåra is not a factor of the eightfold Path. Sammå-saòkappa has its specific function as path-factor. Sammå-saòkappa “touches” the nåma or rúpa which appears so that sammå-diììhi can investigate its characteristic in order to understand it as it is. Thus, sammå-diììhi needs the assistance of sammå-saòkappa in order to develop. In the beginning, when paññå has not been developed, there cannot yet be clear understanding of the difference between the characteristic of nåma and of rúpa. When, for example, sound appears, there is also hearing, the reality which experiences sound, but it is difficult to know the difference between the characteristic of sound and the characteristic of hearing, between rúpa and nåma. Only one reality at a time can be object of mindfulness and when they seem to “appear” together it is evident that there is not right mindfulness. Only when there is right mindfulness of one reality at a time right understanding can develop. At that moment sammå-saòkappa performs its function of “touching” the object of mindfulness. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43310 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 9:30pm Subject: Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada Hi Connie, > C: Still, I'd say if there's propaganda to fear, it's the promotion of atta, > especially if it's disguised as Buddhist. But I guess that's my big > hang-up this past week or so. From reading your posts for the past week, I can see it's a big issue for you. However, I don't see you giving the benefit of the doubt to the authors and quick to attribute things to atta. I can appreciate your point of sakkaya-ditthi as the thing puthujjanas should fear most as it will worm its way into teachings. I think you're reading BK's Cittanupassana part 2 too literally. He preface it saying it's hard to describe and it's only based on his experience. I can't find his expanded biography but I doubt he has a strong pariyatti background. So I don't think it's meant to be "technically" sound. I had the fortune of spending some time at Dhamma Tawya where he received the technique. As far as I understand it's very much consistent and falls within Burmese Theravada tradition and the value of the book mostly lies in part 1. The way I see the logic is as follows: 1) every tihetuka human is capable of enlightenment 2) every being has been a tihetuka at some point/life 3) every being has/had potential for enlightenment 1 AND 2 leads to 3 by implication. This "potential for enlightenment" can be thought of as "deathless within" every human. Seeing it as a permanent core or static potential is clearly wrong. It's a guarantee that every being has experienced all the 81 loki cittas at some point, just not lokuttara. Enlightenment can also be "buddha-nature", once the mind is pure (luminous) enough to take nibbana as the object. So to me, just depends on how literally someone takes certain words and definitions. For example, extending the enlightenment potential to mean every being will become a Buddha is a flawed implication resulting from imprecise useage of the word "Buddha". - kel 43311 From: matheesha Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 11:33pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Nina, > N: We have accumulated so much attachment and ignorance. M:This idea of accumilation is interesting. Does the word skandas refer to the fact that certain things can accumilate? If they do they must be the same as thinking habits/memory is it not? What does abhidhamma state about magga and phala citta. This is another area i would like to explore. metta matheesha 43312 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 11:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi Larry, Howard, LK, Htoo, Suan and all, Just a couple more comments on pabhassaram (luminous). Sometime back I went through and checked quite a number of references to its use in the texts and if I recall correctly, sometimes it refers (as in the AN sutta being discussed) to the undefiled cittas, here specifically the bhavanga cittas, sometimes it refers to wholesome cittas as well or only and often it refers to the ‘luminous’ or pure quality of nibbana. (It never refers to akusala cittas, whereas pandara(clear) refers to all cittas as I understand, Htoo). There’s much more on all this in posts under ‘Luminous’ in U.P. as Connie said. When it comes to the phrase: "Viññaa.nam anidassanam anantam sabbato pabham", in MN49, a footnote in the Bodhi, Nanamoli translation gives: MA offers three explanations of the phrase subbato pabham: (1) completely possessed of splendour (pabha); (2) possessing being (pabhutam) everywhere; and (3) a ford (pahham) accessible from all sides, i.e. through any of the thirty-eight meditation objects. Only the first of these seems to have any linguistic legitimacy...” LK, while you’re waiting for Suan or others, I’d be grateful if you and anyone else look at this old post I wrote discussing this further . Please add any comments of your own: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16916 Also see Suan’s post which follows on: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16922 In conclusion, when pabhassaram or pabham refer to nibbana as in these suttas or in the Udana verse, there is no suggestion of a citta or luminous mind being referred to. Also, any mind or citta is fleeting and impermanent, so Howard, I don’t see how in the AN sutta, it is the arahant’s mind that is being referred to. The cittas of the arahant are never defiled. Instead, I understand as the commentary suggests, that pahbhassaram is referring to the nature of the cittas before they are defiled. It shows it is the kilesa (defilements) that do this defiling as Htoo suggested, not the cittas themselves. So I think we need to look at the use of the terms in context. Often, like ‘vinnanam’ above, they have specific or unusual meanings. I look forward to further comments. Metta, Sarah p.s LK, when you said that Pa auk Sayadaw suggested that luminous refers not to ‘Bhavanga citta itself but cittaja kalapa produced by Bhavanga citta’, do you mean the rupas produced by citta? This doesn’t make sense, but I’ll be glad for any clarification. ================= 43313 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 0:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi LK, It's good to see you around after your long break. --- lokuttaracitta wrote: > By the way, > > You can get some clew on "pabhassaramidam bhikkhave cittam" in "The > Teachings of Phra Ajaan Mun Bhuridatta Thera" on > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/mun/released.html > > Section 6. > > The root instigator of the cycle of death and rebirth. > > > //thitibhutam avijja-paccaya > sankhara...upadanam...bhavo...jati...// > > Each and every one of us born as a human being has a birthplace: > we > have our parents as our birthplace. So why did the Buddha formulate > the teaching on sustained conditions only from the factor of > unawareness onwards? What unawareness comes from, he didn't say. > Unawareness has to have a mother and father just as we do, and we > learn from the above line that //thitibhutam// is its mother and > father. //Thitibhutam// refers to the primal mind. ..... S: I’m not familiar with this ‘thitibhutam’. Can anyone help me with the Pali? Is it from thi.ti-(basis) as citta thi.ti, basis of citta, i.e vatthu? Connie, any 'luminous' cittas? ... > Awareness and unawareness both come from //thitibhutam//. When > //thitibhutam// is imbued with unawareness, it isn't wise to its > conditions; but when it is imbued with awareness, it realizes its > conditions for what they really are. This is how the matter appears > when considered with the clear insight leading to emergence > (//vutthana-gamini vipassana//). > > To summarize: //Thitibhutam// is the primal instigator of the > cycle > of death and rebirth. Thus it is called the root source of the > three > (see Section 12). ... S: Can you give me a sutta reference which uses this phrase or helps me understand what he and you are talking about? *****..... > The following is from "Acariya Mun Bhuridatta - A Spiritual > Biography" at > > http://www.buddhanet.net/ebooks_hist_art.htm > > > Appendix II > The following comments about the nature of the citta have been > excerpted from several discourses given by Ãcariya Mahã Boowa. <...> > The conscious acknowledgement of phenomena as they arise and cease is > called viññãõa. For instance, viññãõa acknowledges and registers the > sense impressions that are produced when sights, sounds, smells, > tastes, and tactile sensations contact the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, > and body respectively. Each such contact between an external sense > sphere and its corresponding internal base gives rise to a specific > consciousness that registers the moment at which each interaction > takes place, and then promptly ceases at the same moment that the > contact passes. Viññãõa, therefore, is consciousness as a condition > of the citta. Sankhãra, or thoughts and imagination, is also a > condition of the citta. Once the citta has given expression to these > conditions, they tend to proliferate without limit. On the other > hand, when no conditions arise at all, only the citta's inherent > quality of knowing is apparent. .... S: In most contexts in the Tipitaka, citta and vinnana are synonyms. For example, when we refer to vinnana khandha, we re referring to all cittas. In the context of D.O, vinnana refers to vipaka cittas Sankhara khandha refers to all cetasikas except vedana and sanna. Sankhara or abhisankhara in D.O. refers to cetana (kamma) which may condition vipaka. ‘When no conditions arise at all’ makes little sense to me. Even lokuttara cittas are conditioned. Again, pls give any clarifications if you care to. Metta, Sarah ========== 43314 From: Illusion Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:14am Subject: Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada: Delayed Response Dear all, I have read your posts and I'm sorry I can't respond right now because I really need to finish this paper I'm working on, due Friday. I will respond on Friday, the day before the beginning of my spring break! :) Metta, []\/[]aya []Dutra {ô_ô} "I am nothing but the constituents of the clinging aggregates that is subject to change and unsatisfaction." 43315 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 0:58am Subject: Sarah /Re: Buddha Nature Dear Sarah I greatly appreciate your tireless energy put into DSG > p.s LK, when you said that Pa auk Sayadaw suggested that luminous refers > not to Bhavanga citta itself but cittaja kalapa produced by Bhavanga > citta?E do you mean the rupas produced by citta? This doesnt make sense, > but I'll be glad for any clarification. I am not sure what you imply by saying "do you mean the rupas produced by citta? This doesnt make sense" You might get some sense from Pa auk sadadaw's explainations on what the light of wisdom is. http://www.btinternet.com/~maunglwin/nibbanacom/l_of_w01.htm#lightofwi sdom *excerpt* ******************* But as to "light of wisdom", the questions arise: "Is there light in wisdom?", "Is there light in mental factors (Nama dhamma)?" This is explained in the subcommentary to Visuddhimagga, page 428, paragraph 733: Vipassanobhaso ti vipassana citta samuithitam, sasantatipatitam utu samutthananca bhasuram Rupam - What is the light of Vipassana insight? Two types of causes are mentioned. This bright light is caused by Vipassana Citta (mind) and also by the Tejo dhatu called utu which occur in one's own continuity process of Rupa. This explanation can be easily understood by the meditator who is meditating at the Rupa kammatthana stage: 1) For any person, any living beings who are composed of Nama and Rupa, every mind that arises dependent on hadaya vatthu (heart base) has the ability to produce Cittaja Rupa (matter cause by mind). These Cittaja Rupa arise as Cittaja Kalapa in the whole life. If one of these Kalapa is analysed, there are 8 kinds of Rupa factors: Pathavi, Apo, Tejo, Vayo, Vanna, Gandha, Rasa and Oja (Earth, water, fire, wind, colour, smell, taste and nutritive essence). The colour of it is called Vanna dhatu. Every Samatha Bhavana Citta (mind) and Vipassana Bhavana Citta (mind) can produce Cittaja Rupa. So, in this case the Vipassana Bhavana Citta can produce Cittaja Rupa. Every Kalapa of Cittaja Rupa has the Ruparammana called Vanna dhatu. This Ruparammana is 'Bhasuram Rupam', a brilliantly bright Rupa. 2) Also if discerned further, every Cittaja Kalapa has the 4 element: Pathavi, Apo, Tejo, Vayo. In these 4 elements, the Tejo dhatu is called utu. This Tejo dhatu called utu can produce new generations of Kalapa. Depending on how powerful the Samatha Bhavana Citta and Vipassana Bhavana Citta are, this production of new generations of Kalapa by Tejo datu has the ability to spread out, externally (bahiddha) from internal (ajjhata). If analysed, every Kalapa produced by Tejo dhatu has 8 kinds of Rupa factors: Pathavi, Apo, Tejo, Vayo, Vanna, Gandha, Rasa and Oja. Every Utuja Rupa Kalapa has the Ruparammana called Vanna dhatu. This Ruparammana is 'Bhasuram Rupam', a brilliantly bright Rupa. This explanation shows that both - 1) the brightness of the Vanna dhatu of every Cittaja Rupa Kalapa caused by the Vipassana Citta and 2) the brightness of the Vanna dhatu of every Kalapa caused by the Tejo dhatu called utu which is present in the Cittaja Rupa Kalapa - are called Vipassanobhasa, the light of Vipassana nana. The explanation above is similar for the light that appears in Samatha Bhavana Citta. So, is this really the light of Vipassana nana? No, it is not. It is used in the Text as a metaphor only. Instead of saying that the effect (Rupa) has light which is caused by nana (insight), it is said that the cause in itself has light as a metaphor. It is actually the name of the Vanna dhatu, Ruparammana present in Cittaja Rupa and Utuja Rupa. ****************************** from LK 43316 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: killing a sentient being Hi Howard, Chris & All, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi Sarah (and Ken O & Chris) - > > I'm trying to stay away from posting, but sometimes I find it a > bit > difficult. ;-) What you say in the following is literally correct, > Sarah, but > fraught with danger in my opinion. ... S: Yes, it's a sensitive topic, but I'm glad you joined in;-). I find it helpful to consider just a little more. Just a couple more comments on this thread. It’s true as you and Lodewijk said, that we live in a world with other people and have to take responsibility including the resisting of our own and others’ harmful deeds. With or without the Dhamma, we’ll continue to look for peaceful ways of resolving issues and will continue to perform good deeds according to our confidence in their value and ability to perform them. None of this is undermined in anyway by learning more about the Truths. On the contrary,as I see it, by understanding more about the dhammas appearing in a day, we learn to be more honest and sincere about our motives and intentions and of course, we learn to see what the real problems in our life are. We’re so used to hiding behind the black curtain of ignorance, that usually we’re not brave enough to face up to our present lobha, dosa and moha. As Nina just wrote to another friend: “These are the source of all problems in life, not the other people, not the situation. We like to blame others for our problems, but then we have aversion, dosa, while doing so. We have to be very patient and learn more about our different cittas, They arise and fall away so fast. Often we delude ourselves and believe that cittas are kusala, but immediately after kusala citta there is bound to be akusala citta, such as attachment to our kusala.” This is true whether we’re talking about a work or home situation, about our concerns to help various causes we’ve adopted or even now as we discuss the Dhamma, don't you think? We will think and plan about the future and consider past events anyway. We don’t need to consider the Dhamma to do this. What we need are the reminders that whilst dwelling on future outcomes or past causes, there really are only the presently arising dhammas in truth. We think we or our governments can play a major role in the results that others will experience, but this is because we have so little real appreciation of kamma and its results and of other complex conditions. As we know, not even a Buddha could prevent kamma from bringing its results when it was the right time, even for arahants such as MahaMoggallana. Of course, this doesn’t mean we don’t do our best to help others in whatever ways we can, but we know that we have very limited abilities to really affect outcomes and the greatest help we can offer when we have a chance is by understanding and sharing the Dhamma with anyone who might benefit. Finally, the point of the earlier comments was to suggest that our good and bad acts and the circumstances we find ourselves in really do depend on conditions rather than choices made by a self. Also, that present intentions and cittas cannot always (ever?) be judged by outward appearances. Whilst we dwell on others' unwholesome acts or intentions, the only dhamma that can be known relates to our present mental states. Yes, it’s quite wrong if we think it’s useless to do anything or if everything is predetermined. At the same time, we can learn that there is a) just a ‘flickering mind moment’ as Chris put it and as she also said b) ‘we haven’t the faintest idea of how dangerous all those uncountable mind moments that flick by in any minute really are’. Only an arahant truly appreciates the danger an unsatisfactoriness of all conditioned dhammas, I think, although all ariyans have appreciated this sufficiently to realize nibbana. I’ll be glad to hear any further comments. I know this is a topic you both feel strongly about. Metta, Sarah ======= 43317 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 11:05pm Subject: Re: Tep /Buddha Nature Dear Tep Let me start by wishing this comment never serve SGI's purposes. They are widely considered in Mahayana buddhist world to abuse Lotus Sutra and other Buddhist teachings just for their own selfish interest. Please remember I am not a students of "Acariya Mun's school" which seems to me much bolder in discribing his meditaional experiences than other conservative mainstream in Theravada . --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi LokuttaraCitta (and Connie) - > > Is the 'primal mind' according to Acariya Mun same as "this mind" or is > it the same as "that mind" (as described in Connie's first message > on "Buddha Nature")? I am not sure of his terminology . However, I guess Acariya Mun refers to Bhavanga citta as Primal mind . > Is this permanent, never changing, mind of the Arahant same as "that > mind" in Connie's message? I think so. >Further, is it an Atta? Is it Nibbana? Please reread Acariya Mun's articule quoted in my post before There he dare use a bit provocative terms like the true citta ,genuine citta and so on. He even says ,"Our real problem, our one fundamental problem - which is also the citta's fundamental problem – is that we lack the power needed to be our own TRUE SELF" Wow !! But I do not think he goes too far as a theravada monk by cleary saying "The true citta is Atta. The true citta is Nibbana". Nibbana is Anatta and Object of Lokuttaracittas in mainstream theravada as far as I know. This is very very delicate area which should be treat with utmost care.Otherwise ,I do believe, it comes only to fuel our Ego and Ego- clinging and bring Buddhist meditators to stop at one of mundane Jhanas. As you may know, Jhanic experiences are so blissful and wonderful that people without right understandings tend to regard them as Nibbana with pride and sometimes begin to damage other people by wrong Buddhist teachings. I believe that is one of the reasons why Mainstream Theravada is discreet in word about this area. from LK 43321 From: Joop Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 2:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hallo Jon, Sarah, James In # 43116 Jon said: "I'm not so sure that the sutta you quote [Paramatthaka Sutta, Sutta- Nipata, IV-5] really says what you say it does ('no opinions'). I think it's more about the danger of clinging to opinions or ideas, having preconceived notions, etc. For example, it talks about <>, <>, wrong view about becoming or not, etc. " Jon: "I have my doubts as to whether the ideal of having no opinions is really attainable." Joop: I agree with that (psychological based) guess. All I can say is: I have no ideals; I only discovered that most opinions that are arsing in me, are FUTILE. So I try not to cling to them." In # 43266 Sarah (with Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Citta) said: "This sutta is quoted a lot and usually in support of the same `view' about having no opinions which you hold. Let me share some of my reflections here. 1. I understand that the views referred to in the sutta are wrong views (micha ditthi). The Pali given is `di.t.thi', translated as `dogmatic view' by Saddhatissa. Unless di.t.thi is modified by samma, it nearly always refers to wrong views. For example, we read that "the Perfect One is free from any theory or view(ditthigata)". Of course this refers to wrong views. (see dictionary notes below*). As it says in the dictionary "The rejection of speculative views and theories is a prominent feature in A chapter of the Sutta-Nipáta, the Atthaka-Vagga." This is the chapter of Eights which the Paramatthaka Sutta is from." Joop: Nothing of course; 'of course' does not exist. Yes, the sutta is about rekecting speculative views and theories, but the text of it states more than that. More than is stated in some other Teachings of the Buddha. I accept the tension that exists between suttas and I know many people cannot handle this kind of inconstistencies. Sarah: "2. When there is samma ditthi (right view), there is of course no speculation, conceit or greed involved, but instead the direct knowledge (or panna, understanding) of paramatha dhammas (highest truths)." Joop: I agree, but I should stop this statement with "understanding)"; because one can think to easy about the lists of 89 cittas, 28 (or another number) rupas etc when you talk about 'paramatha dhammas'. Sarah: "4. I'd like to stress that samma ditthi (right view) is a synonym for panna (right understanding). In other words, right view is not a speculative opinion of any kind, but direct knowledge of dhammas." Joop: Yes, that's very important. But that's only true from the moment I experience any 'right view' from within. Till that moment they are, when I read about them in dsg or other texts, theories that may be correct. And I take this vague notion that thy are correct, with me in my meditation/comtemplations, with the open mind and the attitude that these - in essence still conventional theories - got right views in the highest sense TO ME. (I add that 'TO ME' to it because 'right views' don't exist as such - that essentialism - they can only exist in individuals) In fact that more or less the same as what you say: "Of course there are many degrees and kinds of panna or right view, not just direct insight. Reflecting wisely on kamma or on the Truths, even at a theoretical level can be with right view or panna. This is pariyatti (wise reflecting and consideration) which has to develop in order for patipatti(direct knowledge or understanding) to arise and develop." Joop: Perhaps there is another misunderstanding in our discussion about the terms 'view, opinion, theory" Sarah: There's no one who can have a view, but both wrong view (di.t.thi) and right view (pa~n~naa) are mental factors which are real and arise." Joop: You talk about wrong views and right views. That one dichotomy. But when I use in my brains the (dutch word for) view, I think many time more 'opinion' or 'theory' and than the dichotomy is: correct view versus incorrect view. And 'incorrect' is a theory when it's falsified (Popper). When I say that as an effect of my meditation I less and less have opinions, then a third dichotomy is playing a role: useful opinions and useless opinions. Let's for example take the opinion I had for years and still have not left behind me totally: 'George W. Bush is an dangerous idiot" I have arguments that this is a correct theory (his refusal to participate in the Kyoto-protocol for example; Irak) It was a useful opinion two years ago when I with others tried to prevent that the Netherlands participated in the Irak-war. But now I feel it's useless, because it's futile. That why it's a wrong view, because there is hate in me when I state this opinion. Another example, from Joseph Goldsteins book 'One Dhamma: the emerging Western Buddhism' (I only have a dutch translation so I had to translate it back to english) about attachment to opinions. It's about a Tibetan Rinpoche of whom was stated that he was an incarnation of Sariputta. He thought: that is not possible because Sariputta was (according the Pali Canon) an arahat so he is not reborn so nobody in this century can be an incarnation of him. So after some time thinking about that he concluded to have no opinion about this topic anymore. I still have problems with that, I think Goldstein is - partly without realizing that - converted from a Theravada to a Tibetan Buddhist. But maybe he is firther on his path than I am. Metta Joop 43322 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 2:49am Subject: Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature Dear Sarah > ..... > S: I'm not familiar with this `thitibhutam?E Can anyone help me with the > Pali? Is it from thi.ti-(basis) as citta thi.ti, basis of citta, i.e > vatthu? Connie, any 'luminous' cittas? > > (see Section 12). > ... > S: Can you give me a sutta reference which uses this phrase or helps me > understand what he and you are talking about? > As my reply to Tep, I am not a student of Ven A Mun and am not sure of his terminology. I quoted his articles to Connie just as food for thought Is not it better for you to ask Thanissaro Bhikkhu about them , the translator of the article, A Heart Released, from Thai to English ? I hope the following quotation never confuse you further ! "Clarity of insight by Ajahn Chah" http://www.abhayagiri.org/dhamma/clarity.pdf That means you must become your own witness, able to confirm the results from within your own mind. It's like the example of the sour fruit. Imagine I told you that a certain fruit was sour tasting and invited you to try some of it. You would have to take a bite from it to taste the sourness. Some people would willingly if I told them the fruit was sour, but if they simply believed that it was sour without ever tasting it, that belief would be useless (mogha), it wouldn't have any real value or meaning. If you described the fruit as sour, it would be merely going by my perception of it. Only that. The Buddha didn't praise such belief. But then you shouldn't just dismiss it either: investigate it. You must try tasting the fruit for yourself, and by actually experiencing the sour taste, you become your own internal witness. Somebody says it's sour, so you take it away and, by eating it, find out that it really is sour. It's like you're making double sure - relying on your own experience as well as what other people say. This way you can really have confidence in the authenticity of its sour taste; you have a witness who attests to the truth. Venerable Ajahn Mun referred this internal witness that exists within the mind as thitibhutam. The authenticity of any knowledge acquired simply from other people remains unsubstantiated, it is only a truth proven to someone else --you only have someone else's word to go on that the fruit is sour-- you could say that it's a half-truth, or fifty per cent. But if you actually taste the fruit and find it sour, that is the one hundred per cent, whole truth: you have evidence from what other people say and also from your own direct experience. This is a fully one hundred per cent substantiated truth. This is thitibhutam: the internal witness has risen within you. *snip* What causes wisdom to arise? It comes from contemplating impermanence, suffering and not-self, and gaining insight into the truth of the way things are. You have to see the truth clearly and beyond doubt in your own mind; it has to be like that. There has to be continuous clear insight. All objects (arammana) that arise into consciousness are seen to pass away; that cessation is followed by more arising. After more arising there is further cessation. If you still have attachment and clinging suffering must arise from moment to moment, but if you are letting go, you won't create any suffering. Once the mind is clearly seeing the impermanence of phenomena, we call it thitibhutam - the internal witness. It is self-sustaining. Hence in the beginning, you should only accept as the truth about fifty per cent of the things other people tell you. On one occasion the Buddha gave a discourse *unquote* > > condition of the citta. Once the citta has given expression to these > > conditions, they tend to proliferate without limit. On the other > > hand, when no conditions arise at all, only the citta's inherent > > quality of knowing is apparent. > .... > When no conditions arise at all?Emakes little sense to me. Even lokuttara cittas > are conditioned. But I do not think that "Object" of Lokuttaracittas is conditioned. By the way, could you please explain me how can 33 to 36 cetasikas in lokuttaracittas be discerned ? with Metta from LK I deleted my posts to you two times because I found careless mistakes .Sorry ! 43323 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 0:25am Subject: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi, Ken (and Charles - and also Jon, Nina, and other "concept non-believers" ;-), In a message dated 3/16/05 11:24:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > Hi Charles, > > --------------- > C: >So beings, only exist for a billionth of a second? > > --------------- > > Yes! > > It can be said that there are ultimately no beings, however, it is > still possible to talk about them without contradicting the anatta > doctrine. There are several places in the texts where we > read, "When the various components that make up a chariot are > correctly assembled, a chariot is said to exist. So too, when the > five khandhas are correctly assembled (arise together in the same > moment) a living being is said to exist." (Or words to that effect. > (I can find a reference if you want one.)) > > Beings have a lifespan of just one moment because there is only the > present moment. This is logical when you consider that the past no > longer exists and the future has never existed. But it is hard to > accept, and so people conveniently put logic aside and say, "Yes, > but, there is a continuum and, therefore, there is a sense in which > we do continue to exist." > > An Abhidhamma student would tell them, "No buts! There is only the > present moment." > > > -- > Ken H > ========================= Well done, Ken! I think this was an excellent presentation. Part of what you write is "When an Abhidhamma student reads, "I am enjoying this cup of coffee," he knows there have been momentary experiences of sense objects and mind objects (one at a time) and moments of thought creation (conceptualising)." As with 99% of what you wrote in this post (Exception: the *momentary* coming together of the chariot parts was not in the original, I believe), I think yours is a correct "take". It also happens to raise in my mind a loose-end Abhidhammic issue that troubles me yet, and that is the kinds of actual mind-door objects that are present during thought processes and conceptual projecting. I do not not believe that pa~n~natti are ever truly objects of consciousness. I believe that there is only imagining that there are such objects. However, I do believe that during mindstates of thinking processes and conceptual projection, there *are* actual (paramatthic) mind-door arammana. Now some of these are rupas, and some are namas in the form of "fresh memories" of just-passed namas and rupas. But those sorts of objects do not strike me as sufficient to account for our thinking processes and the sankharic processes of conceptual projection. It seems to me that there must be additional mind-door phenomena in the form of mental traces that are passed on from state to state and that constitute the data/raw material upon which thinking processes operate. But I do not see any such things put forward in Abhidhamma. Sure there is sa~n~na mentioned, a bundle of operations that "mark", and compare and contrast marks, but there seems to be no mention of the nature of these "marks" or of their being passed along. Is this just a gap in the Abhidhamma (or our record of the Abhidhamma), or do recollection (remembering) and other such mental operations magically occur (via a form of Buddhist time travel! ;-) with no data passed along on which to operate? 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) 43324 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi, Joop Joop wrote: >Jon: "I have my doubts as to whether the ideal of having no opinions >is really attainable." >Joop: I agree with that (psychological based) guess. All I can say >is: I have no ideals; I only discovered that most opinions that are >arsing in me, are FUTILE. So I try not to cling to them." > > Yes, that is my experience too. But just as opinions are not to be clung to, neither are they to be a cause for dosa! There is thinking all the time, and opinions are just an aspect of that. So no need to pay particular attention to them one way or the other ;-)). Jon 43325 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 0:32am Subject: An Article on Memory Hi, all - At the following site you will find an elementary article that discusses memory in a clear and easy fashion and which presents a standard information-storage perspective that I personally suspect is roughly correct. I would be interested in hearing what the Abhidhammic perspective on this would be. http://www.cc.gatech.edu/classes/cs6751_97_winter/Topics/human-cap/memory.html 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) 43326 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 0:46am Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi again, Ken et al - In a message dated 3/17/05 8:28:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > It seems to me that there must be additional mind-door phenomena in the > form of > mental traces that are passed on from state to state and that constitute the > > data/raw material upon which thinking processes operate. But I do not see > any > such things put forward in Abhidhamma. Sure there is sa~n~na mentioned, a > bundle of operations that "mark", and compare and contrast marks, but there > seems > to be no mention of the nature of these "marks" or of their being passed > along. Is this just a gap in the Abhidhamma (or our record of the > Abhidhamma), or > do recollection (remembering) and other such mental operations magically occu > r > (via a form of Buddhist time travel! ;-) with no data passed along on which > to > operate? > ========================== A thought that has occurred to me in regard to the nature of "marks" that are passed along is that they might in fact not be namas, but a category of mind-created rupas, knowable only through the mind door (as is the case with "the water element", i.e., liquidity/cohesion). [Such rupic nature of "marks", in fact, would not surprise me, as it harmonizes well with the modern, neurology-based theories of memory that presume "memory traces" of various sorts "stored" in the nervous system.] 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) 43327 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:45am Subject: Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi again, all - It occurs to me that the Buddhist notion of conditionality provides another possible perspective on memory, and quite possibly the correct one. Buddhist conditionality does not require a mechanistic passing on of things from moment to oment. It is merely a matter of "When this is, that will be" and "When this is not, that will not be". When appropriate conditions have all occurred, then a resultant condition will occur. This allows for "action at a (temporal) distance" just as does quantum theory. Applying this to memory, there is the possibility that the "marking" done by sa~n~na is not the production of a substantial trace that is replicated in each subsequent mindstate, but is merely an operational event that serves as one condition for a future event of remembering. It may well be merely that several "marking operations" of sa~n~na, occurring at various times, serve, together with other conditions occurring at other times, as basis for a future operation of remembering, with nothing "passed along" at all. This would be a "very Buddhist" perspective. Moreover, from the Buddhist point of view, the passing along of rupic traces as replicated mindstate-objects, would also have to involve action-at-a-distance, because from the moment of a sa~n~nic marking until the moment of remembering, certainly not every intervening mindstate had a rupic trace as its object. Thus it seems to me that the "conditionality theory" put forward in this post may be the best way of understanding the matter. To put it simply: Sa~n~nic marking-events and other events serve as conditions for future acts of remembering, period. My apologies for "thinking aloud" about this matter on-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) 43328 From: connie Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:54am Subject: doubting BK (was Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada) Hi, Kel, I appreciate your thoughts on "buddha nature". Thank you. I think both halves of BK's article* aren't "meant to be 'technically' sound". Maybe "an ounce of practice is worth a ton of theory", but how do you know what he's talking about when he says "object", "rising and falling", "mind", "anchor" or that nama and rupa have to be known when there's no defining of terms? I guess this is all what some of my other friends keep calling 'intuitive' when I think they're disgusted with me, but I think if we don't know what we're doing, we're probably doing something wrong and I fail to appreciate 'intuition' as somehow inherently better than 'reason'. I guess BK's answer to me would be: "Why do you need more-so much knowledge? Then you don't really develop the emotional, spiritual, and psychological aspects", but if there is a right those things, I think they'll follow on right knowledge. If "whatever is happening right now is your object of meditation", what does it mean to say "If the 'worse person in the world' happens to be next to you doing the most unacceptable things and you start judging, disliking, comparing, hating, even trying to control, you have totally failed in your practice!" Why would I not still be successful recognizing these negative things? He says, "If there is wrong attitude there and you are able to see it clearly, acknowledge it, that 'seeing' by itself will change and turn in time that negative attitude into positive. Do not change object until your present object zeros." Or objects, as he also says "if you need to keep alert note two phenomena (objects)", but if "you are experiencing loss of clarity, then try to limit the objects. Stay with one or two only". Why would I not "Look straight into the thinking mind. That will cause it to disappear. Then turn [my] attention to rising and falling for three or four times and look right into the mind again" or remember that "To increase sati look continuously into sensation area persisting, increasing viriya"? To my reading, there is just too much self controlling things here. Which "mind needs to slow down, become stable" and how is the 'meditating mind', which can only arise "when the observing mind has no lobha, dosa nor soka (worry-anxiety) inside it" ever going to arise if "Every time you experience something new, anxiety comes into the practice"? I'd think every moment there would be some new object or experience. I hope I'm taking BK too literally when it sounds like he's saying multiple minds co-exist in the meditator. Also, it's one thing to describe your own experience but another to say something like "The Buddha said that the samaadhi you develop from walking meditation is much stronger than the samaadhi that you develop from sitting meditation". Maybe he did, but I don't remember reading anything like that anywhere else. peace, connie *Bhikkhu Khemavamsa's "Contemplation of the Mind: Practicing Cittanupassana": http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/cittanupassana5.pdf 43329 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:03am Subject: doubting BK (was Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Hie "The Buddha said that the > samaadhi you develop from walking meditation is much stronger than the > samaadhi that you develop from sitting meditation". Maybe he did, but I > don't remember reading anything like that anywhere else. >======= Dear Connie, Thanks for all your helpful posts rcently. Just to note that the Visuddhimagga does have somewhere where they say the concentration gained while walking lasts long, plus one becomes fit for travel and a few other benefits. Robert 43330 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:34am Subject: To James: Re: To Connie: BB's Article 2 Hi James, -------------------------- J: > If you want to tell me that my opinion is wrong, that's okay; but I don't think it is appropriate to tell me that I am a wrong because I am the wrong sort of person. Do you get it? (Sorry for the lecture, but I think you should learn this.) ---------------------------- Yes, I get it, and I don't mind the lecture at all. That's the sort of trouble I was intentionally stirring up. :-) ----------------------------------------------- Ken H: > > At the risk of being thrashed, I will join in: James:> Oh no, I am not going to thrash you over this issue. It is a tempest in a teacup, really. > ------------------------------------------------- Thanks. Actually, what I meant was; "At the risk of being thoroughly defeated by an experienced opponent, I will join in the debate." ----------------- Ken H: > > The word "odd" does cast BB's argument in a bad light. But, rather than being swayed by words,… James: > You mean like how you cast me in the bad light as being a `debator uninterested in the truth'? ;-)) ----------------- :-) Something like that, yes. My post was partly about techniques used in debate (and, to that extent, off-topic on this list). I thought you would appreciate it because you had already posted a similar message, some time ago. In that case, I entirely disagreed with the specific allegations you were making, but I agreed with the principle. That is, I agreed that we should be getting to the truth rather than using suspect means (like discrediting the messenger etc.) simply in order to win a debate. ----------------------- J: > I don't think the Buddha was `concerned' about anything- concern means worry and the Buddha didn't worry; the Buddha had compassion but he didn't worry. Now do you understand what I was saying? Maybe I didn't express myself in the best way possible but I didn't want to go on and on about it- it is a very minor issue. ----------------------- I see. That does make more sense. But I would add that Bhikkhu Bodhi would not have implied the Buddha was a worrier (and I think you know he wouldn't). To be "concerned" with a particular problem can mean to be directing one's attention to it. But, as you say, there's no need to go on about it. ------------------------- Ken H: > > If anything, I think the point proves BB's argument. Eternal happiness is not a possibility and so repeated births must be a problem. James: > I don't understand your reasoning- perhaps you would care to explain more? -------------------------- Gladly! Actually, I think it might be a fairly important topic. You will have noticed suttas in which the Buddha described his Middle Way as offering "final release from dukkha." The point was, I think, that some people had already found release from dukkha in their current lives. I am thinking, for example, of gods and jhana masters who could live for aeons in the perfect peace of the fine immaterial sphere. The trouble was that the wheel of samsara kept turning, and after all those aeons they would eventually be reborn in the lower planes of woe. Also, there are suttas in which the Buddha admits that other philosophies would be suitable if only the laws of nature were not the way the Buddha knew them to be. If rebirth was not made inevitable by the laws of kamma and vipaka, then a philosophy of, 'Eat, drink and be merry,' would be as good as any. But the point BB was making was that, without knowledge of the Buddha's teaching, even the greatest kusala kamma can only offer rebirth. And therein lies the problem. Ken H 43331 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory In a message dated 3/17/2005 6:49:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Buddhist conditionality does not require a mechanistic passing on of things from moment to oment. Hi Howard. I don't really know what you mean by the above, but by examining the way the Suttas talk about DO, it sounds pretty "mechanistic" to me... Sutta Quotes demostrating the principle of DO... “…just as heat is generated and fire is produced from the conjunction and friction of two fire-sticks, but when the sticks are separated and laid aside the resultant heat ceases and subsides; so too, these three feelings are born of contact, rooted in contact, with contact as their source and condition. In dependence on the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings arise; with the cessation of the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings cease.â€? (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 2, pg. 1270) “ . . . each feeling arises in dependence upon its corresponding condition, and with the cessation of its corresponding condition, the feeling ceases.â€? (Ven. Nandaka instructing nuns at the request of the Buddha . . . Middle Length Discourse of the Buddha, pg. 1122, Advice from Nandaka, Nandakovada Sutta, #146) “By reason of a cause it came to be By rupture of a cause it dies awayâ€? (Ven. Sela . . . Kindred Sayings, vol. 1, pg. 169) “Thus, monks, one state just causes another state to swell, one state just causes the fulfillment of another state…â€? (The Buddha . . . Gradual Sayings, vol. 5, pg. 4) TG 43332 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 10:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 142 - Nina Dear Azita and Matheesha, Azita wrote:'Its hard for me to 'match up' what I read and my everyday life, if you know what I mean?' Matheesha, this is also the point you touched on when you said: 'So i wonder if abhidhamma is an predominantly theoretical body of work commenting on the actual'. This is something that cannot be explained in one post, but it is very useful for all of us if you bring up what seems theoretical, and also what you see as an inconsistency between sutta and abhidhamma. It is an opportunity to go deeper into the subject of Abhidhamma. It helps to go into details like hiri and ottappa Azita has a question about. op 17-03-2005 00:59 schreef gazita2002 op gazita2002@y...: > Azita: You say they bec more refined, so can we say in the beginning > Hiri and Ottappa may manifest as 'our conscience' which stops us from > gossiping about someone in an unfriendly way? N: Hiri and ottappa are, together with many other sobhana cetasikas indispensable for the arising of kusala citta. When there is an occasion for gossiping, but we abstain, there is also the sobhana cetasika that is abstention, virati cetasika. Abstention from bad speech. There are confidence in kusala, sati and many other sobhana cetasikas that perform their functions. You say 'in the beginning', but I want to be careful with this expression. It may be even now. It depends on conditions whether there are hiri and ottappa with regard to more coarse or more subtle akusala. Situations are different at different times. When we say in conventional language 'our conscience' this may cause misunderstandings. We may forget that there are many sobhana cetasikas necessary for one moment of kusala citta. A: "fear of blame" sounds like dosa, altho you say its not. It > also sounds like mana, 'what will they think of me'. Maybe you have > already explained it but I would like to understand a little more > about this, and I can see from above that it arise with wholesome > cittas. N: Shame and fear of blame: this is a way of explaining these two cetasikas. We have to understand them and then we do not fall over these words. But we cannot catch: this is hiri, this is ottappa, they arise together and both of them see the danger of akusala. We may think with mana, 'what will they think of me', and then it is not ottappa. But we can abstain from akusala with respect for the teacher, for the Buddha, with concern for the neighbours, and then it is a different matter. Matheesha, you see here that it is so important to know more about different types of kusala cittas and akusala cittas, otherwise we are all confused about what is going on within ourselves. When you read the Satipatthana sutta and its Co. (translated by Soma Thera, the Way of Mindfulness) you see that the Abhidhamma is of great support to understand what the objects of satipatthana are. It also helps us to entangle our different feelings, some kusala, some akusala. A: Patience, courage and good cheer, > [altho I don't seem to be having much of any of the above > lately] :-( N: These are the ups and downs of life, that is also Abhidhamma! I wish I could help you. But when you know that patience, courage and good cheer cannot come on command, only when there are the right conditions, you mind less. They are all fleeting moments, anyway, not something we possess. They are not yours, and that is Abhidhamma. Abhidhamma clearly explains anatta. Impatience, lack of courage, a bad mood, also these arise when there are conditions for them. But kusala can arise instead of akusala by good friendship, listening to the Dhamma, considering it, beginning to be aware, as you know. Don't you find that when you try to explain Dhamma you are concentrated only on that and you do not think of your own bad mood? Sarah often said that the Dhamma is the best medicine. Patience, courage and good cheer (but only momentary!), Nina. 43333 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 10:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] alleywalk Dear Connie and Rob K, Gradual Sayings, V, III, 29 (Book of the Fives). The alley-walk. Nina. op 17-03-2005 17:03 schreef rjkjp1 op rjkjp1@y...: > Just to note that the > Visuddhimagga does have somewhere where they say the concentration > gained while walking lasts long, plus one becomes fit for travel and > a few other benefits. 43334 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, TG - In a message dated 3/17/05 1:31:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > > In a message dated 3/17/2005 6:49:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, > upasaka@a... writes: > Buddhist conditionality does not require a mechanistic passing on of things > from > moment to oment. > Hi Howard. > > I don't really know what you mean by the above, but by examining the way the > > Suttas talk about DO, it sounds pretty "mechanistic" to me... > > Sutta Quotes demostrating the principle of DO... > > “…just as heat is generated and fire is produced from the conjunction and > friction of two fire-sticks, but when the sticks are separated and laid > aside > the resultant heat ceases and subsides; so too, these three feelings are > born of > contact, rooted in contact, with contact as their source and condition. In > dependence on the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings arise; > with > the cessation of the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings cease.â€? > (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 2, pg. 1270) > > “ . . . each feeling arises in dependence upon its corresponding condition, > and with the cessation of its corresponding condition, the feeling ceases.â€? > (Ven. Nandaka instructing nuns at the request of the Buddha . . . Middle > Length Discourse of the Buddha, pg. 1122, Advice from Nandaka, Nandakovada > Sutta, > #146) > ----------------------------------------- Howard: Those 2 quotes pertain to contact being a condition for feeling. That happens to be an immediate predecessor conditioning, but not all conditionng is of that sort. Also, contact is but one precondition for feeling, not the sole one, for in general mutiple conditions coming together are required. In addition, when condition A is immediate predecessor to resultant B, A may well not be present in the next moment when B arises, and so it still amounts to "action at a distance". ----------------------------------------- > > “By reason of a cause it came to be > By rupture of a cause it dies awayâ€? > (Ven. Sela . . . Kindred Sayings, vol. 1, pg. 169) > > “Thus, monks, one state just causes another state to swell, one state just > causes the fulfillment of another state…â€? > (The Buddha . . . Gradual Sayings, vol. 5, pg. 4) > --------------------------------------- Howard: These are unclear as to this issue. --------------------------------------- > > TG > ================== With metta, Howard P.S. I just came across the article at the following site: http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:gLuk_WLbdTIJ:www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/budfree.htm+conditio nality+kalupahana&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 I hadn't seen this article before, and I find it interesting that action at a distance is mentioned in the following part of the article: __________________________ The Buddha’s qualified determinism has led David Kalupahana to speak of Buddhist “conditionalityâ€? rather than causality.14 For him Buddhist conditionality represents a middle way between strict determinism and the destruction of freedom on the one hand, and an equally unacceptable indeterminism on the other. Because the Buddha rejected the both material and mental substances, Buddhist conditionality amounts to causality withOUT (HCW editorial correction) substance metaphysics. We should envision, as we have been forced to do in contemporary physics, all events conditioning one another rather than physical and mental causes pushing, pulling, or otherwise interacting with one another. Incredibly enough, action at a distance has now been confirmed between pairs of subatomic particles, although physicists still do not understand how this can happen. Therefore, Buddhist conditionality could possibly be used to explain the actions of subatomic particles, which are currently impossible to understand according to classical science’s view of causality.Buddhist conditionality is summarized by the following formulas: “When this is present, that comes to be; from the arising of this, that arises. When this is absent, that does not come to be; on the cessation of this, that ceases.â€?15 Moving from facts to values, the principle of conditionality is summarized as a twelve-fold chain starting with ignorance, then unmindful action, a resultant distorted consciousness, and then nine other conditions that lead to rebirth. If anyone of these conditions is not present, then rebirth in a next life will not happen. One might see it in terms of Aristotle’s formal causation, as the following authors do: “As a theory of causation, this ‘dependent coarising’ concerns the formal concomitances among things rather than their material derivation from one another. It resembles a medical diagnosis in several ways. By showing that the ailment depends on a series of conditions, it indicates the point at which the series can be broken and so facilitates a cure.â€?16 ------------------------------------------------------------- /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) 43335 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: responsibilities in the world. Hi Sarah, Howard, Sarah, this is well expressed and I print it out. Tomorrow I have lunch with Lodewijk in a restaurant and this is such a good opportunity for a leisure Dhamma talk. Notebook on the table, in between the good food. Dhamma and pleasure, but pleasure is also Dhamma. Lodewijk needs a break, he feels the loss of my father and did a lot of work about his house. It gets you also physically, more than you would think. Nama and rupa and conditions. Nina. op 17-03-2005 10:41 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y... > It’s true as you and Lodewijk said, that we live in a world with other > people and have to take responsibility including the resisting of our own > and others’ harmful deeds. ... > > On the contrary,as I see it, by understanding more about the dhammas > appearing in a day, we learn to be more honest and sincere about our > motives and intentions and of course, we learn to see what the real > problems in our life are. 43336 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Matheesha, op 17-03-2005 08:33 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: >> N: We have accumulated so much attachment and ignorance. > > M:This idea of accumilation is interesting. Does the word skandas > refer to the fact that certain things can accumilate? If they do they > must be the same as thinking habits/memory is it not? N: Each citta (viññaa.nakkhandha) falls away but since it is immediately succeeded by the next one there are conditions for accumulating good and bad inclinations (the formations khandha), all experiences, all we learnt, from moment to moment, from life to life. When we think of life as an uninterrupted series of cittas, the fact of accumulation becomes more understandable. Indeed, you can notice that habits are formed, what you experienced is remembered. Saññaa that accompanies each citta remembers. We can remember things that happened long ago. What has been accumulated is a condition for the arising again of akusala citta and cetasikas, and of kusala citta and sobhana cetasikas. Paññaa, a sobhana cetasika, is also accumulated and can develop from life to life. Kamma, good and evil deeds, are accumulated and can produce result, even in future lives. M: What does abhidhamma state about magga and phala citta. This is > another area i would like to explore. N: When paññaa has been developed in stages of insight it can become accomplished to the degree that enlightenment can be attained. The maggacitta eradicates defilements and experiences the unconditioned element, nibbaana. The phala citta is the lokuttara vipaakacitta that succeeds the maggacitta immediately in the same process, and this also experiences nibbaana. Since defilements are deeply rooted, they are eradicated in the subsequent stages of enlightenment, until they are all eradicated at the fourth stage, the stage of the arahat. However, for us now it is more important to understand the right Path leading to enlightenment. Nina. 43337 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi Howard In a message dated 3/17/2005 11:34:49 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Hi, TG - In a message dated 3/17/05 1:31:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > > In a message dated 3/17/2005 6:49:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, > upasaka@a... writes: > Buddhist conditionality does not require a mechanistic passing on of things > from > moment to oment. > Hi Howard. > > I don't really know what you mean by the above, but by examining the way the > > Suttas talk about DO, it sounds pretty "mechanistic" to me... > > Sutta Quotes demostrating the principle of DO... > > “…just as heat is generated and fire is produced from the conjunction and > friction of two fire-sticks, but when the sticks are separated and laid > aside > the resultant heat ceases and subsides; so too, these three feelings are > born of > contact, rooted in contact, with contact as their source and condition. In > dependence on the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings arise; > with > the cessation of the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings cease.â€? > (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 2, pg. 1270) > > “ . . . each feeling arises in dependence upon its corresponding condition, > and with the cessation of its corresponding condition, the feeling ceases.â€? > (Ven. Nandaka instructing nuns at the request of the Buddha . . . Middle > Length Discourse of the Buddha, pg. 1122, Advice from Nandaka, Nandakovada > Sutta, > #146) > ----------------------------------------- Howard: Those 2 quotes pertain to contact being a condition for feeling. That happens to be an immediate predecessor conditioning, but not all conditionng is of that sort. Also, contact is but one precondition for feeling, not the sole one, for in general mutiple conditions coming together are required. In addition, when condition A is immediate predecessor to resultant B, A may well not be present in the next moment when B arises, and so it still amounts to "action at a distance". ----------------------------------------- TG I don't know of any "conditioning" that is free of contact. > > “By reason of a cause it came to be > By rupture of a cause it dies awayâ€? > (Ven. Sela . . . Kindred Sayings, vol. 1, pg. 169) > > “Thus, monks, one state just causes another state to swell, one state just > causes the fulfillment of another state…â€? > (The Buddha . . . Gradual Sayings, vol. 5, pg. 4) > --------------------------------------- Howard: These are unclear as to this issue. --------------------------------------- TG I'm not sure why its not clear. These quotes are expressing the principle of DO, i.e., conditionality. These statements should be applicable at all times in regard to all conditioned phenomena. If they are not, then the Buddha was in error. I guess my point is that I disagree with the notion that you seem to be projecting that conditions can somehow be free of causal mechanisms. No doubt many causal events are beyond our current understanding. Because we may not understand or clearly see the mechanisms, I don't think that's enough grounds to believe they aren't there. > > TG > ================== With metta, Howard TG 43338 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:03pm Subject: doubting BK (was Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada) Hi Connie, A bit long message to warn you. > C: I think both halves of BK's article* aren't "meant to be 'technically' > sound". Maybe "an ounce of practice is worth a ton of theory" Kel: Perhaps so, it definitely isn't presented as a normal book. It's more like stream of consciousness writing. I agree that it's not technically sound in everything. The later saying comes from Shwe Oo Min Sayadaw and it's a common phrase in Burma. I think everyone would agree that actual practice is what gets you there. Of course as you pointed later, one needs a solid foundation of theory (cinta-maya panna). But I would also argue that the amount of details someone needs differ. From what I've seen, people do quite well with simple instructions and simple models. However, there's definitely people where simple isn't sufficient and hinder their progress. > C: but how do > you know what he's talking about when he says "object", "rising and > falling", "mind", "anchor" or that nama and rupa have to be known when > there's no defining of terms? Kel: I think he assumes certain familiarity and orthodox use of the terms. It's definitely not a safe assumption on DSG I find :) I didn't have any trouble catching his meaning or at least his drift. > C: I guess this is all what some of my other > friends keep calling 'intuitive' when I think they're disgusted with me, > but I think if we don't know what we're doing, we're probably doing > something wrong and I fail to appreciate 'intuition' as somehow inherently > better than 'reason'. Kel: I would think you need both equally. If intuition alone was enough, everyone would become Buddha. Or perhaps that's why they think everyone will be a Buddha? I think certain amount of trust in Dhamma leads to suta-maya panna. Then using that to drive intuition and arrive at cinta-maya panna through reasoning. Certain people have enough accumulated to become pacceka-buddhas and there intuition might lead. I definitely think it's a danger when people apply what is reserved for highest quality beings to general populus. But if they all aspire to be Buddha then let them rely on intuition. I for one cannot sacrifice myself to fulfill paramis up to that level. > C: I guess BK's answer to me would be: "Why do you > need more-so much knowledge? Then you don't really develop the emotional, > spiritual, and psychological aspects", but if there is a right those > things, I think they'll follow on right knowledge. Kel: I think this is mostly directed at Buddhist scholars who spend all their whole lives studying texts. They claim there's no time to practice because they can't spare the time. Plenty of those people in Burma and in general I assume. Kinda like one uncle I have who says all the studying he's doing now will carry over and he's just trying to achieve first jhana. Then he'll try for sotapanna as a brahma based on that knowledge, I told him good luck. > If "whatever is happening right now is your object of meditation" > does it mean to say "If the 'worse person in the world' happens to Kel: To me it's just a simple thing most people say about being in the present. > He says, "If there is wrong attitude there and you > are able to see it clearly, acknowledge it, that 'seeing' by itself will > change and turn in time that negative attitude into positive. Kel: This comes from idea of recognizing kilesas behind your actions. Once the true nature or motivations are clearly perceived then the attitude changes. The association with self is lessened. > Do not change object until your present object zeros." > "if you need to keep alert note two phenomena (objects)", > "you are experiencing loss of clarity, then try to limit the > objects. Stay with one or two only". Kel: Situational descriptions. Most beginners cannot remain on one object. For example one is aware of the breath but at the same time pain the in leg. The mind itself is ping-ponging but the meditator is unable to observe that and they appear to co-exist. The idea is the mind remains alert more when it's trying to be aware of so many things seemingly at once, doesn't fall under thina- middha. Having only one subtle object increases the likelyhood thina-middha can slip right in at momentary slackening of sati. > Why would I not "Look straight into the thinking > mind. That will cause it to disappear. Then turn [my] attention to > rising and falling for three or four times and look right into the mind > again" or remember that "To increase sati look continuously into sensation > area persisting, increasing viriya"? Kel: This is the same as Mahasi instructions of observing until something disappear. It's attempting to go from gross to subtle using one gross object as the vehicle. Ever able to pentrate through the thinking mind or observe it clearly and fully? Sometime when attempting to follow the thinking mind, one can get pulled in and get immersed in the story. So the breath or abdomen can be used as "anchor" to strengthen samadhi. At the least snap out of the story arc. The instructions to increase sati or viriya is in-line with balancing the indriyas. It's just a way to help the meditator realize what needs to be done. Of course doing it successfully depends on the conditions blah blah blah. > To my reading, there is just too much self controlling things here. Kel: If you're reading it on a surface and trying to equate it with atta then sure. I'm sure Sarah would agree with your position. However there's plenty of stuff BK says that goes to show how anatta can be clearly seen. Just laws of nature, cause and effect going on. > Which "mind needs to slow down, become stable" and how is the 'meditating > mind', which can only arise "when the observing mind has no lobha, dosa > nor soka (worry-anxiety) inside it" ever going to arise if "Every time you > experience something new, anxiety comes into the practice"? I'd think > every moment there would be some new object or experience. Kel: If you look at the mind-door process of being able to recognize something, it's repeated experience of the replicated object then the impression. Same principle here, it's all similar experiences which the mind recognizes. The mind slows down means it's experiencing almost identical objects. When he talks about something new, it's referring to scenarios like the following. One is experiencing subtle things, then something gross up, the reaction is mostly what happened? Did something go wrong etc? Or if one is experiencing gross things then it starts becomes subtle, reaction is joy followed right by fear of losing it. Then one starts to cautiously approach the objects, forgetting how it got there in the first place. He's calling that type of things anxiety when something *suddenly* changes (to an untrained mind). >C: I hope I'm taking BK too literally when it sounds like he's > saying multiple minds co-exist in the meditator. Kel: He didn't say co-exist at the same time exactly. It's about citta taking the previous citta as the object, a simple model for vithis. > samaadhi you develop from walking meditation is much stronger > samaadhi that you develop from sitting meditation". Kel: RobK pointed out it was in Vism. I'll also refer to Ashin Ananda's practice right before he came an arahat. He was doing walking meditation. - kel 43339 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:52pm Subject: To James: Re: To Connie: BB's Article 2 Hi Ken H., Ken H.: Gladly! Actually, I think it might be a fairly important topic... James: Yes, I think it is an important topic also; unfortunately, I don't really trust my opinion on this matter because I am not enlightened. The deeper I `think' about it the more confused I become. This is because I have not realized the Four Noble Truths for myself (not even the First Noble Truth of Suffering). So, what is dukkha *really*??? I am reminded of the time before the Buddha was enlightened, when he was Gotama, and he became very upset when he encountered three different types of people: old, sick, and dead. And he thought to himself `Since I am also subject to old age, sickness, and death it would not be fitting, it would not be proper, for me to pursue things which are also subject to old age, sickness, and death. That would be an ignoble quest. Therefore, since I am subject to old age, sickness, and death, I should pursue that which is not subject to those things. That would be a noble quest.' Compare this to what BB writes, "And, as I will show presently, these terms are intended quite literally as signifying biological birth, aging, and death, not our anxiety over being born, growing old, and dying." But what about the dukkha that made Gotama seek the truth? It seems to me that Gotama had a lot of anxiety over sickness, aging, and death and he hadn't experienced them directly (at least not aging and death- and he didn't recall his past lives). This is not a cut-and-dry issue; there seems to be some gray area. And, again, we have to get back to how this all relates to DO. Anyone have an Advil? ;-)) Metta, James 43340 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 9:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, TG - In a message dated 3/17/05 3:01:09 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Howard > > In a message dated 3/17/2005 11:34:49 AM Pacific Standard Time, > upasaka@a... writes: > Hi, TG - > > In a message dated 3/17/05 1:31:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, > TGrand458@a... writes: > > > > >In a message dated 3/17/2005 6:49:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, > >upasaka@a... writes: > >Buddhist conditionality does not require a mechanistic passing on of things > > >from > >moment to oment. > >Hi Howard. > > > >I don't really know what you mean by the above, but by examining the way > the > > > >Suttas talk about DO, it sounds pretty "mechanistic" to me... > > > >Sutta Quotes demostrating the principle of DO... > > > >“…just as heat is generated and fire is produced from the conjunction and > >friction of two fire-sticks, but when the sticks are separated and laid > >aside > >the resultant heat ceases and subsides; so too, these three feelings are > >born of > >contact, rooted in contact, with contact as their source and condition. In > > >dependence on the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings arise; > >with > >the cessation of the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings cease.â€? > > >(The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 2, pg. 1270) > > > >“ . . . each feeling arises in dependence upon its corresponding condition, > > >and with the cessation of its corresponding condition, the feeling ceases.â€? > >(Ven. Nandaka instructing nuns at the request of the Buddha . . . Middle > >Length Discourse of the Buddha, pg. 1122, Advice from Nandaka, Nandakovada > >Sutta, > >#146) > > > ----------------------------------------- > Howard: > Those 2 quotes pertain to contact being a condition for feeling. That > happens to be an immediate predecessor conditioning, but not all conditionng > > is of that sort. Also, contact is but one precondition for feeling, not the > sole one, for in general mutiple conditions coming together are required. In > > addition, when condition A is immediate predecessor to resultant B, A may > well not > be present in the next moment when B arises, and so it still amounts to > "action at a distance". > ----------------------------------------- > > TG I don't know of any "conditioning" that is free of contact. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't get your point. My meaning was that feeling is conditioned by contact as its immediate predecessor, but not all conditioning occurs by immediate precedence. For example, birth is a condition for death, but not consistently by immediate precedence. The initiation of consciousness in a lifetime is a requisite condition for the last. -------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > >“By reason of a cause it came to be > >By rupture of a cause it dies awayâ€? > >(Ven. Sela . . . Kindred Sayings, vol. 1, pg. 169) > > > >“Thus, monks, one state just causes another state to swell, one state just > >causes the fulfillment of another state…â€? > >(The Buddha . . . Gradual Sayings, vol. 5, pg. 4) > > > --------------------------------------- > Howard: > These are unclear as to this issue. > --------------------------------------- > > TG I'm not sure why its not clear. These quotes are expressing the > principle of DO, i.e., conditionality. These statements should be > applicable at all > times in regard to all conditioned phenomena. If they are not, then the > Buddha > was in error. > ------------------------------------- Howard: I'm saying that these quotes do not unambiguously say that all conditioning proceeds by immediate precedence. -------------------------------------- > > I guess my point is that I disagree with the notion that you seem to be > projecting that conditions can somehow be free of causal mechanisms. No > doubt many > causal events are beyond our current understanding. Because we may not > understand or clearly see the mechanisms, I don't think that's enough > grounds to > believe they aren't there. > ------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm saying that the Dhamma doesn't countenance "causal forces", but merely this/that conditionality. ------------------------------------------- > > > > > >TG > > > ================== > With metta, > Howard > TG > ======================== TG, I've said all I can in expressing my understanding of this matter, and I fear that anything further I would add would just amount to repetition. So I think I'll give this matter a rest. ;-) 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) 43341 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 9:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi again, TG - I found one more thing, by Ven. Ajahn Brahamvamso, on the net that is relevant. It is at the following url: http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:vv7PYsWVytsJ:www.bswa.org/publications/HTML/PaticcaSamuppada_Dependent_Origination .html+idappaccayata&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 Included there you will see the following: <> I send this to you not to prove my point, but merely to show that the idea is not novel to 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) 43342 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 4:02pm Subject: Vism.XIV,146 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 146. (xx)-(xxi) The malleable state of the [mental] body is 'malleability of the body'. The malleable state of consciousness is 'malleability of consciousness'. They have the characteristic of quieting rigidity in the [mental] body and in consciousness. Their function is to crush stiffening in the [mental] body and in consciousness. They are manifested as nonresistance. Their proximate cause is the [mental] body and consciousness. They should be regarded as opposed to the defilements of views, conceit (pride), etc., which cause stiffening of the [mental] body and of consciousness. 43343 From: connie Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:20pm Subject: Re: alleywalk Dear Nina, Robert, Kel, Gradual Sayings, V, III, 29 (Book of the Fives). The alley-walk. 9. Ca"nkamasutta.m 29. “Pa~ncime, bhikkhave, ca"nkame aanisa.msaa. Katame pa~nca? Addhaanakkhamo hoti, padhaanakkhamo hoti, appaabaadho hoti, asita.m piita.m khaayita.m saayita.m sammaa pari.naama.m gacchati, ca"nkamaadhigato samaadhi cira.t.thitiko hoti. Ime kho, bhikkhave, pa~nca ca"nkame aanisa.msaaâ€?ti. Navama.m. "There are five benefits of walking, monks. What five? Endurance for a long journey; endurance for striving; smallness of obstacles; thorough digestion of food and drink taken; samaadhi obtained from walking lasts a long time. These, indeed, monks, are five benefits of walking." This is the ninth. No doubt, my translation could use some help, but there it is. I didn't spend much time looking in the Vsm, but didn't see anything particularly relevant. thank you, connie 43344 From: connie Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:21pm Subject: Re: doubting BK Thank you for your explanations, Kel. I still don't appreciate BK's writing, especially that second half where I think he sounds like a mystic, but there's not much point in our going around in circles over it. Laughing at myself... I'm still not ready to say samaadhi from walking meditation is stronger than from sitting, but I can see where the idea might come from reading the sutta Nina gave. I hope your uncle makes it, too. I don't suppose we'd ever know. In all fairness, BK did make some comments in the first part that probably are worth repeating: -If you hear something, just know there is hearing. If you know what sound it is you are hearing, this is not meditation. -You must know ruupa and you must also know naama — only then you will have an all-rounded view and knowledge. -If you have expectations to see arising and passing away you won’t see arising and passing away. -Trying to create something is lobha (greed). Rejecting what is happening is dosa (aversion). Not knowing if something is happening or has stopped happening is moha (delusion). -Real paramattha has only its characteristics, when you see the object you see only its characteristics, the characteristics are changing, are impermanent. When you get to real paramattha you don’t know this is heat, cold, tension, fear, agitation, craving. You just know that this is the changing nature of the object. -We cannot directly experience concepts. Only by experiencing the quality — hard, soft, cold, heat, stiffness, pressure, heaviness, tension, pain, fear, craving, doubt — we are experiencing directly without thinking about it. peace, connie ps... to you, James, if you see this, that's con-descending from her high horse ;) 43345 From: mnease Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi Connie, ----- Original Message ----- From: "connie" To: "dsg" Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 7:20 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature > I think the Nichirenists consider his > teachings on "the true Buddhism" to be an advancement over all earlier > schools and separate from Mahayana, rather like the Vajrayana do. Seems that way to me, too. The test, to me, is the extent to which their views are consistent with the suttapi.taka on a gross level. Very few even theravadins pass this test. mike 43346 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 2:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory In a message dated 3/17/2005 2:15:17 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Howard: I'm saying that the Dhamma doesn't countenance "causal forces", but merely this/that conditionality. Hi Howard I completely disagree with the above assessment but that's no shock is it? ;-) The suttas are replete with the Buddha demonstrating causal forces at work both physically and mentally. TG 43347 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:02pm Subject: Re: Sila Visuddhi (purity of sila) Hi Sarah, Thanks for this information on sila visuddhi. At the risk of sounding obstinate, I still don't see the dangers of "personlessness" that Suan warned against. I think if someone seems to be taking anatta too far he is actually not taking it far enough. We have another weekend of Dhamma discussion at Cooran starting tomorrow (or tonight for some people). The topic is "Right Understanding," and I'm just on my way to the Useful Posts file to plagiarise a contribution. :-) Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi KenH ,Tep & All, > > When I was checking the reference on citta visuddhi and ditthi which Htoo > referred me to, I came across the following quote on sila visuddhi. > > [Firstly, as I understand, there are 9 different kinds of visuddhi > (purity), which develop with satipatthana as stages of vipassana are > reached. 43348 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 3:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi Howard Wait a minute...I thought you rested your case. I need a ruling from the judge. In a message dated 3/17/2005 2:41:06 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Hi again, TG - I found one more thing, by Ven. Ajahn Brahamvamso, on the net that is relevant. It is at the following url: http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:vv7PYsWVytsJ:www.bswa.org/publications/HT ML/PaticcaSamuppada_Dependent_Origination .html+idappaccayata&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 Included there you will see the following: <> I send this to you not to prove my point, but merely to show that the idea is not novel to me. With metta, Howard TG Causal changes occur continuously and sequentially and unfold in accordance to the relative momentum of forces at hand. "Separating" cause and effect is just a manner of thinking about something being separate, it isn't an actuality. TG 43349 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:11pm Subject: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Howard, Thank you for your generous remarks: -------------------- H: > Well done, Ken! I think this was an excellent presentation. As with 99% of what you wrote in this post (Exception: the *momentary* coming together of the chariot parts was not in the original, I believe), I think yours is a correct "take". -------------------- Not that I am complaining about my mark :-) but I would like some clarification on the chariot question. I wrote: "When the various components that make up a chariot are correctly assembled, a chariot is said to exist: So too, when the five khandhas are correctly assembled (arise together in the same moment) a living being is said to exist." So I didn't say there was a momentary coming together of the chariot parts. If anything, I would have said the opposite. Chariots and their parts are not anicca: they lie around gathering dust for years. You probably meant to say that the coming together of the five khandhas was not explicitly momentary (as described in the suttas). Maybe not, but in the context of the Dhamma as a whole, that interpretation is unavoidable. Various suttas tell us that nothing changes faster than consciousness, and that it is almost impossible to describe how fast that is. Then there are suttas describing the six worlds, which make it clear that when consciousness changes so do all the cetasikas (and associated rupas). (As Htoo might say, when the king goes, his retinue goes with him.) Considering those suttas together, we can only conclude that an assembly of the five khandhas lasts only one moment. ----------------------------- H: > It also happens to raise in my mind a loose-end Abhidhammic issue that troubles me yet, and that is the kinds of actual mind- door objects that are present during thought processes and conceptual projecting. I do not not believe that pa~n~natti are ever truly objects of consciousness. ----------------------------- You must envy me sometimes for my unquestioning acceptance of the texts. :-) I know some people object to the idea of "parroting" but it's not so bad when you try it. I must sound like some kind of pusher! :-) Ken H 43350 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:42pm Subject: Remember those days.....? Hi All, Remember those days when we used to receive hand-written dhamma letters by snail-mail with corrections and lots of personal touches? Well, I know some will. I just got home, picked up the mail and glanced at a brown envelope from Japan with an address that meant nothing to me. Nothing very surprising --I have a lot of ex-students living in Japan who occasionally send me a card or note. When I took out the hand-written pages, it took me a while to recognise who it was from, even when I saw Phil's name at the end. Somehow, one no longer expects friends here to write letters and I didn't know he had our address, but I suppose it was on the back of a package I sent before. Anyway, I'll sepatately type in his letter to the Group. If there are any replies (and I hope there are, of course), I'll happily print them out and post them back to him. I know he'll be very pleased. If anyone can think of any posts they've written recently (or someone else has written for that matter) that they think Phil would like to see, pls let me know the numbers and I'll include them at the same time. I'll wait just a few days, but will send a second package if there's anything later. In a note to me at the top, he adds: >Hi Sarah! How's it going? Hope you and Jon are well. I think I'll be back at DSG in a few more weeks, but in the meantime could I ask you to pass this along to the Group? I would have typed it but our computer screen has gone black again! Doesn't help that I'm scrawling this on my lap on the balcony!< S: Actually, it's very easy to write and a pleasure to type for the list. I'm sure any typos in the following are mine. Metta, Sarah ========== 43351 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 9:14pm Subject: Phil's letter from Japan Hello Group! We've finally settled in to our new place. Both very happy about it. Many opportunities to reflect on lobha related to this move, because there are so many aspects to this neighbourhood/area, and the apartment itself is nicer. Now when I walk home from the station, instead of going by discount stores and fast food restaurants along a traffic-clogged thoroughfare, there is a posh shopping area with European brand goods, and then quiet, affluent streets, and a lovely little river and a park with huge trees, and vegetable gardens everywhere. I often think of what Rob K said, that it is the same wherever he is, and I believe that that is true for him. For me, there is such clinging to variations in conceptual beauty. I intentionally take a short cut right through the perfume and bag departments of the posh department store, drinking in the fragrances and glancing with delight at the beautiful women in elegant suits working at Chanel, Vuiton, Cartier etc. I take pride in telling students and friends where we live. And yet we can’t afford and don’t really want to buy those brand goods. Peculiar. At least I have an intellectual understanding that all this lobha is arising due to conditions. A moment or many moments of strong desire and ignorance is nothing to fret about – there will be many of them in this lifetime. The important thing is to gradually come to see them for what they are. I found this from Sarah in one of the past posts I’ve been studying: “There is more and more confidence that nothing other than the understanding of the present reality really matters at all.” I am also feeling confident about that. I am also aware that in addition to all the times that there is sensual greed and gross ignorance arising, there is a kind of reluctance, a kind of suspicion with respect to the khandhas. Yesterday morning was lovely, with sunlit dew drops in the cherry trees (just starting to bloom), ducks in the pond in the park, mild soft air, but as I walked to the station I found that a kind of mistrust, disgust, unease was arising – there was reluctance to lie lost in comforting concerts of spring loveliness. On other days, there will be delighting, like the other morning when it snowed, and children were wearing pink and yellow boots and using pink umbrellas, and were all so thrilled by the rare snow. And it is not all delighting, or all disgust. On the snowy day there was a moment of irritation when a child blocked my way, on the lovely bust disgusting morning there was appreciation for Naomi when I saw two fo the ducks seemingly bow to each other. I often think of Nina’s post about the shattered oven door – how she found so much going on in one mundane experience. Daily life is so full of moments in which understanding can arise. We learn to let go of trying to make them arise, appreciate them when they do. I am itching to bubble on, but since our computer is dead again I have to write by hand and ask Sarah to decipher and pass it on to the group. One question I’d like to ask. This is Nina, writing to Howard: “It only makes sense that I need to listen and read dhamma and on and on. With so much avijja and craving what would I find when I seek to practice? The feeling of urgency points to the present moment, and if there is no sati and panna what can be done? Nothing can accelerate the process of development except when sati and panna does arise.” I think this is very important. When I see how gross my lobha is at times, should there not be samvega, should there not be an arousing of a sense of urgency? If there is, there is, but even when there is, when there is so much ignorance, what will be gained from urgency? If the man with his turban on fire strikes out at the fire, hurries to put it out, the flames might just spread deeper, fanned by his flailing! Better to ever so patiently remove the turban, which has to be unwound, not just torn off, maybe. Something to think about, but these days I find even samvega can lead to a further deepening of patience, paradoxically. Ah, the question. It comes from the next part of the same post: Nina: “It seems that it is precisely because there is not enough panna, that at this point I can only appreciate the concept of Satipatthana and how this is different from pariyatti. I expect that when the panna has been accumulated enough, then there would be no need to be reminded about ‘practice’. Pariyatti is a dhamma and is anatta, and so is patipatti, and pativedha.” I am now rereading the CMA, but am wondering where pariyatti, patipatti and pativedha fall in as dhammas? I won’t be able to read the answer for now, but I hope the question will lead to a little fruitful discussion. It sounds like a very important point! :-) Metta, Phil P.S. many thanks to Ken H for sending me copies of the Burma talks on tape. Great stuff! ==================== S: As I said, I’ll forward anything on the thread or addressed to Phil. Phil, hope you get your computer working again soon. Meanwhile, if you send any more letters (preferably short ones for decoding!!), I’m happy to help. 43352 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 10:35pm Subject: Re: doubting BK Hi Connie, Connie: to you, James, if you see this, that's con-descending from her high horse ;) James: Hehehe…clever. Really, I rarely find you to be on a high horse; however, if you could teach Sarah a thing or two about the value of looking at both sides, that would be a noble accomplishment. ;-) Metta, James 43353 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 10:36pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 149 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(s) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** When there is sammå-saòkappa there is no akusala vitakka, wrong thinking; there is no “thought of sense-pleasures”, no “thought of malice”, no “thought of harming”. When the eightfold Path is being developed the four noble Truths will be known and “unprofitable thoughts” will eventually be eradicated. We read in the “Kindred Sayings” (V, Mahå-vagga, Book XII, Chapter I, §7, thoughts) that the Buddha, while he was at Såvatthí, said to the monks: * "Monks, think not evil, unprofitable thoughts, such as: thoughts of lust, thoughts of hatred, thoughts of delusion. Why do I say so? Because, monks, these thoughts are not concerned with profit, they are not the rudiments of the holy life, they conduce not to revulsion, to dispassion, to cessation, to tranquillity, to full understanding, to the perfect wisdom, they conduce not to nibbåna. When you do think, monks, you should think thus: This is dukkha. This is the arising of dukkha. This is the ceasing of dukkha. This is the practice that leads to the ceasing of dukkha. Why do I say this? Because, monks, these thoughts are concerned with profit, they are rudiments of the holy life… they conduce to nibbåna. Wherefore an effort must be made to realize: This is dukkha. This is the arising of dukkha. This is the ceasing of dukkha. This is the practice that leads to the ceasing of dukkha." * The “thinking” referred to in this sutta is not thinking about the four noble Truths. It refers to the direct realization of the four noble Truths which are: dukkha, which is suffering, its origin, which is craving, its cessation, which is nibbåna, and the way leading to its cessation, which is the eightfold Path. When there is right mindfulness of a reality which appears, sammå-saòkappa “touches” it and then paññå can investigate its characteristic in order to know it as it is. This is the way to eventually realize the four noble Truths. At the moment of enlightenment the four noble Truths are penetrated. When the citta is lokuttara citta, sammåsaòkappa is also lokuttara. It “touches” nibbåna. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43354 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: doubting BK Hi James,(Connie & Cooranites) --- buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Connie, > > Connie: to you, James, if you see this, that's con-descending from > her high horse ;) > > James: Hehehe…clever. Really, I rarely find you to be on a high > horse; however, if you could teach Sarah a thing or two about the > value of looking at both sides, that would be a noble > accomplishment. ;-) .... S: Trust me, she tries her very best to educate me both on-list and off-list too occasionally (though I always try to encourage her to share her talents with the more open-minded members here, rather than wasting it just on my myopic eyes:-). Here’s one example I just fished out of her recent best efforts to enlighten me about both sides: *** C signing off:>>> con-de-scender *** S:signing off>> From one con-de-scender to another, *** C: o dear, when you write, it's from sarah-de-scender and I am con-de-ceiver, but i suppose it's all con-sceptual... from sceptre, those con-juring skep-sticks the magician waves to keep our judgements of the comings and goings con-fused, leading to believing 'all is one'. Actually, just writing to thank you for doing my buddanature homework - luminous mind UPs. Not really different assignments after all: a quote from The End of my "Hugo's Next Life", his "Current Practice" article [http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/cittanupassana5.pdf]: That Infinite, Eternal Creating, Unlimited Love And Intelligence Is Who You Really Are !< **** S: So now I know! I’ll try not to get back on that high horse for a while;-). Thanks for thinking of me too and glad to see you corresponding with Connie, Ken H and others meanwhile. I know Phil would be glad to hear from you, if you think I can be trusted with the courier role, that is;-). Metta, Sarah p.s Cooranites, if you managed to get through this nonsense, have a good weekend of discussion and we’ll look forward to any reports of discussions/further questions/ background descriptions/whatever ====== 43355 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 0:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo Hi Htoo (& Nina), I know you are busy these days and we’ll have to wait for more. I think all our threads are pretty well tied up neatly. Just a couple of brief comments: N:> I remember an example, given by Kh Sujin, of weak akusala citta that > is not akusala kamma: just putting sugar in one's tea. We also should > think of samalobha, ordinary lobha, and visama lobha, lobha that is > more harmful. I have seen this in a commentary. Sama means even, > visama: uneven, contrary. ... S: Yes, thank you for adding this – it was just what I was thinking of, sama and visama lobha. ... H: > It is better if we can detect akusala citta at its earliest points > soon after the base happen [arise & pass away]. I like the > explanation of 'sama' and 'visama' lobha. Kamma has different > classifications. Some have potentiative power and some have reductive > power and some have destructive power etc etc. > > Ordinary akusala may or may reveal its effect. My belief is that all > akusala cittas do have kamma. And all kamma each do carry their full > power till the last moment of arahatta-cuti-citta. > > Kamma without results may well be such ones. ... S: Yes. We should remember the four functions of kamma – generating,supporting, obstructive and destructive. To repeat what I quoted from the commentary (Abhidhammatthavibhavini) before on supporting kamma: “A wholesome or unwholesome kamma which, although unable to produce a result by itself, becomes the condition for prolonging the result of another kamma or, in keeping with the capacity of the generating kamma, becomes the condition for prolonging the activity of a result that is pleasant or unpleasant by not giving rise to the conditions which cut it off and giving rise to the conditions which enhance it, is called supporting.” .... > But unhealthy control of smile is not Dhamma even though laughing may > have akusala base. ... Yes, we all agree:-) Metta, Sarah ==== 43356 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 0:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Dear Htoo, --- htootintnaing wrote: > Htoo: There are 2 alternatives in 'kama javana cittas' if not in > arahats. They are akusala and kusala. ... S: Yes ... > If you focus on kusala or if you deviate to kusala then you will deny > that cittas that are not at the objects of dana, siila, bhavana are > kusala cittas. This means 'sincerely purely learning mind' is > performed by one of eight mahakusala cittas. ... S: IF, 'sincerely purely learning mind' really is kusala. For example, often we may be sincerely studying various subjects, including some Dhamma studies, but with ignorance. I believe the kusala moments are far and few between compared to the akusala. How about when we’re studying and there are the usual experiences through the sense doors occurring. Is there any awareness or guarding of the sense doors? Usually not. ... > If you focus on akusala then you may agree the proposal. That is > cittas that are not in killing, stealing, sexing, lying, intoxicating > are not akusala. Then you might accept 'sincerely purely learning > mind' is not akusala. If not akusala then it is one of 8 mahakusala > cittas. ... S: Definitely we cannot say this – that if it is not some kind of breaking of precepts or akusala kamma patha that it is mahakusala. ... > Htoo: I have told you above. If not alobha, adosa, amoha then they > must be with lobha, dosa, moha. This is logical inferrence. ... S: Yes, agreed!! ... <...> > Htoo: Generally akusala are much more abundant than kusala. Learing > non-religious things will invlove many javana cittas. > > Lobha is most common one when learning. Dosa may also arise when > learning. Pure moha may also arise without lobha and dosa when > learning. > > But what cittas are they when learning mind do not have lobha, dosa > and moha? ... S: Kusala – no disagreement, just a difference in emphasis, perhaps. ... <...> > Htoo: True. I try to meditate when reading. It is much more difficult > than sitting with eyes closed. I drop big attachment at its early > life and I drop big aversion at its early life. ... S: Sounds a bit too much like ‘I’ trying and dropping this and that. You’ll tell me this is just conventional language and yet it’s very easy for that idea of ‘me’ doing something to creep in all the time when we want particular results. Instead I’d encourage just understanding what is appearing at that moment, even if it’s some difficulty, frustration or idea of self doing something or trying. ... <...> > Htoo: Karuna and mudita are occasional cetasika in kusala cittas. > Metta or non-aversion is universal to all beautiful consciousness. ... S: I think we’ve discussed before how adosa (non-aversion) is ‘universal to all beautiful consciousness’ as you put it and is of many kinds and degrees. However metta is one kind of adosa which is always towards other people and doesn’t arise by any means with all beautiful consciousness. <...> > 'Right now' if it is not satipatthana, then it is not bhavana kusala > cittas. But 'right now' if javana cittas are simless that is there is > no lobha, no dosa, and no moha then they are not akusala cittas. ... S: Bhavana kusala can of course also be samatha bhavana, not just satipatthana. .... > > :-) if not akusala javana they are kusala javana cittas. But these > kusala javana cittas are not kamma patha. So they are not dana, sila, > and bhavana. They are ordinary ones. ... S: Yes, they are ordinary ones, but I believe each moment of kusala can be included in dana and sila in a wider sense. At each moment of kusala, there is renunciation from akusala. It might be good to explore this further if you have any comments sometime or Nina, Tep or others may add more. Metta, Sarah ======= 43357 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 1:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 1 Hi AndrewL, Both Jon and I appreciated your posts a lot. I’ll just respond to the first one now and leave the others til later (probably Monday). --- Andrew Levin wrote: S:> > Our hope is to understand, not to direct." > A: > WELL can't metta be practised intentionally by one after reading a > book on how to arouse metta?? (Incidentally, the conditions of other > people 'being' should be enough to extend metta, whether they are > within one's sight or not). ... S: I think the conditions are other people, but also an understanding of the characteristic of metta. It’s true that for some people it’s very natural to be friendly and helpful whenever one has an opportunity. For others, it helps to hear and read reminders. When one thinks of others’ needs instead of one’s own, then metta arises naturally. .... >This is reasonable, just as it is > reasonable to say it might take a little bit more than that, more > conditions, but I'd say it's all fair game. Finding Buddhism and > studying meditation from a particular meditation manual that > emphasized 'loving-friendliness' and the generous help of others > towards my welfare were the conditions for generating metta. These > days it seems like going through the motions, wishing each person > metta through the same sentences 'May he be well, happy, and peaceful. > May no harm come to him, ... etc' is a little dry and tiring, but I'm > going to be looking to practise metta in the future. It's one root of > virtuous action, as I am reading (one particular mode of non-hate). ... S: I’m glad to hear it and I sense you genuinely are more concerned for others’ welfare these days, Andrew. And yes, I think there’s a big difference between reciting sentences and showing loving-kindness or friendliness when we have the chance. I also appreciate that you are grateful for the generous help of others towards your welfare. Reflecting on others’ kindness can be a kind of generosity or good will too. ... > KK. I get caught up in reading U.P. posts for long times sometimes. > I think it could just be having to wait until I get out more for > things to make sense, sitting online a lot doesn't conduce to the > words of an exchange feel meaningful. ... S: I’m not sure what ‘KK’ means here? Just be patient as we all have to remind ourselves:-) Glad you’ve been reading and reflecting so much. ... > body). It also got me wishing I knew the derived types of matter too > but I knew the book was off-limits for studying at least for now. ... S: Nina’s book on ‘Rupas’ is very helpful and readable, if only for reference. But no hurry. ... > Re: Abhidhamma and moha & dosa <...> > Isn't being able to tell whether it's dosa or moha part of seeing the > reality? And thus study to clear up the issue a legitimate pursuit? ... S: Good question. Of course it’s very legitimate and it helps to consider more about the different characteristics. But in the end, the ‘study’ is of the present dhamma (reality) and if that reality is trying to distinguish states, then that thinking is what should be known. After I wrote to you, I posted this extract from ‘Cetasikas’ which touches on the same point, but here to knowing vitakka vs vicara: “The more we study the realities which are taught in the Abhidhamma, the more we see that there are many different phenomena which each have their own characteristic. They appear one at a time, but when we try to name them there is thinking of a concept instead of mindfulness of a characteristic. Sometimes a reality which thinks may appear and then we may doubt whether it is vitakka or vicåra. It is useless to try to find out which reality appears because at such a moment there is no awareness. Thinking has a characteristic which can be realized when it appears and then there is no need to name it vitakka or vicåra.” S: In other words, we need to distinguish between being aware of just what is appearing and trying to put it in a pigeon-hole, I think. We read similes about the ingredients in a curry, for example, to show that only a Buddha can really distinguish all the various ingredients exactly as they arise and appear. .... <...> > This makes me think.. what kind of ignorance are we talking about > here? Can ignorance of the true nature of reality manifest as > delusion, that is, a skewed view of some objects, instead of a proper > one, or is that part of ignorance itself. When I feel that darkness > is it ignorance built up of the true nature of realities, manifesting > as just (dark) non-knowledge of the way things are? .... S: Yes, it’s not knowing. Whenever the javana cittas are not rooted in non-attachment, non-aversion and possibly wisdom, they are rooted in ignorance. There is no awareness of any kind at such times. On our recent trip to India, we talked about the ‘black curtain of ignorance’ and this is similar to the darkness you mention. Most of the time we are living in darkness and the true nature of realities are hidden from view by the black curtain. The task of wisdom is to shed light or pull aside that curtain. Beginning to recognise this darkness or non-knowledge of the way things are is a kind of wisdom in itself, I believe. Great points and discussion. I’ll look forward to more later. Meantime, keep writing! Metta, Sarah ======== 43358 From: Joop Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 3:15am Subject: Re: Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi again, all - > > It occurs to me that the Buddhist notion of conditionality provides > another possible perspective on memory, and quite possibly the correct one. Hallo Howard Your alternative theory deserves a reward for originality, and still sounds theravadin to me. Maybe it can help describing the dynamics of the memory-process, but how about the statics, memory as a dhamma ? As an Appendix to his book 'Abhidhamma studies' Nyanaponika has added an essay with the title 'The omission of memory from the list of dhammas'. The book can be found on the internet, but no the appendix. I will try to abstract the 5 pages, but I'm not sure I understand them enough. Nyanaponika start with the information that 'sati' means 'mindfulness', and that the way it's used in the Dhammasangani, but also means 'memory'. But that meaning pays only a role in the bachground in the list of dhammas. Than he asked if it's possible that 'memory' is forgotten when the list of dhammas were composed, and he rejects that possiblility: "The list is undoubttedly the result of careful investtigation supported by introspective intuition". "… we can understand how 'remembering', that is connecting to the past, is a function of perception in general. We can now formulate the following definition: sanna is cognition as well as recognition, both being by way of selected marks. We can summarzie our findings as follows: 1 Memory, as we usuaaly understand it, is not mentioned as a separate component of a moment of consciousness because it is not a single mental factor but a complex process. 2 The mental factor that is most important for the arising of memory, is perception (sanna=sanjanana), being that kind of elementary cognition (janana) that proceeds by way of taking up, making, and remembering (i.e., identifying) marks. 3 …" etc I hope this will help you a little. Two short remarks that will not be helpful: - Memory has to do with the dimension of 'time' and that is as such a difficult aspect of the Abhidhamma, as Nyanaponika also mentions. - Memory has is - in modern thinking - also a dynamic function of the brains. So it has a rupa-aspect; perhaps one can say 'memory' is made of 'water', that's also only a hypothesis. Metta Joop 43359 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:15am Subject: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Htoo (& Nina), > > I know you are busy these days and we'll have to wait for more. I think > all our threads are pretty well tied up neatly. Just a couple of brief > comments: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Sarah and Nina, Kamma is a complicated topic. I agree with what you said in your reply post. With Metta, Htoo Naing 43360 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:43am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Dear Sarah, I just cleared off all and re-include what is to be responded from your reply-post. All other points are agreed. Here I think you have caught the point I made. ^^^ <...> > Htoo: Generally akusala are much more abundant than kusala. Learing > non-religious things will invlove many javana cittas. > > Lobha is most common one when learning. Dosa may also arise when > learning. Pure moha may also arise without lobha and dosa when > learning. > > But what cittas are they when learning mind do not have lobha, dosa > and moha? ... S: Kusala – no disagreement, just a difference in emphasis, perhaps. ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: If not uddhacca-citta and if not vicikiccha-citta, a citta is not moha-citta. I am talking on moha-citta and not on moha cetasika. These 2 new sentences open a new front. But I am trying to relate this to the above topic. So when a child is learning there are many cittas. That is a mixture of vithi cittas and bhavanga cittas. Among vithi cittas the most prominent cittas are javana cittas. The largest number of vithi cittas can be found in 'ati-mahantarammana'. There are 14 vithi cittas. Half of these vithi cittas are javana cittas. That is why I told javana cittas are the most prominent. When a child is learning there is a mixture of vithi cittas and bhavanga cittas. Among vithi cittas, the most abundant cittas are javana cittas. His learning is not daana, siila, bhavanaa. No one will say 'that child is doing daana or siila or bhavanaa when he is reading or learning'. But there are javana cittas. These cittas are not kiriya cittas. So they have to be akusala cittas or kusala cittas. He is not doing daana, siila, bhavana. So what will you say? Again he is not killing, stealing, sexing, lying, intoxicating. Does he do any akusala? What will you say? He is clearly learning. He is following the meaning of things what he has been studying. Apparaently he is not in vicikicchaa, which is moha-cittas. I mean his javana cittas when learning are not vicikicchaa cittas. Uddhacca cittas may happen. But not all the time. So mostly he is not in moha-javana. As he is learning, there is no dosa except the time when he is angry with his power of understandability. So apparent there are 2 alternatives. 1. mahakusala cittas as javana cittas 2. lobha muula akusala cittas as javana cittas Mahakusala cittas are 8 and 4 cittas are not accompanied by pannindriya cetasikas. Then 4 cittas left and they are called dvihetuka cittas. That is they have alobha and adosa as 2 root cetasikas. Lobha muula akusala cittas are also dvihetuka cittas. Their roots are lobha and moha cetasika. So the child is learning. There are javana cittas. These javana have 2 roots whatever they are kusala or akusala if there is no panna in hamakusala cittas. 2 alternatives are now 1. lobha and moha 2. alobha and adosa If there is NO ADOSA all javana cittas are not akusala citta. Because ADOSA cetasika always accompanies all kusala cittas. Sometimes, lobha is so subtle to be detected. The differentiating point here is adosa cetasika. I like the assumption that 'purely learning mind' is not akusala cittas. With Metta, Htoo Naing 43361 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, TG - In a message dated 3/17/05 10:54:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Howard: > I'm saying that the Dhamma doesn't countenance "causal forces", but > merely this/that conditionality. > > Hi Howard > > I completely disagree with the above assessment but that's no shock is it? > ;-) The suttas are replete with the Buddha demonstrating causal forces at > work > both physically and mentally. > > TG > ======================== Life would turn shockingly dull were we to start agreeing on too much!! ;-)) 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) 43362 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:50pm Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi, Ken - In a message dated 3/17/05 11:12:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > Not that I am complaining about my mark :-) but I would like some > clarification on the chariot question. I wrote: > > "When the various components that make up a chariot are correctly > assembled, a chariot is said to exist: So too, when the five > khandhas are correctly assembled (arise together in the same moment) > a living being is said to exist." > > So I didn't say there was a momentary coming together of the chariot > parts. If anything, I would have said the opposite. Chariots and > their parts are not anicca: they lie around gathering dust for > years. > > You probably meant to say that the coming together of the five > khandhas was not explicitly momentary (as described in the suttas). > Maybe not, but in the context of the Dhamma as a whole, that > interpretation is unavoidable. > > ========================= I agree that there is repeated, momentary coming-together of khandhic elements, but that the chariot simile doesn't make that point. You added it on about the khandhas, and I think it is quite valid, but just isn't pointed to by that simile. 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) 43363 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 0:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Joop - Thanks for your reply. The "rupa" ideas you introduce at the end of your post are interesting. As regards Ven Nyanaponika's remarks on memory - and I own his book - I think he is primarily concerned with why memory is not explicitly mentioned in the Abhidhamma rather than what its exact nature is. My "alternative" perspective really comes down to there being occurrences of remembering (i.e., particular cognitive events) but not memories - i.e., memory is a category of operation (possibly several, as the venerable points out) conditioned by the occurrence of earlier (some *way* earlier) cognitive events in much the same way as kamma vipaka can occur even lifetimes after the conditioning kamma, when, finally, other supporting conditions have come to pass required for the kammic promissory note to be paid. So, my tentative position is that your question "... but how about the statics, memory as a dhamma?" would be answered by this alternative theory to the effect that there are no statics in this matter, only dynamics. Your post follows below in its entirety [It's not overly long] without further comment by me. With metta, Howard In a message dated 3/18/05 6:16:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, jwromeijn@y... writes: > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi again, all - > > > > It occurs to me that the Buddhist notion of conditionality > provides > >another possible perspective on memory, and quite possibly the > correct one. > > Hallo Howard > > Your alternative theory deserves a reward for originality, and still > sounds theravadin to me. Maybe it can help describing the dynamics of > the memory-process, but how about the statics, memory as a dhamma ? > As an Appendix to his book 'Abhidhamma studies' Nyanaponika has added > an essay with the title 'The omission of memory from the list of > dhammas'. > The book can be found on the internet, but no the appendix. I will > try to abstract the 5 pages, but I'm not sure I understand them > enough. > > Nyanaponika start with the information that 'sati' > means 'mindfulness', and that the way it's used in the Dhammasangani, > but also means 'memory'. But that meaning pays only a role in the > bachground in the list of dhammas. > Than he asked if it's possible that 'memory' is forgotten when the > list of dhammas were composed, and he rejects that possiblility: "The > list is undoubttedly the result of careful investtigation supported > by introspective intuition". > "… we can understand how 'remembering', that is connecting to the > past, is a function of perception in general. We can now formulate > the following definition: sanna is cognition as well as recognition, > both being by way of selected marks. We can summarzie our findings as > follows: > 1 Memory, as we usuaaly understand it, is not mentioned as a separate > component of a moment of consciousness because it is not a single > mental factor but a complex process. > 2 The mental factor that is most important for the arising of memory, > is perception (sanna=sanjanana), being that kind of elementary > cognition (janana) that proceeds by way of taking up, making, and > remembering (i.e., identifying) marks. > 3 …" etc > > I hope this will help you a little. Two short remarks that will not > be helpful: > - Memory has to do with the dimension of 'time' and that is as such a > difficult aspect of the Abhidhamma, as Nyanaponika also mentions. > - Memory has is - in modern thinking - also a dynamic function of the > brains. So it has a rupa-aspect; perhaps one can say 'memory' is made > of 'water', that's also only a hypothesis. > > Metta > > Joop > /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) 43364 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 7:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma in the restaurant Hi Sarah, Howard, Matheesh, Larry and all, Before the soup I read Sarah's post to Lodewijk which he found very good and sympathetic. I quote (with snips) what we found very helpful: > It’s true as you and Lodewijk said, that we live in a world with other > people and have to take responsibility including the resisting of our own > and others’ harmful deeds.... > On the contrary,as I see it, by understanding more about the dhammas > appearing in a day, we learn to be more honest and sincere about our > motives and intentions and of course, we learn to see what the real > problems in our life are. We’re so used to hiding behind the black curtain > of ignorance, that usually we’re not brave enough to face up to our > present lobha, dosa and moha. N: Lodewijk agreed with the black curtain. And so important that the Abhidhamma helps us to be more sincere as to what our cittas are. Lodewijk exclaimed: the perfection of truthfulness (he is reading this on the disc right now). Sarah: As Nina just wrote to another friend: “These > are the source of all problems in life, not the other people, not the > situation. ... > We think we or our governments can play a major role in the results that > others will experience, but this is because we have so little real > appreciation of kamma and its results and of other complex conditions...... Of > course, this doesn’t mean we don’t do our best to help others in whatever > ways we can, but we know that we have very limited abilities to really > affect outcomes and the greatest help we can offer when we have a chance > is by understanding and sharing the Dhamma with anyone who might benefit. >.... Whilst we dwell on others' unwholesome acts or intentions, > the only dhamma that can be known relates to our present mental states. > Yes, it’s quite wrong if we think it’s useless to do anything or if > everything is predetermined. .. L: Lodewijk remarked that if we say: just conditions that it can be misinterpreted as fatalism. But Sarah explained this clearly. We also talked about Howard's recent posts on concepts. He said: end quote. Citta can know or cognize anything: what is real and what is imagined, an illusion. whatever citta cognizes is at that moment object-condition for citta. The Abhidhamma is sparse in it explanation of concepts. In the Patthana concept is only mentioned under object condition, not under strong dependence of object. And under natural strong dependence-condition, such as climate and friends. Elsewhere: concept is under dhammaarammana, experienced only through the mind-door. Of course names, concepts and similes are used, but merely to explain realities. That is all. Why this scarcity? Our usual way of life is with concepts, we are thinking of them the whole day. The Tipitaka stresses: the development of understanding of the khandhas, the elements, the aayatanas, sensefields. It is hight time we learn about these, life is too short. This kind of understanding leads to detachment, to liberation. Investigation of thinking of concepts and how the citta operates in doing that does not lead to the goal. Not the concepts, but the citta which thinks should be investigated, is it kusala or akusala, even now? Life is the present moment, the present moment should be understood as it is. If citta is not intent on dana, sila or bhavana citta thinks in an akusala way, even now. The meditation subject of samatha is a concept, but then citta thinks in the wholesome way. In vipassana, the object is not a concept but a nama or rupa. The citta which thinks is nama, not self, and eventually it can be realized as such. The three characteristics of *realities* should be penetrated. *** We then talked about the six pairs, sobhana cetasikas that have to support each kusala citta. We just study these with Larry. At first Lodewijk looked somewhat incredulous when I talked about lightness crushing the sluggishness of sloth and torpor and malleability crushing the rigidity of wrong view and conceit. I explained how necessary all these sobhana cetasikas are for the functioning of kusala citta. They are all in the Dhammasangani, the first Book of the Abhidhamma. One can be so rigid and stubborn in one's views, or because of conceit. Then one does not want to listen to true Dhamma, too conceited. Lightness makes citta alert and quick to react when there is an opportunity for kusala. I gave an example of the quick reactions of Kh. Sujin and other friends whenever there is an opportunity to help here or over there. No hesitation. There are always opportunities for sila, refraining from complaining, when at the table near us someone smokes, or keeps on using his mobile phone. Or for patience, like we did during many years, having dinner with my father each Sunday, also when we found it heavy to do this. Lodewijk agreed: these six pairs seem to be theoretical but upon further reflection they can be led back to each moment of daily life, and this is true for the whole Abhidhamma he said. He wondered whether it is right to enjoy such nice food as we did in the restaurant, whether we do not accumulate more and more attachment. The Dhamma might wear away and attachment will increase. I said, no, understanding all such moments will lead to detachment. We cannot force ourselves to lead a monk's life, but understanding should be developed naturally, also of attachment. And, as I said before, the Commentary said that each good deed is nekhamma, renunciation. You renounce your own comfort. You do not seek yourself. **** Nina. 43365 From: connie Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 8:00am Subject: Re: BB's art Hi, James, Sarah, Just to say, we're always giving things meaning in the context of our own understanding. I don't think we ever really do see things from anyone else's p.o.v. so all the sides we think we're looking at are our own and any arguments are with ourselves. How can I say "I take your meaning" when it's something I've imposed on mere visual objects? Basically, I ignore the larger background, pull out the black squiggles punctuating it & 'make sense' (or not) of them. I don't stop at just a literal meaning we might conventionally agree on, but take the gift of your words and form up a mental image of you, pretending that 'you' are not just my own figure of speech. I guess since I've just gotten off one horse, I'm fence sitting now. BB's article's about PS, but the following portion reminds me of a Sarah-RobM-Htoo and others' thread about kamma -vs- accumulations. When I first read it, VN's "vipaakacetanaa ... is a plain self-contradiction" made sense to me, but BB convinced me otherwise. [Smiling... this is good... a barrel race (a certain rodeo event & a barrel racer being the last 'real horse' I remember riding) needs three barrels... but enough of my nonsense]. peace, connie ...Ven. ~Naa.naviira derides the commentarial notion that naamaruupa in the PS formulation is vipaaka. He points out that naama includes cetanaa, volition or intention, and this leads the Commentary to speak of vipaakacetanaa: "But the Buddha has said (AN 6:63/iii,415) that kamma is cetanaa (action is intention), and the notion of vipaakacetanaa, consequently, is a plain self-contradiction." Here again the commentarial position can easily be defended. The Buddha's full statement should be considered first: "It is volition, monks, that I call kamma. Having willed (or intended), one does kamma by body, speech, or mind." The Buddha's utterance does not establish a mathematical equivalence between cetanaa and kamma, such that every instance of volition must be considered kamma. As the second part of his statement shows, his words mean that cetanaa is the decisive factor in action, that which motivates action and confers upon action the ethical significance intrinsic to the idea of kamma. This implies that the ethical evaluation of a deed is to be based on the cetanaa from which it springs, so that a deed has no kammic efficacy apart from the cetanaa to which it gives expression. The statement does not imply that cetanaa (in the non-arahant) is always and invariably kamma. In order to see that the notion of vipaakacetanaa is not self-contradictory nor even unintelligible, we need only consider the statements occasionally found in the Suttas about naamaruupa descending into the womb or taking shape in the womb (e.g. DN 15/ii,63; also #17 above). It is undeniable that the naamaruupa that "descends" into the womb is the result of past kamma, hence vipaaka. Yet this naama includes cetanaa, and hence that cetanaa too must be vipaaka. Further, the Suttas establish that cetanaa, as the chief factor in the fourth aggregate (the sa"nkhaarakkhandha), is present on every occasion of experience. A significant portion of experience is vipaaka, and thus the cetanaa intrinsic to this experience must be vipaaka. When one experiences feeling as the result of past kamma, the cetanaa coexisting with that feeling must be vipaaka too. The Commentaries squarely confront the problem of cetanaa in resultant states of consciousness and explain how this cetanaa can perform the distinct function of cetanaa without constituting kamma in the common sense of that word. (See Atthasaalinii, pp. 87-88; The Expositor (PTS trans.), pp. 116-17.) 43366 From: Andrew Levin Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 9:23am Subject: Re: New view on satipatthana 1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi AndrewL, > > Both Jon and I appreciated your posts a lot. I'll just respond to the > first one now and leave the others til later (probably Monday). > > --- Andrew Levin wrote: > S:> > Our hope is to understand, not to direct." > > > A: > WELL can't metta be practised intentionally by one after reading a > > book on how to arouse metta?? (Incidentally, the conditions of other > > people 'being' should be enough to extend metta, whether they are > > within one's sight or not). > ... > S: I think the conditions are other people, but also an understanding of > the characteristic of metta. It's true that for some people it's very > natural to be friendly and helpful whenever one has an opportunity. For > others, it helps to hear and read reminders. When one thinks of others?> needs instead of one's own, then metta arises naturally. Possibly. Let me tell you, though the first sprinkles of metta I gave to my friends were small, and the result of numerous wishes for their welfare, once I had loving-kindness going, it seemed love took on a mind of its own and everyone in sight I had love for. I don't know if it was metta specifically, but it was definitely non-hate. Creating more metta will still be a challenge, as will maintaining it, but reading about metta and harmlessness has helped. I have sent out thoughts of harmlessness to my ex's, over a mile past my house from my bedroom when I was first being introduced to dharma. Less rigid thought patterns, and getting metta to flow, was how it was done. This brings me to a point I should have made earlier. I still want you to know that I think people can follow the instructions from a book, from an online PDF, and create metta, and do contemplations and meditations as found in Vism. and countless other, modern, and ancient texts. In the Vism, do we not have the statement that for repulsiveness of the body meditation one should go to a good friend, and learn the skills? One has to recite the names of the body parts orally and mentally for just under a year and learn other skills as well. Then one goes to a secluded place and begins contemplating on each of the body parts until one becomes clearest. I brought up the additional example of having read a PDF where the instructor recommended one find a characteristic or manifestation of each element in a specific part of the body, say, the mouth, and go on to try to detect similar qualities throughout the body to eventually be mindful of the elements throughuot the entire body. This, too, is sort of done by a person intentionally, a deliberate practise. However this is not just waiting for conditions to come up. Additionally, you can look at the nine charnel contemplations as an example of something we must deliberately do (if we choose to do it, that is), not just fit into daily life. And even if we do do Abhidhamma in 'daily life' I read in Nina's book that we are to be mindful of realities appearing in the moment. Isn't this similar to what I proposed, being mindful in the present moment, only making my practise the focus of my life, not having my practise be recognizing something here and there in a completely diferent life. I have given you the example of sati, of how I have established mindfulness of the entire body, which transfers over to mindfulness in sitting meditation. Nina proposes to counter ignorance or aversion we need mindfulness. Again, what do you see this mindfulness as. And how would you distinguish the kind of mindfulness I talk about, being aroused intentionally, vs the kind of mindfulness that you speak about that is for one nama or rupa, but does not have the four foundations of mindfulness as its proximate cause (instead discussing the teachings?)? Please forgive me if I addressed this in one of the other two posts on this thread, I just feel it's an essesntial point. If you can, please go back to where I described this originally and think about it. We should be able to reconcile these two views, don't you think? > .... > >This is reasonable, just as it is > > reasonable to say it might take a little bit more than that, more > > conditions, but I'd say it's all fair game. Finding Buddhism and > > studying meditation from a particular meditation manual that > > emphasized 'loving-friendliness' and the generous help of others > > towards my welfare were the conditions for generating metta. These > > days it seems like going through the motions, wishing each person > > metta through the same sentences 'May he be well, happy, and peaceful. > > May no harm come to him, ... etc' is a little dry and tiring, but I'm > > going to be looking to practise metta in the future. It's one root of > > virtuous action, as I am reading (one particular mode of non-hate). > ... > S: I'm glad to hear it and I sense you genuinely are more concerned for > others?welfare these days, Andrew. And yes, I think there's a big > difference between reciting sentences and showing loving-kindness or > friendliness when we have the chance. I also appreciate that you are > grateful for the generous help of others towards your welfare. Reflecting > on others?kindness can be a kind of generosity or good will too. > ... No, no. These are days of yore. I am acting very often out of greed, and this is something I would like to work on, developing generosity and detachment, and to strengthen my renunciation. Similarly with non-hate and loving-kindness, or just plain kindness and harmlessness. > > KK. I get caught up in reading U.P. posts for long times sometimes. > > I think it could just be having to wait until I get out more for > > things to make sense, sitting online a lot doesn't conduce to the > > words of an exchange feel meaningful. > ... > S: I'm not sure what `KK?means here? > Just be patient as we all have to remind ourselves:-) Glad you've been > reading and reflecting so much. > ... KK is K is OK. Whence reflection? > > > body). It also got me wishing I knew the derived types of matter too > > but I knew the book was off-limits for studying at least for now. > ... > S: Nina's book on `Rupas?is very helpful and readable, if only for > reference. But no hurry. > ... > > Re: Abhidhamma and moha & dosa > <...> > > Isn't being able to tell whether it's dosa or moha part of seeing the > > reality? And thus study to clear up the issue a legitimate pursuit? > ... > S: Good question. Of course it's very legitimate and it helps to consider > more about the different characteristics. But in the end, the `study?is > of the present dhamma (reality) and if that reality is trying to > distinguish states, then that thinking is what should be known. > Right but can't we endeavor to learn about different realities by way of thinking ourselves into learning about them, say, by reading about the characteristics of dosa, moha, and lobha, in Nina's 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life?' > After I wrote to you, I posted this extract from `Cetasikas?which touches > on the same point, but here to knowing vitakka vs vicara: > > "The more we study the realities which are taught in the Abhidhamma, the > more we see that there are many different phenomena which each have their > own characteristic. They appear one at a time, but when we try to name > them there is thinking of a concept instead of mindfulness of a > characteristic. > :-/ I'm with you for non-conceptual awareness, but would you believe me if a noble one told me to note 'aversion, aversion' where it appears? > Sometimes a reality which thinks may appear and then we may doubt whether > it is vitakka or vicåra. It is useless to try to find out which reality > appears because at such a moment there is no awareness. Thinking has a > characteristic which can be realized when it appears and then there is no > need to name it vitakka or vicåra.?> > S: In other words, we need to distinguish between being aware of just what > is appearing and trying to put it in a pigeon-hole, I think. We read > similes about the ingredients in a curry, for example, to show that only a > Buddha can really distinguish all the various ingredients exactly as they > arise and appear. > .... No pigeon hole. Just know it for what it is. By studying nama and rupa and how they can appear, function, and manifestation. > <...> > > This makes me think.. what kind of ignorance are we talking about > > here? Can ignorance of the true nature of reality manifest as > > delusion, that is, a skewed view of some objects, instead of a proper > > one, or is that part of ignorance itself. When I feel that darkness > > is it ignorance built up of the true nature of realities, manifesting > > as just (dark) non-knowledge of the way things are? > .... > S: Yes, it's not knowing. Whenever the javana cittas are not rooted in > non-attachment, non-aversion and possibly wisdom, they are rooted in > ignorance. There is no awareness of any kind at such times. On our recent > trip to India, we talked about the `black curtain of ignorance?and this > is similar to the darkness you mention. Most of the time we are living in > darkness and the true nature of realities are hidden from view by the > black curtain. The task of wisdom is to shed light or pull aside that > curtain. > > Beginning to recognise this darkness or non-knowledge of the way things > are is a kind of wisdom in itself, I believe. > Eh. It feels way more 'dark' darkness than 'wisdom' darkness. But maybe it's a start. > Great points and discussion. I'll look forward to more later. Meantime, > keep writing! > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== Sorry if this one's a little messy, I had to rush to get the post in. 45-50 minutes for computer group. Bye A.L. 43367 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:38am Subject: Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi all - In the Honeyball Sutta the Buddha says that what one feels one perceives (or recognizes); that is, sa~n~na depends on vedana. Nowhere, I believe, is it said that vedana depends on sa~n~na. Now according to Abhidhamma, vedana and sa~n~na are universals that *co-occur* in every mindstate. Given that this is so, I wonder in what what sense there holds the asymmetrical dependence of sa~n~na on vedana. In what sense is vedana requisite for sa~n~na but not vice-versa? If there were mindstates with sa~n~na present but not vedana, yet in every state with vedana also there were sa~n~na, then the asymmetrical dependence would be clear. But this not being the case, the matter is unclear. I would like a clarification of this if possible. 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) 43368 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:51am Subject: Re: BB's art Hi Connie, Thanks for the post, which you addressed to me, but I am not quite sure how to respond. It seems as if you are maybe just thinking out loud? Not sure. Anyway, I will throw in a few comments to express my appreciation for your efforts. No need to respond if you don't feel like it: Connie: Just to say, we're always giving things meaning in the context of our own understanding. I don't think we ever really do see things from anyone else's p.o.v. so all the sides we think we're looking at are our own and any arguments are with ourselves. James: Yes, I agree with you…but we have to try. What else can we do? Maybe all of us should just shut up and close down this group? Maybe so, but then Sarah would have nothing to do in her spare time! ;-)) (Just kidding). Connie: When I first read it, VN's "vipaakacetanaa ... is a plain self-contradiction" made sense to me, but BB convinced me otherwise. James: I know what you mean! For some reason, I find myself agreeing with both of them. It is very confusing. Really, I have lost interest in the two articles and I don't think I will post any more about it. Ultimately, it comes down to an interpretation of Pali words and both sides find sufficient sutta quotes to defend their particular position. Are they both right? Hmmm…I don't know. I just wish someone had asked the Buddha to more thoroughly explain DO before he entered parinibbana- but you know where wishing gets ya! ;-) Metta, James PS. BTW, I found BK's book `Contemplation of the Mind' to be incredibly boring and confusing. Honestly, I got halfway through and couldn't finish reading it. Please, don't judge the value and skill of meditation based on that book. In my experience, it is the worst book on meditation I have ever read. :( 43369 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 7:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na In a message dated 3/18/2005 9:45:12 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Hi all - In the Honeyball Sutta the Buddha says that what one feels one perceives (or recognizes); that is, sa~n~na depends on vedana. Nowhere, I believe, is it said that vedana depends on sa~n~na. Now according to Abhidhamma, vedana and sa~n~na are universals that *co-occur* in every mindstate. Given that this is so, I wonder in what what sense there holds the asymmetrical dependence of sa~n~na on vedana. In what sense is vedana requisite for sa~n~na but not vice-versa? If there were mindstates with sa~n~na present but not vedana, yet in every state with vedana also there were sa~n~na, then the asymmetrical dependence would be clear. But this not being the case, the matter is unclear. I would like a clarification of this if possible. With metta, Howard Hi Howard Check out Connected Discourses of the Buddha pages 1531 - 1532. The two Suttas on Dwelling. Reading these suttas one has to wonder if perception is a "universal." At any rate, I think feeling is the bare experience while perception and thinking are progressively more complex mental operations. Feeling is the "base" IMO, and for all practical purposes, perceptions are conjoined with it because they are so closely linked. But perceptions are still outgrowths from feelings as I understand it. However, in the same suttas mentioned above, the Buddha does say "there is feeling with perception as condition." In my way of thinking about that...an initial feeling instigated the perception and the perception, in turn, is a condition instigating feelings based on that. TG 43370 From: Frank Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 0:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na I don't know what the abidhamma says, but in either M or S nikaya, the Buddha says something to the effect of: 1) with contact (phassa) as a requisite condition, there is feeling. 2) with contact as a requisite condition, there is perception (sanna) 3) with contact as a requisite condition, there is volition (sankhara) To me, this implies that once there is contact/phassa/sensory impingement, feeling+perception+volition occur simultaneously. The critical part of the dependent origination formula referenced so frequently (with feeling as requisite condition, there is craving), So my take on this is that when phassa/contact occurs, you get a cocktail of the 3 aggregates feeling+volition+perception that arise as a result. If one has deluded perception+volition, then the result would be craving or its siamese twin aversion. If one has correct perception + correct volition in that instant, then the dukkha chain breaks down. Feeling aggregate in an arahant and a worldling in that instant is no different according to my understanding. upasaka@a... wrote: Hi all - In the Honeyball Sutta the Buddha says that what one feels one perceives (or recognizes); that is, sa~n~na depends on vedana. Nowhere, I believe, is it said that vedana depends on sa~n~na. Now according to Abhidhamma, vedana and sa~n~na are universals that *co-occur* in every mindstate. Given that this is so, I wonder in what what sense there holds the asymmetrical dependence of sa~n~na on vedana. In what sense is vedana requisite for sa~n~na but not vice-versa? If there were mindstates with sa~n~na present but not vedana, yet in every state with vedana also there were sa~n~na, then the asymmetrical dependence would be clear. But this not being the case, the matter is unclear. I would like a clarification of this if possible. 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) 43371 From: matheesha Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 1:34pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Nina, N:>Saññaa that accompanies each citta remembers. M: Yes, memory is a phenomena which the suttas dont seem to elaborate on. I would like to think that the dhamma is ultimately experiential. If the sanna of every pancaskanda which arises contains past memories (have I understood it wrongly?) then one must be give rise to all memories each time sanna comes into being (maybe not?). Nevertheless it is good to have an abhidhammic explanation for it. I also wondered about how memories form. Does it have an element of attachment (upadana) do you think? (ie - is it an act of attachment?). N:The maggacitta eradicates defilements and experiences the unconditioned element, nibbaana. The phala citta is the lokuttara vipaakacitta that succeeds the maggacitta immediately in the same process, and this also experiences > nibbaana. M: Few questions here. How can an unconditioned element be experienced? Shouldnt there be no experience of it? (ie- identified by not having felt anything ..sort of like sleep?) Does the lokuttara vipaka citta mean that phala is arising as an Effect of the magga citta, (which is the Cause)? Does abhidhamma explain why defilements are eradicated with magga citta? Is it possible for say ..a sothapanna to experience phala citta again on a later date at will? I have heard this mentioned in some schools of theravada meditation. N:> Since defilements are deeply rooted, they are eradicated in the subsequent > stages of enlightenment, until they are all eradicated at the fourth stage, > the stage of the arahat. M: Interestingly i wonder if it is possible for there to be more than just the 4 x 2 magga-phala citta depending on the maturity of the mental faculties of the practitioner. But I would suspect that the answer is no :) The suttas seem to suggest that there maybe other ways of getting rid of defilements as well. Would the abhidhamma support this? The suttas also seem to suggest that nibbana is possible by just using void/emptiness/letting go as an object of meditation. Would abhidhamma insist on udaya-vya nana/insight knowledge of impermenence to give rise to magga-phala citta? N:> However, for us now it is more important to understand the right Path > leading to enlightenment. M: Yes, but I feel my needs are met in that department :) I'm trying to find out what abidhamma provides as explanation for things we experience while on the path. Thank you, Metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Matheesha, > op 17-03-2005 08:33 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: > >> N: We have accumulated so much attachment and ignorance. > > > > M:This idea of accumilation is interesting. Does the word skandas > > refer to the fact that certain things can accumilate? If they do they > > must be the same as thinking habits/memory is it not? > N: Each citta (viññaa.nakkhandha) falls away but since it is immediately > succeeded by the next one there are conditions for accumulating good and bad > inclinations (the formations khandha), all experiences, all we learnt, from > moment to moment, from life to life. > When we think of life as an uninterrupted series of cittas, the fact of > accumulation becomes more understandable. > Indeed, you can notice that habits are formed, what you experienced is > remembered. Saññaa that accompanies each citta remembers. We can remember > things that happened long ago. What has been accumulated is a condition for > the arising again of akusala citta and cetasikas, and of kusala citta and > sobhana cetasikas. Paññaa, a sobhana cetasika, is also accumulated and can > develop from life to life. > Kamma, good and evil deeds, are accumulated and can produce result, even in > future lives. > M: What does abhidhamma state about magga and phala citta. This is > > another area i would like to explore. > N: When paññaa has been developed in stages of insight it can become > accomplished to the degree that enlightenment can be attained. The > maggacitta eradicates defilements and experiences the unconditioned element, > nibbaana. The phala citta is the lokuttara vipaakacitta that succeeds the > maggacitta immediately in the same process, and this also experiences > nibbaana. > Since defilements are deeply rooted, they are eradicated in the subsequent > stages of enlightenment, until they are all eradicated at the fourth stage, > the stage of the arahat. > However, for us now it is more important to understand the right Path > leading to enlightenment. > Nina. 43372 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 8:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, TG - In a message dated 3/18/05 3:16:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Howard > > Check out Connected Discourses of the Buddha pages 1531 - 1532. The two > Suttas on Dwelling. Reading these suttas one has to wonder if perception is > a > "universal." > ------------------------------- Howard: Thanks. I'll check them. ------------------------------ > > At any rate, I think feeling is the bare experience while perception and > thinking are progressively more complex mental operations. > ----------------------------- Howard: What you describe here sounds more like vi~n~nana to me. Vedana is experiencing as pleasant, unpleasant, or affectively neutral, I believe. ------------------------------ Feeling is the "base" > > IMO, and for all practical purposes, perceptions are conjoined with it > because > they are so closely linked. But perceptions are still outgrowths from > feelings as I understand it. > > However, in the same suttas mentioned above, the Buddha does say "there is > feeling with perception as condition." > ------------------------------- Howard: Interesting! I'll definitely ck those suttas. -------------------------------- In my way of thinking about that...an > > initial feeling instigated the perception and the perception, in turn, is a > condition instigating feelings based on that. > > TG > > ======================= 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) 43373 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 8:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, Frank - In a message dated 3/18/05 3:56:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, frank@4... writes: > > I don't know what the abidhamma says, but in either M or S nikaya, > the Buddha says something to the effect of: > > 1) with contact (phassa) as a requisite condition, there is feeling. > 2) with contact as a requisite condition, there is perception (sanna) > 3) with contact as a requisite condition, there is volition (sankhara) > ------------------------------------ Howard: (1) Occurs in the Honeyball Sutta, and (2) is transitively implied in that same sutta. As to (3), I'm not so sure. Certainly in dependent origination, the reverse dependency holds. Of course, treating the scheme as a wheel every link depends on every other, but the primary dependency seems to be sankhara --> phassa. Can you possibly find the sutta source for (3)? ------------------------------------- > > To me, this implies that once there is contact/phassa/sensory impingement, > feeling+perception+volition occur simultaneously. > ------------------------------------ Howard: It makes it possible that they occur simultaneously, but not necessary. This isn't a logical implication. That condition A is needed for conditions B, C, and D doen't imply that B, C, and D be simultaneous. ------------------------------------ > > The critical part of the dependent origination formula referenced so > frequently (with feeling as requisite condition, there is craving), > > So my take on this is that when phassa/contact occurs, you get a cocktail of > the 3 aggregates feeling+volition+perception that arise as a result. If one > has deluded perception+volition, then the result would be craving or its > siamese twin aversion. If one has correct perception + correct volition in that > instant, then the dukkha chain breaks down. Feeling aggregate in an arahant > and a worldling in that instant is no different according to 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) 43374 From: gazita2002 Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 2:06pm Subject: Re: alleywalk Dear Connie, Nina, Rob, Kel & others, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Dear Nina, Robert, Kel, > > Gradual Sayings, V, III, 29 (Book of the Fives). The alley-walk. > "There are five benefits of walking, monks. What five? Endurance for a > long journey; endurance for striving; smallness of obstacles; thorough > digestion of food and drink taken; samaadhi obtained from walking lasts a > long time. These, indeed, monks, are five benefits of walking." This is > the ninth. > > thank you, > connie Azita: Can anyone tell me what is meant by 'smallness of obstacles' in the context of the above? It seems to me to be the odd one out. Maybe when the monks walked, they used a special path, one with no fallen trees to climb over or creeks to cross, as is the situation when I go bushwalking. 43375 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 9:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi again, TG - In a message dated 3/18/05 3:16:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > However, in the same suttas mentioned above, the Buddha does say "there is > feeling with perception as condition." =================== I have read the suttas. I'm not so sure that the "conditioning" is quite what we mean by that. The commentary given there says that feeling conditioned by thinking pertains to the 1st jhana, and feeling conditioned by perception pertains to jhanas 2 through 7. Now, the 1st jhana is strongly characterized by vitakka and vicara, and the 8th jhana is that of "neither perception nor not perception". So, I think that "with condition" in these suttas may carry a meaning more along the lines of "associated with". As to not all mindstates involving sa~n~na, well, I suppose that 8th-jhana states might fall into that category. But I doubt it. Sa~n~na is not a one-dimensional operation. It seems to be a two-mode operation. At times, sa~n~na does "marking". At other times it does recognition. Now it seems to me that sa~n~na must be operative as a marking operation during the 8th jhana, because upon withdrawal from the jhana, a review of the states in the 8th jhana is possible (as spelled out in the Anupada Sutta). 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) 43376 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 9:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na In a message dated 3/18/2005 2:39:52 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: I have read the suttas. I'm not so sure that the "conditioning" is quite what we mean by that. The commentary given there says that feeling conditioned by thinking pertains to the 1st jhana, and feeling conditioned by perception pertains to jhanas 2 through 7. Now, the 1st jhana is strongly characterized by vitakka and vicara, and the 8th jhana is that of "neither perception nor not perception". So, I think that "with condition" in these suttas may carry a meaning more along the lines of "associated with". As to not all mindstates involving sa~n~na, well, I suppose that 8th-jhana states might fall into that category. But I doubt it. Sa~n~na is not a one-dimensional operation. It seems to be a two-mode operation. At times, sa~n~na does "marking". At other times it does recognition. Now it seems to me that sa~n~na must be operative as a marking operation during the 8th jhana, because upon withdrawal from the jhana, a review of the states in the 8th jhana is possible (as spelled out in the Anupada Sutta). With metta, Howard Hi Howard That all sounds reasonable to me. I don't necessarily follow the notes as gospel or limit an interpretation to the notes, but the notes sounded reasonable too. Regarding the 8th jhana, the notes don't help because its ambiguous. The Sutta says no perception, whereas the 8th jhana is sort of a fuzzy one. TG 43377 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Frank In a message dated 3/18/2005 12:56:48 PM Pacific Standard Time, frank@4... writes: I don't know what the abidhamma says, but in either M or S nikaya, the Buddha says something to the effect of: 1) with contact (phassa) as a requisite condition, there is feeling. 2) with contact as a requisite condition, there is perception (sanna) 3) with contact as a requisite condition, there is volition (sankhara) To me, this implies that once there is contact/phassa/sensory impingement, feeling+perception+volition occur simultaneously. The critical part of the dependent origination formula referenced so frequently (with feeling as requisite condition, there is craving), So my take on this is that when phassa/contact occurs, you get a cocktail of the 3 aggregates feeling+volition+perception that arise as a result. If one has deluded perception+volition, then the result would be craving or its siamese twin aversion. If one has correct perception + correct volition in that instant, then the dukkha chain breaks down. Feeling aggregate in an arahant and a worldling in that instant is no different according to my understanding. TG I like this exposition and I really like the way you described it as a "cocktail" of aggregates. Very funny for a teaching that doesn't look to favorably at drinking. Anyway, you're probably right with all you wrote but I have one other idea to consider. Although "contact" is indeed the condition for feeling, perception, and mental formations ... perhaps its not "the same contact." Perhaps its a series of very quick cascading contacts. And perhaps its both depending on the states in question. I.E., some arise simultaneously and some arise in rapid sequence yet both because of contact. TG 43378 From: gazita2002 Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 3:09pm Subject: Re: Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 142 - Nina Dear Nina and Matheesha, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Azita and Matheesha, > Azita wrote:'Its hard for me to 'match up' what I read and my everyday life, > if you know what I mean?' > Matheesha, this is also the point you touched on when you said: 'So i wonder > if > abhidhamma is an predominantly theoretical body of work commenting > on the actual'. > This is something that cannot be explained in one post, but it is very > useful for all of us if you bring up what seems theoretical, and also what > you see as an inconsistency between sutta and abhidhamma. It is an > opportunity to go deeper into the subject of Abhidhamma. Azita: I feel like I make no progress :-( even going backwards. For example, I'm reading dhamma books, listening to tapes and finding it all very interesting and understandable. Sometimes after reading/listening there arises a depressed feeling, a flat feeling, a frustration that I can't take that understanding with me into doing the everyday things that one has to do to survive - shopping for food, cleaning, working - all the things I don't really want to do. Despite telling myself these things have to be done, the impatience and bad feeling just seems to grow and last longer, Now that I've started my whinge, I'll keep going and get it off my chest. I find trying to communicate via internet so frustrating, I actually feel physically ill if I spend much time sitting here in front of the computor. I can call you my friends but I don't even know what half of you look like. Maybe this is what is meant by conditions, for example, so much good dhamma discussion on this forum but i'm unable/unwilling to access it due to my past kamma. There doesn't feel like much kusala in my life, those moments are very short-lived, if they arise at all. Patience [I have none], courage [what's that?], good cheer [never heard of it] Azita 43379 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 3:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Ken, --------------- C: > So beings, only exist for a billionth of a second? > --------------- K > Yes! It can be said that there are ultimately no beings, however, it is still possible to talk about them without contradicting the anatta doctrine. There are several places in the texts where we read, "When the various components that make up a chariot are correctly assembled, a chariot is said to exist. So too, when the five khandhas are correctly assembled (arise together in the same moment) a living being is said to exist." (Or words to that effect. (I can find a reference if you want one.)) Beings have a lifespan of just one moment because there is only the present moment. This is logical when you consider that the past no longer exists and the future has never existed. But it is hard to accept, and so people conveniently put logic aside and say, "Yes, but, there is a continuum and, therefore, there is a sense in which we do continue to exist." An Abhidhamma student would tell them, "No buts! There is only the present moment." ............... So beings can't have existed in the past? And, the future doesn't exit? Have you experience this, or do you not experience? When you look in the mirror in the morning, do your image disappear after a billionth of a second, or a moment? ************************** ------------------------ C: > when you say "namas and rupas " I think -- Mind and body/flesh. ------------------------ K > When you say, "Mind and body/flesh," an Abhidhamma student thinks nama and rupa. The difference is; only nama and rupa exist in the present moment. When the mind is thought of as a persistent thing receiving information, processing it and creating ideas, then that mind is a mere concept (which does not exist in ultimate reality). The same applies to flesh: a piece of meat - something that can be seen, touched, smelt and tasted - is a mere idea created by the mind. In the ultimate reality of the present moment, there can be only one object of consciousness. If it is a physical object, it can be a visible rupa, audible rupa, gustatory rupa, olfactory rupa, or one of the three kinds of tactile rupa. .............................. In ultimate reality there is space, emptiness, but you may not find it, unless you search for the essence. -------------------------- C: > And Lobha ??? that does not mean Buddha's teachings, it means what ever you then me define it to be. When I read "'I am enjoying this cup of coffee'" I also think of the Buddha's teachings -- What is "I" ...., How does "I" enjoy ..., does coffee cause enjoyment, -------------------------- When an Abhidhamma student reads, "I am enjoying this cup of coffee," he knows there have been momentary experiences of sense objects and mind objects (one at a time) and moments of thought creation (conceptualizing). In many of those moments, the mental factor known as lobar has arisen, performed its function (of attachment to its object) and fallen away. The person who believes he is enjoying a cup of coffee is not being aware of one of those moments of lobar. He is aware of a different (illusory) reality in which there is a human being enjoying a (simultaneously) delicious, hot, aromatic drink. ------------------------------ C: > I am noticing you separate "the conditioned and conventional reality." Why? (This is a new approach to me) ------------------------------- k> I hope it will be clear by now that conventional reality is illusory - the product of thinking. Conditioned reality is the five khandhas as they arise in this present, fleeting moment. They can arise in one of six ways, or, as the Buddha said, "as one of the six worlds." There is one world for each of the six kinds of consciousness - seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and mentally cognising. In a moment of seeing (the eye world) the vinnana-khandha is represented by eye consciousness, sankhara- khandha is represented by eye contact (and other mental factors), sanna-khandha by perception of visible object, vedana-khandha by feeling arising from eye contact and rupa-khandha by the eye base and visible object. (There might be one or two technical mistakes in that, but you'll get the general picture.) ........................ Have you experienced this, and how would you describe that experience? ********************************* KH: > >As the ancient commentaries say: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it; The Path is, but no traveler on it is seen." > ............ C: > If no-one suffers than it is silly to try and end suffering, it effects no-one. ------------------ Exactly! When the anatta characteristic has been directly known (not just read about in books), concern for worldly existence and non- existence fades away. Consequently, there will be conditions for Nibbana to become the object of consciousness. When that happens, various causes of suffering will be permanently destroyed. So, trying doesn't enter into it. Suffering is ended by the conditioned dhammas of the Eight-fold Path. ................................ It is true that having no concern for worldly existence and non-existence, the various causes of suffering will (change "will" to "can") be permanently destroyed. (add: however, this is only in the individual, not necessarily in all that comes in contact with the individual). §§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§ ------------------------------------ C: > But then, are we in agreement that the five aggregates exist? ------------------------------------ k> Of course we are: we have been talking about them for weeks. :-) (I have been calling them the five khandhas.) However, I have been trying to stress that they exist for only the briefest possible moment. Even the Eight-fold Path is just a fleeting moment in which the five khandhas exist in their supramundane form. ...................... how have you experienced these briefest possible moments? How have you experience the ending of your existence? CharlesD 43380 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, TG - In a message dated 3/18/05 5:55:57 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Howard > > That all sounds reasonable to me. I don't necessarily follow the notes as > gospel or limit an interpretation to the notes, but the notes sounded > reasonable > too. Regarding the 8th jhana, the notes don't help because its ambiguous. > The Sutta says no perception, whereas the 8th jhana is sort of a fuzzy one. > > TG > ================ Yep. We see this the same way. 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) 43381 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions In reality, the point of the sutras is to not cling. Clinging to the Right View is clinging none the less. I have always interpreted paradoxes, like the one mentioned below, as alluding to a graded path where things (ideas) change as you progress along the path. Also in this case, the real issue is not so much clinging, it is clinging to knowledge will give rise to feeling "you" have/are "inferior or superlative" .... ----- Original Message ----- From: Joop Sent: Wednesday, 09 March, 2005 13:53 Subject: [dsg] Having no opinions Not clinging to views is one of the central topics of the Teachings, especially not clinging to any doctrine of a self. Of course one should not keep 'false' views; but in some suttas the Buddha states that one should not keep any view, any opinion at all. For example verse 5 of the Atthaka Vagga, part of the Sutta-Nipata, called 'Supreme' (see below) doesn't give much room (or no room at all) for the positive value for having a 'right view', as stated in other parts of the Teachings of the Buddha. In the explanation to the translation I have read that some comments to this paradox state that this text should be taken at face value; other readers say these verses of the Atthaka Vagga should be further interpreted. I'm afraid that 'further interpreted' means : render harmless I like this Vagga: this suttas make having any orthodoxy impossible. ... Supreme - Paramatthaka Sutta (Sutta-Nipata, IV-5) When dwelling on views as "supreme," a person makes them the utmost thing in the world, &, from that, calls all others inferior and so he's not free from disputes. When he sees his advantage in what's seen, heard, sensed, or in precepts & practices, seizing it there he sees all else as inferior. That, too, say the skilled, is a binding knot: that in dependence on which you regard another as inferior. So a monk shouldn't be dependent on what's seen, heard, or sensed, or on precepts & practices; nor should he conjure a view in the world in connection with knowledge or precepts & practices; shouldn't take himself to be "equal"; shouldn't think himself inferior or superlative. Abandoning what he had embraced, abandoning self, not clinging, he doesn't make himself dependent even in connection with knowledge; doesn't follow a faction among those who are split; doesn't fall back on any view whatsoever. One's who isn't inclined toward either side -becoming or not-, here or beyond- who has no entrenchment when considering what's grasped among doctrines, hasn't the least preconceived perception with regard to what's seen, heard, or sensed. By whom, with what, should he be pigeonholed here in the world? -this brahmin who hasn't adopted views. They don't conjure, don't yearn, don't adhere even to doctrines. A brahmin not led by precepts or practices, gone to the beyond -Such- doesn't fall back. 43382 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Jon, All you have to do is die. ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Thursday, 10 March, 2005 14:05 Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Jon Wrote: While I agree generally with James' reply about the important difference between holding opinions about things and the knowledge that comes from direct experience, I'm not so sure that the sutta you quote really says what you say it does ('no opinions'). I think it's more about the danger of clinging to opinions or ideas, having preconceived notions, etc. For example, it talks about <>, <>, wrong view about becoming or not, etc. I have my doubts as to whether the ideal of having no opinions is really attainable. Joop wrote: >Not clinging to views is one of the central topics of the Teachings, >especially not clinging to any doctrine of a self. >Of course one should not keep 'false' views; but in some suttas the >Buddha states that one should not keep any view, any opinion at all. ... > > >Supreme - Paramatthaka Sutta (Sutta-Nipata, IV-5) > >When dwelling on views as "supreme," >a person makes them the utmost thing in the world, >&, from that, calls all others inferior >and so he's not free from disputes. >When he sees his advantage >in what's seen, heard, sensed, >or in precepts & practices, >seizing it there he sees all else as inferior. > >That, too, say the skilled, >is a binding knot: that in dependence on which >you regard another as inferior. >So a monk shouldn't be dependent >on what's seen, heard, or sensed, >or on precepts & practices; >nor should he conjure a view in the world >in connection with knowledge or precepts & practices; >shouldn't take himself to be "equal"; >shouldn't think himself >inferior or superlative. > >Abandoning what he had embraced, >abandoning self, not clinging, >he doesn't make himself dependent >even in connection with knowledge; >doesn't follow a faction >among those who are split; >doesn't fall back on any view whatsoever. > >One's who isn't inclined toward either side >—becoming or not-, here or beyond— >who has no entrenchment >when considering what's grasped among doctrines, >hasn't the least preconceived perception >with regard to what's seen, heard, or sensed. >By whom, with what, >should he be pigeonholed here in the world? >—this brahmin who hasn't adopted views. > >They don't conjure, don't yearn, >don't adhere even to doctrines. >A brahmin not led by precepts or practices, >gone to the beyond >—Such— doesn't fall back. 43383 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions The point of the suttra is clinging, clinging to even what you know is true. Personally, I think the Buddha said this to remind us of the relatives of even views, the possibility that a new view may come along and be more correct for the current situation, and how all views can also lead one into suffering (causing it or feeling it). CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Joop To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, 17 March, 2005 11:36 Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions In # 43116 Jon said: "I'm not so sure that the sutta you quote [Paramatthaka Sutta, Sutta- Nipata, IV-5] really says what you say it does ('no opinions'). I think it's more about the danger of clinging to opinions or ideas, having preconceived notions, etc. For example, it talks about <>, <>, wrong view about becoming or not, etc. " Jon: "I have my doubts as to whether the ideal of having no opinions is really attainable." Joop: I agree with that (psychological based) guess. All I can say is: I have no ideals; I only discovered that most opinions that are arsing in me, are FUTILE. So I try not to cling to them." In # 43266 Sarah (with Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Citta) said: "This sutta is quoted a lot and usually in support of the same `view' about having no opinions which you hold. Let me share some of my reflections here. 1. I understand that the views referred to in the sutta are wrong views (micha ditthi). The Pali given is `di.t.thi', translated as `dogmatic view' by Saddhatissa. Unless di.t.thi is modified by samma, it nearly always refers to wrong views. For example, we read that "the Perfect One is free from any theory or view(ditthigata)". Of course this refers to wrong views. (see dictionary notes below*). As it says in the dictionary "The rejection of speculative views and theories is a prominent feature in A chapter of the Sutta-Nipáta, the Atthaka-Vagga." This is the chapter of Eights which the Paramatthaka Sutta is from." Joop: Nothing of course; 'of course' does not exist. Yes, the sutta is about rekecting speculative views and theories, but the text of it states more than that. More than is stated in some other Teachings of the Buddha. I accept the tension that exists between suttas and I know many people cannot handle this kind of inconstistencies. Sarah: "2. When there is samma ditthi (right view), there is of course no speculation, conceit or greed involved, but instead the direct knowledge (or panna, understanding) of paramatha dhammas (highest truths)." Joop: I agree, but I should stop this statement with "understanding)"; because one can think to easy about the lists of 89 cittas, 28 (or another number) rupas etc when you talk about 'paramatha dhammas'. Sarah: "4. I'd like to stress that samma ditthi (right view) is a synonym for panna (right understanding). In other words, right view is not a speculative opinion of any kind, but direct knowledge of dhammas." Joop: Yes, that's very important. But that's only true from the moment I experience any 'right view' from within. Till that moment they are, when I read about them in dsg or other texts, theories that may be correct. And I take this vague notion that thy are correct, with me in my meditation/comtemplations, with the open mind and the attitude that these - in essence still conventional theories - got right views in the highest sense TO ME. (I add that 'TO ME' to it because 'right views' don't exist as such - that essentialism - they can only exist in individuals) In fact that more or less the same as what you say: "Of course there are many degrees and kinds of panna or right view, not just direct insight. Reflecting wisely on kamma or on the Truths, even at a theoretical level can be with right view or panna. This is pariyatti (wise reflecting and consideration) which has to develop in order for patipatti(direct knowledge or understanding) to arise and develop." Joop: Perhaps there is another misunderstanding in our discussion about the terms 'view, opinion, theory" Sarah: There's no one who can have a view, but both wrong view (di.t.thi) and right view (pa~n~naa) are mental factors which are real and arise." Joop: You talk about wrong views and right views. That one dichotomy. But when I use in my brains the (dutch word for) view, I think many time more 'opinion' or 'theory' and than the dichotomy is: correct view versus incorrect view. And 'incorrect' is a theory when it's falsified (Popper). When I say that as an effect of my meditation I less and less have opinions, then a third dichotomy is playing a role: useful opinions and useless opinions. Let's for example take the opinion I had for years and still have not left behind me totally: 'George W. Bush is an dangerous idiot" I have arguments that this is a correct theory (his refusal to participate in the Kyoto-protocol for example; Irak) It was a useful opinion two years ago when I with others tried to prevent that the Netherlands participated in the Irak-war. But now I feel it's useless, because it's futile. That why it's a wrong view, because there is hate in me when I state this opinion. Another example, from Joseph Goldsteins book 'One Dhamma: the emerging Western Buddhism' (I only have a dutch translation so I had to translate it back to english) about attachment to opinions. It's about a Tibetan Rinpoche of whom was stated that he was an incarnation of Sariputta. He thought: that is not possible because Sariputta was (according the Pali Canon) an arahat so he is not reborn so nobody in this century can be an incarnation of him. So after some time thinking about that he concluded to have no opinion about this topic anymore. I still have problems with that, I think Goldstein is - partly without realizing that - converted from a Theravada to a Tibetan Buddhist. But maybe he is firther on his path than I am. Joop 43384 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:35pm Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Is this question about what psychologist call the subconsciousness. If it is, check the Tibetan version of the Abhidhamma. Trumpa (a Lama) called it the mental gossip, one of the things that meditation should quite. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: upasaka@a... To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, 17 March, 2005 14:46 Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi again, Ken et al - 3/17/05 8:28:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > It seems to me that there must be additional mind-door phenomena in the > form of > mental traces that are passed on from state to state and that constitute the > > data/raw material upon which thinking processes operate. But I do not see > any > such things put forward in Abhidhamma. Sure there is sa~n~na mentioned, a > bundle of operations that "mark", and compare and contrast marks, but there > seems > to be no mention of the nature of these "marks" or of their being passed > along. Is this just a gap in the Abhidhamma (or our record of the > Abhidhamma), or > do recollection (remembering) and other such mental operations magically occu > r > (via a form of Buddhist time travel! ;-) with no data passed along on which > to > operate? ========================== A thought that has occurred to me in regard to the nature of "marks" that are passed along is that they might in fact not be namas, but a category of mind-created rupas, knowable only through the mind door (as is the case with "the water element", i.e., liquidity/cohesion). [Such rupic nature of "marks", in fact, would not surprise me, as it harmonizes well with the modern, neurology-based theories of memory that presume "memory traces" of various sorts "stored" in the nervous system.] Howard 43385 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Howard, What would you say is the message of the Honeyball Sutta? My interpretation is that perception is the root of conflict. There seems to be the implication that a perception is the object of desire. Seeing that perception opens the door to underlying tendencies of lust, aversion, views, and ultimately conflict, "then nothing is found there to delight in, welcome and hold to", and consequently "these evil, unwholesome states cease without remainder". Larry 43386 From: connie Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:41pm Subject: Re: alleywalk Hi, Azita, > Gradual Sayings, V, III, 29 (Book of the Fives). The alley-walk. > "There are five benefits of walking, monks. What five? Endurance for a > long journey; endurance for striving; smallness of obstacles; thorough > digestion of food and drink taken; samaadhi obtained from walking lasts a > long time. These, indeed, monks, are five benefits of walking." This is > the ninth. Azita: Can anyone tell me what is meant by 'smallness of obstacles' in the context of the above? It seems to me to be the odd one out. Connie: My apologies. I wasn't sure how to translate appaabaadho. I think it should be something more like "little affliction" or "few illnesses". Say, that 'endurance for a long journey' thing, isn't that patience, courage and good cheer? Hope you're feeling better. 43387 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 6:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma in the restaurant Nina: "Investigation of thinking of concepts and how the citta operates in doing that does not lead to the goal." Hi Nina, I think it is important to recognize concepts. So much of my life is involved with trying to grasp concept as though it were a solid reality that it is always a surprise to notice this, that concept is concept. Larry 43388 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 2:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, Larry - In a message dated 3/18/05 8:40:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > What would you say is the message of the Honeyball Sutta? > > My interpretation is that perception is the root of conflict. There > seems to be the implication that a perception is the object of desire. > Seeing that perception opens the door to underlying tendencies of lust, > aversion, views, and ultimately conflict, "then nothing is found there > to delight in, welcome and hold to", and consequently "these evil, > unwholesome states cease without remainder". > > Larry > ========================= I would say the message is as follows: It is our cognitive and emotional proliferating that leads to our distress, that papa~nca comes about by a process of dependent origination with sa~n~na as most immediate condition but with the most fundamental condition being ignorance, and when that is uprooted wisdom SEES that "with regard to the cause whereby the perceptions & categories of complication assail a person, THERE IS NOTHING TO RELISH (emphasis mine) ... [and] that is where these evil, unskillful things cease without remainder." 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) 43389 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:16pm Subject: Re: alleywalk Hi, Azita & Connie > Connie: My apologies. I wasn't sure how to translate appaabaadho. I > think it should be something more like "little affliction" or "few > illnesses". kel: I think walking makes one healthy, I remember it in Burmese vaguely. - kel 43390 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:52pm Subject: Re: Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 142 - Nina --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > > Dear Nina and Matheesha, > Azita: I feel like I make no progress :-( even going backwards. > For example, I'm reading dhamma books, listening to tapes and > finding it all very interesting and understandable. Sometimes after > reading/listening there arises a depressed feeling, a flat feeling, a > frustration that I can't take that understanding with me into doing > the everyday things that one has to do to survive - shopping for > food, cleaning, working - all the things I don't really want to do. > Despite telling myself these things have to be done, the impatience > and bad feeling just seems to grow and last longer, > Now that I've started my whinge, I'll keep going and get it > off my chest. I find trying to communicate via internet so > frustrating, I actually feel physically ill if I spend much time > sitting here in front of the computor. > I can call you my friends but I don't even know what half of > you look like. Maybe this is what is meant by conditions, for > example, so much good dhamma discussion on this forum but i'm > unable/unwilling to access it due to my past kamma. > There doesn't feel like much kusala in my life, those moments > are very short-lived, if they arise at all. > > Patience [I have none], courage [what's that?], good cheer > [never heard of it] > Azita Hi Azita, Your post isn't addressed to me, but I feel your suffering and frustration and thought I might give you some words of encouragement. After reading so much dhamma material, or practicing so much meditation/mindfulness, it is natural to look at those who have walked the path before you and have a feeling of defeat. Again, like all the suffering in life, this comes from craving: craving to be enlightened, craving to be wise, craving to be happy, craving to be peaceful, craving to be respected, and craving to be satisfied. The thing is to not judge yourself for this craving ("Oh, I shouldn't be craving like this! I know better! I am such a failure as a Buddhist!") because craving is natural. The thing is to just be mindful of the craving, over and over again, until it eventually becomes less and less powerful. The Buddha taught that as a water jug is filled drop by drop with water as is the purification of people's minds: drop by drop. I know what you mean by the banality of everyday life; it can become very frustrating. Who wants to do the laundry when there is so much Buddhist practice to be done?? Though the `Mary Poppins Buddhist' ;- ) will tell you that doing the laundry should be a part of the Buddhist practice, that is usually easier said than done. To be more realistic, I think you should just establish good habits and a daily schedule of Buddhist study, mundane work, and meditation- and try to have as much mindfulness as possible throughout all. Most importantly, don't compare yourself to others and realize that progress comes little by little. You write, "for example, so much good dhamma discussion on this forum but i'm unable/unwilling to access it due to my past kamma" and I don't think you are correct in this assumption. Just remember, people can talk dhamma a lot easier than they can practice it. In other words, there are many here who can `Talk the talk, but don't always walk the walk'. Try not to compare yourself to others or judge yourself. Good luck and I hope you start feeling better real soon. :-) Metta, James 43391 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 1:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: alleywalk Dear Walkers, Just finished teaching and needing to ‘run’ off through the Wanchai alleys to the Rugby Sevens for some fun (trust me, James, I do have just a little life outside DSG:-). Meanwhile,there may be more here of relevance or food for further discussion. I happened by chance to come across one of these posts the other day by chance, so I’ll quote from it below while I’m at it. Will catch up later. (LK, I’m very interested in yr luminous quote –more next week, many thx). Metta, Sarah ====== Walking & Walking meditation 14172, 14223, 31223, 33542, 35473, 35864, 41831, 41931, 42182 Jon: >As Nina commented in her post, 'walking meditation' here is probably a translation of the Pali 'cankamana'/'cankamati'. According to the dictionaries, this means simply walking up and down/to walk up and down (as given in both PED and CPED). If cankamana is the original, then the 'meditation' part is very much the translator's own gloss. This is perhaps based on the fact that this form of walking often took place on a prepared walkway as relief from periods of seated contemplation (which the translator would no doubt see as 'sitting meditation'). I was interested to read the 5 benefits of cankamana as summarised by Goggy in a recent post. In Goggy's words (I have yet to find the original) they are: 1) good stamina for long journeys (good for health too, isn't it?) 2) strengthen the mental effort for overall practice 3) balancing between sitting and walking 4) assist digestion (to overcome drowsiness) 5) builds durable concentration. There is no indication here that the walking necessarily involves 'meditation', or that it is regarded as being of any particular benefit as far as the development of understanding is concerned. (Actually, these remind me somewhat of the benefits given somewhere for eating congee.) The problem with using 'meditation' in translations is that it has no precise meaning in English, but can be read as implying any number of things.< 43392 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:46pm Subject: The 4 Ways to Force...!!! Friends: The four Ways to Force (iddhi-pada): 1: The Concentration of Will joined with the effort of Determination. 2: The Concentration of Energy fused with the effort of Determination. 3: The Concentration of Thought linked with the effort of Determination. 4: The Concentration of Investigation coupled with the effort of Determination. Which forces ? The force of perfect determination. The force of making many copies of oneself. The force of transformation i.e. adopting whatever form. The force of mind-made creation of another mentally produced body. The force of penetrating knowledge e.g. to remain unhurt in any danger. The force of penetrating concentration producing whatever wished result. The force of experiencing whatever is repulsive as attractive & agreeable. The force of experiencing whatever is attractive as repulsive & disagreeable. The force of freely accepting or rejecting whatever whether attractive or repulsive. The force of remaining in equanimity faced with either the attractive or the repulsive. Details see: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn51-020.html Friendship is the Greatest ! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. 43393 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 5:18am Subject: [dsg] Re: alleywalk Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Walkers, > > Just finished teaching and needing to `run' off through the Wanchai alleys > to the Rugby Sevens for some fun (trust me, James, I do have just a little > life outside DSG:-). :-) I just love to tease you! Metta, James 43394 From: Joop Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 5:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: > In reality, the point of the sutras is to not cling. Clinging to the Right View is clinging none the less. I have always interpreted paradoxes, like the one mentioned below, as alluding to a graded path where things (ideas) change as you progress along the path. > > Also in this case, the real issue is not so much clinging, it is clinging to knowledge will give rise to feeling "you" have/are "inferior or superlative" .... Hallo Charles, I think I agree with you. But what exactly is "things (ideas) change as you progress..." Where do they change? In my brains or somewhere outsinde the brains of sentient beings? In the last case I don't agree: ideas exist only in my (or somebody else) mind; things are only perceived in my mind Metta Joop 43395 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 5:47am Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi, Howard I see the time you spent not posting has been put to good use in doing some considering ;-)). I am just going to comment on one or two points that come up in your posts, rather than fully discuss the various issues you raise. >Hi, Ken (and Charles - and also Jon, Nina, and other "concept non-believers" >;-), > > I'm not sure what a 'concept non-believer' is, or why I qualify, but perhaps I'll find out as we go along ;-)) >It also happens to raise in my mind a loose-end Abhidhammic >issue that troubles me yet, and that is the kinds of actual mind-door objects >that are present during thought processes and conceptual projecting. I do not >not believe that pa~n~natti are ever truly objects of consciousness. > From what you say here, I perceive a difference in what we each mean by 'pannatti'. As I understand the term, it refers to those mind-objects that are not dhammas -- that is, to names and meanings (or thoughts). So by definition, it refers only to certain objects of consciousness. In other words, it's not a case of there being something called pannatti and the question then being whether these ever become objects of consciousness. (If you were to say that all objects of consciousness are dhammas, then that would be consistent with the usage of pannatti as I understand it, but I don't think that's what you're saying.) >I believe >that there is only imagining that there are such objects. However, I do >believe that during mindstates of thinking processes and conceptual projection, >there *are* actual (paramatthic) mind-door arammana. Now some of these are rupas, >and some are namas in the form of "fresh memories" of just-passed namas and >rupas. But those sorts of objects do not strike me as sufficient to account for >our thinking processes and the sankharic processes of conceptual projection. >It seems to me that there must be additional mind-door phenomena in the form of >mental traces that are passed on from state to state and that constitute the >data/raw material upon which thinking processes operate. But I do not see any >such things put forward in Abhidhamma. > I think the only 'data/raw material', in the sense that I take you to mean those things, is the various objects presently being experienced through the sense-doors. The rest is recollections of previous sense-door and mind-door experiences. In other words, there are indeed no mind-door phenomena in the form of traces referred to in the texts. But from reading your later posts I think you move away from the idea of traces, so I'll snip the rest of your post at this point ;-)). Jon 43396 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 5:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Howard The way you explain things in this post seems to me to be more in line with the way things are stated in the texts, especially where you say: "there is the possibility that the "marking" done by sa~n~na is not the production of a substantial trace that is replicated in each subsequent mindstate, but is merely an operational event that serves as one condition for a future event of remembering. It may well be merely that several "marking operations" of sa~n~na, occurring at various times, serve, together with other conditions occurring at other times, as basis for a future operation of remembering, with nothing "passed along" at all." So when that 'operation of remembering' occurs some time later, there is simply the accessing of that earlier marking. And at such moments the object of consciousness is not a presently arising (or just fallen away) dhamma. One further comment. You call this hypothesis a "conditionality theory". I think it could also be seen as an "accumulation theory" in the sense that previous experiences are not 'lost' but are accumulated and passed on from moment to moment. In other words, I don't think we need to invoke the teaching "When this is, that comes to be" in order to explain the act of remembering as described here. Jon upasaka@a... wrote: >Hi again, all - > > It occurs to me that the Buddhist notion of conditionality provides >another possible perspective on memory, and quite possibly the correct one. >Buddhist conditionality does not require a mechanistic passing on of things from >moment to oment. It is merely a matter of "When this is, that will be" and >"When this is not, that will not be". When appropriate conditions have all >occurred, then a resultant condition will occur. This allows for "action at a >(temporal) distance" just as does quantum theory. ... > 43397 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 5:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Howard upasaka@a... wrote: >Hi, TG - >... >Buddhist conditionality is >summarized by the following formulas: “When this is present, that comes to >be; from the arising of this, that arises. When this is absent, that does not >come to be; on the cessation of this, that ceases.â€?15 Moving from facts to >values, the principle of conditionality is summarized as a twelve-fold chain >starting with ignorance, then unmindful action, a resultant distorted >consciousness, and then nine other conditions that lead to rebirth. If anyone of these conditions is not present, then rebirth in a next life will not happen. > I just question this last statement about the effect of paticca-samuppada. If I'm not mistaken, it reflects the view that the links of PS can be 'broken' at any point, thereby leading to release from samsara. To my reading of PS, continued existence in samsara is all attributable to, and flows from, ignorance and that alone, and the only way out given is the development of panna, which 'reverses' the sequence of conditioned events. I do not recall reading anything in the suttas that supports the view stated just above. This is important because there are certain 'practices' that are based on the idea of cutting off the chain at one of the links. People are always having ideas about short-cuts that the Buddha himself seems to have overlooked ;-)) Jon 43398 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 1:44am Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi, Jon - In a message dated 3/19/05 8:57:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > But from reading your later posts I think you move away from the idea of > traces, so I'll snip the rest of your post at this point ================== Yes, I have moved away from the idea of traces. As regards "objects", if one means by "object" either an actual phenomenon (paramattha dhamma) that is objective content of consciousness OR what merely *seems* to be such, like a tree or house or memory, but does not actually exist, then I would agree to saying that there is always an object of consciousness. As I see it, when we are "remembering something" or "seeing a tree", there is no actual thing/event remembered or cognized, and my preference in speaking literally/ultimately would be to say that there really is no object present, but conventionally there is - that is, it is a covention to say that there is an object of consciousness present. And, as you know, I have no problem with figurative speech so long as one is aware that this is what one is using. With regard to my posting again, well, yes, I am, but I still have in mind to moderate it, and, especially, to not continue to extend a conversation interminably beyond a few posts, but to cease and desist before tiresome and tiring repetition sets in! ;-)) 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) 43399 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 2:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Jon - In a message dated 3/19/05 9:00:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > Hi, Howard > > The way you explain things in this post seems to me to be more in line > with the way things are stated in the texts, especially where you say: > "there is the possibility that the "marking" done by sa~n~na is not the > production of a substantial trace that is replicated in each subsequent > mindstate, but is merely an operational event that serves as one > condition for a future event of remembering. It may well be merely that > several "marking operations" of sa~n~na, occurring at various times, > serve, together with other conditions occurring at other times, as basis > for a future operation of remembering, with nothing "passed along" at all." > > So when that 'operation of remembering' occurs some time later, there is > simply the accessing of that earlier marking. And at such moments the > object of consciousness is not a presently arising (or just fallen away) > dhamma. > > One further comment. You call this hypothesis a "conditionality > theory". I think it could also be seen as an "accumulation theory" in > the sense that previous experiences are not 'lost' but are accumulated > and passed on from moment to moment. In other words, I don't think we > need to invoke the teaching "When this is, that comes to be" in order to > explain the act of remembering as described here. > ----------------------------------- Howard: No, the last 2 paragraphs don't quite properly represent this alternative "conditionality position" I'm discussing. This position does not depend on anything being passed along or accumulated, or on "accessing" something in the past that is now nonexistent. It is just a matter of processing occurring now due to earlier processing and other events having occurred. By the time all the fundamental and supportive conditions have occurred, a specific remembering occurs. There is no presumption of a line-of-billiard-balls, store-and-forward scheme. To make an analogy, in Newtonian mechanics a linear contiguity picture was how event-transmission was viewed as working, but not so in the revolutionary quantum mechanics, and, likewise, in pre-Buddhist substantialist theories that is how things were viewed as working, but not in a Buddhist "conditionality theory." ------------------------------------------------- > > 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) 43400 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 2:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Jon - In a message dated 3/19/05 9:08:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > Hi, Howard > > upasaka@a... wrote: > > >Hi, TG - > >... > >Buddhist conditionality is > >summarized by the following formulas: “When this is present, that comes to > >be; from the arising of this, that arises. When this is absent, that does > not > > >come to be; on the cessation of this, that ceases.â€?15 Moving from facts to > >values, the principle of conditionality is summarized as a twelve-fold > chain > >starting with ignorance, then unmindful action, a resultant distorted > >consciousness, and then nine other conditions that lead to rebirth. If > anyone of these conditions is not present, then rebirth in a next life will not > happen. > > > ---------------------------------- Howard: Well this material is quoted by me, but I am not in total agreement with it. ---------------------------------- > > I just question this last statement about the effect of > paticca-samuppada. If I'm not mistaken, it reflects the view that the > links of PS can be 'broken' at any point, thereby leading to release > from samsara. > > To my reading of PS, continued existence in samsara is all attributable > to, and flows from, ignorance and that alone, and the only way out given > is the development of panna, which 'reverses' the sequence of > conditioned events. I do not recall reading anything in the suttas that > supports the view stated just above. > > This is important because there are certain 'practices' that are based > on the idea of cutting off the chain at one of the links. People are > always having ideas about short-cuts that the Buddha himself seems to > have overlooked ;-)) > > Jon > ======================= I agree completely with you on this, Jon. Some folks take the position that "the chain is to be cut" at one link or other, usually the vedana --> tanha link, and I've often expressed disagreement with this position. As I see it, liberating wisdom must arise. That results in uprooting the deep-seated defilements, and unraveling phase of D.O. occurs (cessation of avijja leading to cessation of sankhara, etc), and liberation resulting. Without uprooting the defilements, of which avijja is leader, there is no liberation. 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) 43401 From: Matthew Miller Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 9:06am Subject: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue There's a new technology that allows blind people to "see" with different parts of the body. For example, a blind subject can "see" by having a camera mounted on his or her forehead that feeds a signal into an electronic device that turns the pattern of light and dark into electrical impulses. The pulses stimulate an array of 144 electrodes on a grid about the size of a postage stamp which zap the coded image into -- the blind person's tongue! At first, the blind subjects describe the sensation as being like candy pop rocks exploding, but later they experience something more "out there" in the world -- a sense of space, depth and shape. Using this device, knowns as a BrainPort, one blind woman who was previously unable to stand upright without holding onto something and concentrating, was able to dance. An earlier version of this device involved a larger array of electrodes taped onto the skin of the back. One interesting finding in these experiments is that there was no experience of a "world" if the camera was mounted on a tripod. Just a tingling sensation. But if the subjects can actively manipulate the camera (mount it on their moving heads, or control the zoom) then a world "emerged" out the mass of tingling. Interaction was the key -- so perception is not the passive process that most people used to assume. It involves active scanning, seeking, interacting. (this surely has implications for our understanding of what's going on during jhana) I don't see how the abhidhamma, with its rigid categories of rupas, vatthus, dvaras and so on, could possibly account for phenomena like this. We need the careful, patient observation and experiment of neuroscience to begin to understand the structure of consciousness. Otherwise we're whistling in the dark and spinning fantasies. Matthew 43402 From: frank Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 9:47am Subject: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Howard and TG, In [M109]: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn109.html (not the exact sutta I was thinking about originally, but it says the same thing) Saying, "Very good, lord," the monk... asked him a further question: "Lord, what is the cause, what the condition, for the delineation[2] of the aggregate of form? What is the cause, what the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness?" "Monk, the four great existents (earth, water, fire, & wind) are the cause, the four great existents the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of form. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of feeling. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of perception. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of fabrications. Name-&-form is the cause, name-&-form the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of consciousness." ============================================================= I'm glad TG appreciated the intended humor of my reference to the cocktail of aggregates (perception+volition+feeling) that arise as a result of contact/phassa. A cocktail is exactly what it is for the unenlightened. We take the raw sensory input (vinnana/consciousness + contact), and form a perception/sanna by relating these raw sensory input to our memory which is stored as a deluded narrative with solid views of self, world, etc. We then have the proliferation of deluded perceptions and deluded volitions/sankhara based on wrong view and wrong perceptions. Isn't this exactly like a fool drunk on cocktails? According to Buddhist scholars, the 12 links of dependent origination was an awkward attempt by well meaning Buddhists to integrate several distinct teachings on conditionality into one magic formula. I find that theory makes much sense, after reading the pali suttas many times. There is a distinct portion on moment to moment experience (6 sets of 6), there is the conundrum of consciousness/nama rupa chicken and egg relationship, there is the long term view of rebirth, and there is the primordial ignorance that underlies all of the worldling's experience. I think it would have been much better off to leave the conditionality relationships in its distinct parts. 1 integrated formula just leads to mass confusion. Just as physicists today want to find a grand unifying theory to consolidate wave and particle properties of light, Buddhist scholars had an anal-retentive impulse to find one clean magic formula on conditionality to settle the matter once and for all. But if you look at the pali suttas as a body of work, the Buddha didn't seem concerned about having perfectly clean formulas. For example, in some places he says there are 3 types of feeling, other places he talks about 5 types of feeling, 6 types of feeling, 18 types of feeling. 3 kinds of people in the world,5 types of people in the world, etc. There's even blatant redundance, recursive relationships, and confusion if we try to really examine the 37 factors of awakening and analyze where each factor belongs. He uses 5 aggregates to characterize the world/self sometimes, other times he prefers using the 6 sense bases. Howard, I think it's beyond the intention of the Buddha's teaching to try to establish a more detailed causal/temporal relationship of the aggregates of feeling+perception+volition than what the Buddha cited above. If there were a more detailed unambiguous causal chain, I'm sure those same people responsible for making 12 links would have made 15 or 16 links and show the proper position of perception in that chain, and maybe have volition listed twice, consciousness listed twice or thrice. Volition/sankhara immediately following ignorance in the formula, should also be right after contact, based on the sutta citation above. You can go mad if you try to find more precise micro-relationships than what's actually needed to see the relationship of dukkha and the letting go of craving/dukkha in our moment to moment experience. If I were to revise the dependent origination formula, I would break it back up into the distinct teachings and concentrate mostly on the moment to moment structure of our experience, namely: Formula for the unawakened: 1) raw sensory input 2) contact 3) a deadly cocktail of feeling + distorted perception + misguided volitions 4) all kinds of exquisite suffering follow Formula restated in more traditional phrasing: 1) there are 6 internal sense media 2) there are 6 external sense media 3) dependent on internal sense media and external media, 6 types of sense consciousness arise 4) the meeting of the first 3 links is sensory impingement/contact/phassa 5) with contact as requisite condition + wrong view, there is a cocktail of feeling + perception + volition 6) with the cocktail as requisite condition, there is craving, aversion, confusion 7) mental proliferation, thicket of views, clinging, solidification of self-identity, the whole mass of dukkha. Formula for the awakened/enlightened: 1-4) same 5) contact is combined with right view + perception + feeling + volition. 6) equanimity caused by right view is established right at that moment 7) the cessation of dukkha experienced in the moment -fk -----Original Message----- From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 11:56 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, Frank - In a message dated 3/18/05 3:56:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, frank@4... writes: > > I don't know what the abidhamma says, but in either M or S nikaya, > the Buddha says something to the effect of: > > 1) with contact (phassa) as a requisite condition, there is feeling. > 2) with contact as a requisite condition, there is perception (sanna) > 3) with contact as a requisite condition, there is volition (sankhara) > ------------------------------------ Howard: (1) Occurs in the Honeyball Sutta, and (2) is transitively implied in that same sutta. As to (3), I'm not so sure. Certainly in dependent origination, the reverse dependency holds. Of course, treating the scheme as a wheel every link depends on every other, but the primary dependency seems to be sankhara --> phassa. Can you possibly find the sutta source for (3)? ------------------------------------- > > To me, this implies that once there is contact/phassa/sensory impingement, > feeling+perception+volition occur simultaneously. > ------------------------------------ Howard: It makes it possible that they occur simultaneously, but not necessary. This isn't a logical implication. That condition A is needed for conditions B, C, and D doen't imply that B, C, and D be simultaneous. ------------------------------------ > > The critical part of the dependent origination formula referenced so > frequently (with feeling as requisite condition, there is craving), > > So my take on this is that when phassa/contact occurs, you get a cocktail of > the 3 aggregates feeling+volition+perception that arise as a result. If one > has deluded perception+volition, then the result would be craving or its > siamese twin aversion. If one has correct perception + correct volition in that > instant, then the dukkha chain breaks down. Feeling aggregate in an arahant > and a worldling in that instant is no different according to my understanding. > > > ====================== With metta, Howard 43403 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 10:33am Subject: Re: Tep /Buddha Nature Dear LK - It was nice of you to give me a thoughtful and proper perspective on this issue of Buddha Nature. To my surprise, after more study, Buddha Nature is more closely related to the "Acariya Mun's school" than I would have thought of a few years ago. Tep: > Is the 'primal mind' according to Acariya Mun same as > "this mind" or is it the same as "that mind" (as described in > Connie's first message on "Buddha Nature")? LK: I am not sure of his terminology . However, I guess Acariya Mun refers to Bhavanga citta as Primal mind . Tep : Well, LK, the following quote is a description of the primal mind. By the way, the author was also in the "Acariya Mun's school". "The ultimate truth within us does not disappear even when we are in darkness and ignorance nor does it return when we reach enlightenment. It is of the nature of 'knowing' (Bhutathata, Literally 'Thusness' or 'Suchness'.). In this there is no ignorance, no right view, just emptiness that is the true essence of the single citta". LK: But I do not think he goes too far as a theravada monk by cleary saying "The true citta is Atta. The true citta is Nibbana". Nibbana is Anatta and Object of Lokuttaracittas in mainstream theravada as far as I know. Tep: O.K., O.K. Now let me give you what I think is the closest response (from the same author) to the above remarks of yours. "When the citta and 'the one who knows' are one in emptiness, then there is nothing to give or knowledge to impart. There is no 'thing' to know the state of anything; there is no state to know a 'thing'. When one knows the original state of the citta then 'citta clearly sees citta'. The citta will then be above all states of conventional labeling, beyond all having and being, beyond all words and past talking about. It is 'Pure Nature' and light coalesced in emptiness, unadulterated and the brightness of the original universe, it is called 'Nibbana' ". From "THE HEART IS KNOWING" : Translated from the original Thai book "Atulo" by Bhikkhu Khemasanto (Ven. Douglas Johnson), Thailand, 1998. http://www.dhammasala.org/content/view/67/115/ Warm regards, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > > Dear Tep > > Let me start by wishing this comment never serve SGI's purposes. They > are widely considered in Mahayana buddhist world to abuse Lotus > Sutra and other Buddhist teachings just for their own selfish > interest. > > Please remember I am not a students of "Acariya Mun's school" which > seems to me much bolder in discribing his meditaional experiences > than other conservative mainstream in Theravada . > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" > wrote: > > > > > > Hi LokuttaraCitta (and Connie) - > > > > Is the 'primal mind' according to Acariya Mun same as "this mind" > or is > > it the same as "that mind" (as described in Connie's first message > > on "Buddha Nature")? > > > I am not sure of his terminology . > > However, I guess Acariya Mun refers to Bhavanga citta as Primal > mind . > > > > Is this permanent, never changing, mind of the Arahant same > as "that > > mind" in Connie's message? > > I think so. > > >Further, is it an Atta? Is it Nibbana? > > Please reread Acariya Mun's articule quoted in my post before > > There he dare use a bit provocative terms like the true > citta ,genuine citta and so on. He even says ,"Our real problem, our > one fundamental problem - which is also the citta's fundamental > problem – is that we lack the power needed to be our own TRUE > SELF" Wow !! > > But I do not think he goes too far as a theravada monk by cleary > saying "The true citta is Atta. The true citta is Nibbana". > > Nibbana is Anatta and Object of Lokuttaracittas in mainstream > theravada as far as I know. > > This is very very delicate area which should be treat with utmost > care.Otherwise ,I do believe, it comes only to fuel our Ego and Ego- > clinging and bring Buddhist meditators to stop at one of mundane > Jhanas. As you may know, Jhanic experiences are so blissful and > wonderful that people without right understandings tend to regard > them as Nibbana with pride and sometimes begin to damage other people > by wrong Buddhist teachings. I believe that is one of the reasons why > Mainstream Theravada is discreet in word about this area. > > from LK 43404 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 6:15am Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, Frank - In a message dated 3/19/05 12:48:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, frank@4... writes: > Hi Howard and TG, > > In [M109]: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn109.html > (not the exact sutta I was thinking about originally, but it says the same > thing) > Saying, "Very good, lord," the monk... asked him a further question: "Lord, > what is the cause, what the condition, for the delineation[2] of the > aggregate of form? What is the cause, what the condition, for the > delineation of the aggregate of feeling... perception... fabrications... > consciousness?" > > "Monk, the four great existents (earth, water, fire, &wind) are the cause, > the four great existents the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate > of form. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of > the aggregate of feeling. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for > the delineation of the aggregate of perception. Contact is the cause, > contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of fabrications. > Name-&-form is the cause, name-&-form the condition, for the delineation of > the aggregate of consciousness." > ===================== I'm not clear on what 'delineation' means, but I suppose it means becoming aware of as a phenomenon. If that is so, why would any of this be surprising? I'm not clear on what the point is, Frank. 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) 43405 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 6:26am Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi again, Frank - In a message dated 3/19/05 12:48:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, frank@4... writes: > Howard, I think it's beyond the intention of the Buddha's teaching to try > to > establish a more detailed causal/temporal relationship of the aggregates of > feeling+perception+volition than what the Buddha cited above. > -------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not sure that establishing such a causal/temporal relationship is what the Buddha was intending. For the most part he seems to have been pointing to contact as the condition for delineating three sorts of phenomena. In that regard, he said "Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of feeling. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of perception. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of fabrications." ======================= With metta, Howard If there were > > a more detailed unambiguous causal chain, I'm sure those same people > responsible for making 12 links would have made 15 or 16 links and show the > proper position of perception in that chain, and maybe have volition listed > twice, consciousness listed twice or thrice. Volition/sankhara immediately > following ignorance in the formula, should also be right after contact, > based on the sutta citation above. You can go mad if you try to find more > precise micro-relationships than what's actually needed to see the > relationship of dukkha and the letting go of craving/dukkha in our moment to > moment experience. /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) 43406 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 11:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 142 - Nina Dear Azita, op 19-03-2005 00:09 schreef gazita2002 op gazita2002@y...: > Azita: I feel like I make no progress :-( even going backwards. > For example, I'm reading dhamma books, listening to tapes and > finding it all very interesting and understandable. Sometimes after > reading/listening there arises a depressed feeling, a flat feeling, a > frustration that I can't take that understanding with me into doing > the everyday things. N: Whatever arises is conditioned, and as James said, it is craving that conditions such feeling, and also, as he said, this is very natural. There is no should not or should. It is difficult for all of us to apply what we learnt to daily life. We need lots of reminders. Our dinner reading is now Vipassana Letters, and I thought of you when reading to Lodewijk that Kh Sujin said: Begin again, be aware again. I hear her calling out this. Just as if nothing unpleasant had happened, just begin again. Also, we can remember: do not yearn after the past nor for what has not come yet. As Ken H stresses again and again: there is only the present moment. I understood you did not go to the Coran meeting? Khun Sujin would also say: it is only a kind of nama that thinks. It is thinking of what is not real, a concept. My situation that is such and such, and we worldlings are inclined to do so all the time. That is why I said to Lodewijk re thinking of concepts and Howard's posts about it: it is high time to develop more understanding of realities. A: I find trying to communicate via internet so frustrating, I actually feel physically ill if I spend much time sitting here in front of the computor. N: Let it rest for a while, it does not matter. A: I can call you my friends but I don't even know what half of > you look like. N: Interesting point. What is the meaning of friend? Friendship is with the citta if we are precise. The real friendship without selfishness, that is mettacitta. You do not have to think of a person or his/her looks. When there is mettacitta with you we call it friendship. This helps when you feel lonely. We cannot always apply this, but we can learn, we have to learn so many things, but that is not discouraging. A: Maybe this is what is meant by conditions, for > example, so much good dhamma discussion on this forum but i'm > unable/unwilling to access it due to my past kamma. N: As James said, this is not right. You do not know your past kamma anyway. It is just temporary, a combination of conditions. Also physical tiredness. A: There doesn't feel like much kusala in my life, those moments > are very short-lived, if they arise at all. N: Of course, they are momentary. Jon reminded us some time ago: many more akusala cittas than kusala cittas. This is just a fact. A: Patience [I have none], courage [what's that?], good cheer > [never heard of it] N: Patience will come with practice, courage: it depends on the citta at that moment, it cannot arise at will, good cheer: well this can easily be with lobha and then it is no good. Nina. 43407 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 11:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Q. Dhamma in the restaurant Hi Larry, op 19-03-2005 03:05 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Nina: "Investigation of thinking of concepts and how the citta operates > in doing that does not lead to the goal." L: I think it is important to recognize concepts. So much of my life is > involved with trying to grasp concept as though it were a solid reality > that it is always a surprise to notice this, that concept is concept. N: Well said. It is important to know the difference between concept and ultimate reality, this is necessary for the development of insight. It will only become clear, when we begin to learn what realities are. If we begin to be aware of dhammas, even if it is a coarse awareness, not precise yet. Nina. 43408 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 11:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Mateesha, op 18-03-2005 22:34 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...:> > N:>Saññaa that accompanies each citta remembers. > > M: Yes, memory is a phenomena which the suttas dont seem to elaborate > on. I would like to think that the dhamma is ultimately experiential. > If the sanna of every pancaskanda which arises contains past memories > (have I understood it wrongly?) then one must be give rise to all > memories each time sanna comes into being (maybe not?). N: Saññaa arises and falls away with each citta, and thus events can be remembered. Also now: a sound is remembered, and words are formed, and so the meaning of a word is understood, and a whole sentence, and many phrases, so that we follow a reasoning and can draw conclusions. Without saññaa all this would not be possible. Not all experiences of this life are remembered at each moment of citta and the accompanying saññaa. Saññaa arising now marks the object now, only one object. M: Nevertheless > it is good to have an abhidhammic explanation for it. I also wondered > about how memories form. Does it have an element of attachment > (upadana) do you think? (ie - is it an act of attachment?). N: It is not necessarily attachment that conditions the forming of memories, although many times there arises attachment on account of what we remember. Also wrong view: we remember self, a person: attasaññaa. But remembrance of the Dhamma can condiiton awareness and understanding so that there will be anattaa saññaa. We cannot find out exactly how memories form. We only know that all experiences are accumulated in each citta and that because of natural strong dependence condition a past experience, a defilement or past kusala can condition now akusala or kusala. It is helpful to remember this (kusala saññaa!), because understanding conditions will lead to less clinging to my kusala, my akusala. I leave the rest of your post until later, Nina. 43409 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 7:16am Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Frank and Howard In a message dated 3/19/2005 11:16:59 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Hi, Frank - In a message dated 3/19/05 12:48:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, frank@4... writes: > Hi Howard and TG, > > In [M109]: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn109.html > (not the exact sutta I was thinking about originally, but it says the same > thing) > Saying, "Very good, lord," the monk... asked him a further question: "Lord, > what is the cause, what the condition, for the delineation[2] of the > aggregate of form? What is the cause, what the condition, for the > delineation of the aggregate of feeling... perception... fabrications... > consciousness?" > > "Monk, the four great existents (earth, water, fire, &wind) are the cause, > the four great existents the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate > of form. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of > the aggregate of feeling. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for > the delineation of the aggregate of perception. Contact is the cause, > contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of fabrications. > Name-&-form is the cause, name-&-form the condition, for the delineation of > the aggregate of consciousness." > ===================== I'm not clear on what 'delineation' means, but I suppose it means becoming aware of as a phenomenon. If that is so, why would any of this be surprising? I'm not clear on what the point is, Frank. With metta, Howard TG Deliniation is a poor was of saying "manifestation" or simpler yet ... arising. B. Bodhi/Nanamoli has manifestation in MLDB. Causes for particular conditions are being laid down much like a scientist would do so. My view is that the arising of these mental states is the immediate result of contact. This perspective: of immediate 'contact--result,' allows conditional alterations to be directly known as they are felt. I think this sutta as well as hundreds of others indicate that a merely phenomenological viewpoint is not sufficient to grasp the totality of the Buddha's teachings... as much of what the Buddha discusses are "separate" physical realities. TG 43410 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 9:43am Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, TG (and Frank) - In a message dated 3/19/05 3:17:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > My view is that the arising of these mental states is the immediate result > of > contact. This perspective: of immediate 'contact--result,' allows > conditional alterations to be directly known as they are felt. > =================== I don't see immediacy as implied. There are frequent places where the Buddha has said that A is requisite for B when A does not immediately precede B. Birth and death are an example. Also, kamma is condition for kamma vipaka, but rarely with immediate precedence. 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) 43411 From: frank Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 5:54pm Subject: RE: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Howard, What is it exactly you were asking regarding the honeyball sutta? My impression was you were trying to determine if there was a precise causal relationship (for example in the same way that feeling is the proximate requisite cause for craving) between the aggregate of perception and the aggregate of feeling (what one feels, one perceives). Based on my interpretation of the suttas, there isn't. My impression was you were trying to discern whether there is an atomic precise causal relationship between feeling and perception, and I don't think there is one. In the Buddhist dictionary entry for sankhara nyanatiloka provides some interesting info. The sankhara that is the 2nd link in dependent origination following ignorance is perhaps not exactly the sankhara as one of the 5 aggregates, although there seems like much overlap. You then asked me for a sutta reference to back up the claim that contact is the proximate immediate cause for sankhara (mental formations aggregate), and I provided one which seems to support it, but you seem to have other ideas about what it says. Based on your responses, it sounds like you're discussing some abidhammic subtlety that I have no idea about, so I'll drop out of the thread. It was a mistake to de-lurk :-) From your statement below, it feels like either we're talking about completely different things, or you're trying to address something that I have no clue about. In a way, all communication with humans seems this way. Even though we speak a common language with common understanding of each individual word, perception of the overall body of words arises such that we're effectively in our own worlds and we have no idea what each other is really trying to say. No wonder most relationships end in divorce, and so much discord and animosity between different countries, communities, etc. Even friendly Buddhists can feel like we're talking about completely different things and not understanding what the other friend is driving at. Confused and re-lurking :-) -fk -----Original Message----- From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] Hi, TG (and Frank) - In a message dated 3/19/05 3:17:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > My view is that the arising of these mental states is the immediate result > of > contact. This perspective: of immediate 'contact--result,' allows > conditional alterations to be directly known as they are felt. > =================== I don't see immediacy as implied. There are frequent places where the Buddha has said that A is requisite for B when A does not immediately precede B. Birth and death are an example. Also, kamma is condition for kamma vipaka, but rarely with immediate precedence. With metta, Howard 43412 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 5:55pm Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na TG: "I think this sutta as well as hundreds of others indicate that a merely phenomenological viewpoint is not sufficient to grasp the totality of the Buddha's teachings... as much of what the Buddha discusses are "separate" physical realities." Hi TG, M brains are so mushy these days I don't have any idea on what a "merely phenomenological viewpoint" might be but I have a thought on separate physical realities. I've been trying to understand Nagarjuna via Tsongkhapa & Co. via Hopkins and it seems to me they are saying there is no independent arising in dependent arising, therefore there is no separate, independent conditioning factor in dependent arising. Essentially there is no independent other, no object independent of sense-base or consciousness in dependent arising. A somewhat outdated translation of paticcasamuppada is "dependent co-arising". That's the way I'm understanding it at the moment. Do you have a different view? Frankly, it's a little difficult to see this dependence in my relations with the world. Larry 43413 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 6:06pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Q. Visuddhimagga - Nina / James Hello Nina and James, Thank you both for your comments. There are points that I want to answer more directly but have no time at the moment as I must go to work. Just 'voicing' my dis-ease at the time has made me feel better. I agree with James, it is based on craving - wanting results NOW. I remember K.Sujin saying 'begin again', Nina, and it reminds me of the times we used to meet once a week at Mom Dusadee's house somewhere in Bkk. There is craving for the past and wanting something good for the future, but how futile is that!!!!! Patience [there is a bit], courage [a little] and good cheer - I'm smiling, which probably means lobha :-) Azita 43414 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 1:09pm Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, Frank - In a message dated 3/19/05 8:55:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, frank@4... writes: > > Hi Howard, > What is it exactly you were asking regarding the honeyball sutta? My > impression was you were trying to determine if there was a precise causal > relationship (for example in the same way that feeling is the proximate > requisite cause for craving) between the aggregate of perception and the > aggregate of feeling (what one feels, one perceives). Based on my > interpretation of the suttas, there isn't. My impression was you were trying > to discern whether there is an atomic precise causal relationship between > feeling and perception, and I don't think there is one. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: What I wanted to know was whether the conditionality between vedana and sa~n~na is symmetrical or asymmetrical. Specifically I wrote the following: "In the Honeyball Sutta the Buddha says that what one feels one perceives (or recognizes); that is, sa~n~na depends on vedana. Nowhere, I believe, is it said that vedana depends on sa~n~na. Now according to Abhidhamma, vedana and sa~n~na are universals that *co-occur* in every mindstate. Given that this is so, I wonder in what what sense there holds the asymmetrical dependence of sa~n~na on vedana. In what sense is vedana requisite for sa~n~na but not vice-versa? " The point is that Abhidhamma's claim of both occurring in every mindstate seems to confuse the issue, and I was simply wondering what it means for vedana to condition sa~n~na any more than vice-versa. That's all. ---------------------------------------------- > In the Buddhist dictionary entry for sankhara nyanatiloka provides some > interesting info. The sankhara that is the 2nd link in dependent origination > following ignorance is perhaps not exactly the sankhara as one of the 5 > aggregates, although there seems like much overlap. > You then asked me for a sutta reference to back up the claim that contact > is the proximate immediate cause for sankhara (mental formations aggregate), > and I provided one which seems to support it, but you seem to have other > ideas about what it says. > Based on your responses, it sounds like you're discussing some abidhammic > subtlety that I have no idea about, so I'll drop out of the thread. It was a > mistake to de-lurk :-) > -------------------------------------- Howard: Wow, I didn't know that I could do so much fdamage so quickly! ;-) --------------------------------------- From your statement below, it feels like either we're> > talking about completely different things, or you're trying to address > something that I have no clue about. In a way, all communication with humans > seems this way. Even though we speak a common language with common > understanding of each individual word, perception of the overall body of > words arises such that we're effectively in our own worlds and we have no > idea what each other is really trying to say. No wonder most relationships > end in divorce, and so much discord and animosity between different > countries, communities, etc. Even friendly Buddhists can feel like we're > talking about completely different things and not understanding what the > other friend is driving at. > > Confused and re-lurking :-) > > -fk > ====================== Don't just lurk, Frank. This was a relatively unimportant matter that I raised and that I am quite ready to drop. Stick around. No doubt there'll soon be some actually *important* things to talk about!! 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) 43415 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 6:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi Jon & Howard, > > J: This is important because there are certain 'practices' that are based > > on the idea of cutting off the chain at one of the links. People are > > always having ideas about short-cuts that the Buddha himself seems to > > have overlooked ;-)) > H: I agree completely with you on this, Jon. Some folks take the position > that "the chain is to be cut" at one link or other, usually the vedana --> > tanha link, and I've often expressed disagreement with this position. Kel: Does wrong 'practice' include Mogok sayadaw's teachings? Is his circle of D.O wrong with arrows at vedana-tanha link? http://www.triplegem.plus.com/tdaing1.htm - kel 43416 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 2:40pm Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Howard and Frank In a message dated 3/19/2005 2:44:40 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: I don't see immediacy as implied. There are frequent places where the Buddha has said that A is requisite for B when A does not immediately precede B. Birth and death are an example. Also, kamma is condition for kamma vipaka, but rarely with immediate precedence. With metta, Howard Birth and Death are not immediate if they are thinking of just the "birth event." I think of them as describing the birth of a life and the death of a life. In such a case, I would consider them immediate cause and effect ... as the birth of a life ends in death. When the Buddha speaks of Birth in the 12 Fold Chain, I think he is speaking of the birth of the whole life, not solely the "birth event." This is evidenced by the Buddha explaining the various sufferings that occur during the course of a life. Regarding asynchronous kamma...I think its just an expression. I think of it like two batteries. If one is charged and immediately used...the cause and effect relationship is clear enough. But if the other one is charged but not used for 5 years, it may seem the cause and effect is asynchronous...but its not really. It just wasn't clearly apparent as to how the "charges" were stored and moved along. In each case there was continuous cause and effect all along the line. TG 43417 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 3:00pm Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Larry In a message dated 3/19/2005 5:55:58 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: TG: "I think this sutta as well as hundreds of others indicate that a merely phenomenological viewpoint is not sufficient to grasp the totality of the Buddha's teachings... as much of what the Buddha discusses are "separate" physical realities." Hi TG, M brains are so mushy these days I don't have any idea on what a "merely phenomenological viewpoint" might be but I have a thought on separate physical realities. TG I'm just going to answer the Honeyball question now as the others require me to think too much. The Buddha speaks about Rods and Weapons in the Honeyball. Nothing is ultimately a "separate physical state" cause they are all related. But Rods and Weapons are spoken about in the Honeyball without a demand placed on the student/reader as seeing them only as viable in connection with consciousness/mentality. I've been trying to understand Nagarjuna via Tsongkhapa & Co. via Hopkins and it seems to me they are saying there is no independent arising in dependent arising, therefore there is no separate, independent conditioning factor in dependent arising. Essentially there is no independent other, no object independent of sense-base or consciousness in dependent arising. A somewhat outdated translation of paticcasamuppada is "dependent co-arising". That's the way I'm understanding it at the moment. Do you have a different view? Frankly, it's a little difficult to see this dependence in my relations with the world. Larry TG I may view it only slightly and subtly differently; and too complicated to get into the difference right now. Its basically the way I see it though. TG 43418 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 11:14pm Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Dear matthew, Not sure what you are describing is seeing, could you explain why it is? ""Using this device, knowns as a BrainPort, one blind woman who was > previously unable to stand upright without holding onto something and > concentrating, was able to dance."" =========== What about the many blind people who are well capable of standing, and moving (even dancing) without this device? ============= I don't see how the abhidhamma, with its rigid categories of rupas, > vatthus, dvaras and so on, could possibly account for phenomena like > this. We need the careful, patient observation and experiment of > neuroscience to begin to understand the structure of consciousness. > Otherwise we're whistling in the dark and spinning fantasies. >================== I looked into neuroscience, have to say it looked more like witchcraft than anything to help us understand. Just my opinion. Robertk --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > There's a new technology that allows blind people to "see" with > different parts of the body. > > For example, a blind subject can "see" by having a camera mounted on > his or her forehead that feeds a signal into an electronic device that > turns the pattern of light and dark into electrical impulses. The > pulses stimulate an array of 144 electrodes on a grid about the size > of a postage stamp which zap the coded image into -- the blind > person's tongue! At first, the blind subjects describe the sensation > as being like candy pop rocks exploding, but later they experience > 43419 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 11:33pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 150 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(t) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] Questions i Through how many doors can vitakka and vicåra experience an object? ii Can vitakka and vicåra think of paramattha dhammas? iii What is the difference between vitakka and vicåra? iv Do vitakka and vicåra always arise together? v Can vitakka and vicåra arise in a sense-door process? vi Which types of kåmåvacara cittas (cittas of the sensesphere) are not accompanied by vitakka and vicåra? vii In which stages of jhåna does vitakka arise? viii Why is vitakka abandoned in the higher stages of jhåna? ix In which stages of jhåna does vicåra arise? x Both vitakka and vicåra accompany the citta which is mindful of nåma and rúpa. Are both vitakka and vicåra factors of the eightfold Path? ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)finished!] Metta, Sarah ====== 43420 From: matheesha Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:16am Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Nina, >N:Also now: a sound is remembered, and words are formed, and so > the meaning of a word is understood, and a whole sentence, and many phrases, > so that we follow a reasoning and can draw conclusions. Without saññaa all > this would not be possible. M: Yes, that does seem to show the flow of information and also it's processing. Storage would be the next step. In a way since there is no doubt that it occures its not essential to find out the exact nuts and bolts of how it happens. I suppose understanding that the three characterisitcs are applicable in every instance for seen and unseen mechanisms are enough. >N:because understanding conditions will lead to less clinging to my > kusala, my akusala. M: This is a movement towards Right View. Do you think purely learning and applying this way to day to day life (without formal sathipattana meditation) is a path to nibbana? I suspect for some it might be and possible there is 'proof' in the suttas for this. >N: I leave the rest of your post until later, M: thats fine, no hurry! metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Mateesha, > > op 18-03-2005 22:34 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...:> > > N:>Saññaa that accompanies each citta remembers. > > > > M: Yes, memory is a phenomena which the suttas dont seem to elaborate > > on. I would like to think that the dhamma is ultimately experiential. > > If the sanna of every pancaskanda which arises contains past memories > > (have I understood it wrongly?) then one must be give rise to all > > memories each time sanna comes into being (maybe not?). > N: Saññaa arises and falls away with each citta, and thus events can be > remembered. Also now: a sound is remembered, and words are formed, and so > the meaning of a word is understood, and a whole sentence, and many phrases, > so that we follow a reasoning and can draw conclusions. Without saññaa all > this would not be possible. > Not all experiences of this life are remembered at each moment of citta and > the accompanying saññaa. Saññaa arising now marks the object now, only one > object. > > M: Nevertheless > > it is good to have an abhidhammic explanation for it. I also wondered > > about how memories form. Does it have an element of attachment > > (upadana) do you think? (ie - is it an act of attachment?). > N: It is not necessarily attachment that conditions the forming of memories, > although many times there arises attachment on account of what we remember. > Also wrong view: we remember self, a person: attasaññaa. But remembrance of > the Dhamma can condiiton awareness and understanding so that there will be > anattaa saññaa. > We cannot find out exactly how memories form. We only know that all > experiences are accumulated in each citta and that because of natural strong > dependence condition a past experience, a defilement or past kusala can > condition now akusala or kusala. It is helpful to remember this (kusala > saññaa!), because understanding conditions will lead to less clinging to my > kusala, my akusala. > I leave the rest of your post until later, > Nina. 43421 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:52am Subject: Re: Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 142 - Nina Hello Azita, and all, Just came home from the Cooran weekend ... you were missed, everyone sends hugs - a shame you were a thousand kilometres north this time. Just think, if you had come, you could have been put on the right track about Right View by KenH - like the rest of us. :-) Things could be worse, girl. Andrew can tell you about the crash of a branch falling, and how, when an investigation was made, there was a large python compressing a ringtail possum in order to make it fit into is dislocated jaws. To save or not to save? Not. Pythons have to eat ... but what's a little domanassa compared to that? I can relate to your 'down' feelings - I'd love to have a happy- chappy response ... but all I can advise is 'endure' - fortunately there is anicca. This too shall pass. :-) Looking forward to seeing you in a week in Bangkok, on the evening of Monday 28th. Nothing like being with admirable friends to refresh and revitalise the spiritual life. :-) metta, Chris 43422 From: nina Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 3:09am Subject: Visuddhimagga XIV, 145, 146, and Tiika. Visuddhimagga XIV, 145, 146, and Tiika. Text Vis.:145. (xviii)-(xix) The light (quick) state of the [mental] body is 'lightness of the body'. The light (quick) state of consciousness is 'lightness of consciousness'. They have the characteristic of quieting heaviness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. Their function is to crush heaviness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. The Tiika explains heaviness as slowness or sluggishness. It states that this designates sloth and torpor or the four naamakkhandhas that occur in that way. Text Vis.: They are manifested as nonsluggishness of the [mental] body and of consciousness. Tiika: They are opposed to sluggishness, they are not merely absence of sluggishness. Text Vis.: Their proximate cause is the [mental] body and consciousness. They should be regarded as opposed to the defilements of stiffness and torpor, which cause heaviness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. **** N: When there are sloth and torpor one has no energy for kusala. Lightness (lahutaa) of cetasikas and of citta are opposed to the mental heaviness of sloth and torpor and the other defilements. One may feel too tired to perform any kind of kusala. Lightness of cetasikas and citta support the kusala citta so that it is gentle and light, and at such a moment all sluggishness, mental heaviness and tiredness are gone. When someone needs help one is able to react quickly, and have alertness to doing what is beneficial. One does not waste an opportunity for dana, sila or bhaavanaa. Mental lightness supports the kusala citta in the development of insight. It supports citta to be alert and non-forgetful of naama and ruupa that appear. **** Text Vis.146: (xx)-(xxi) The malleable state of the [mental] body is 'malleability of the body'. The malleable state of consciousness is 'malleability of consciousness'. They have the characteristic of quieting rigidity in the [mental] body and in consciousness. N: The Tiika states that hardness, thaddha, or rigidity, thambho, are terms for wrong view and conceit etc., or for the four naamakhandhas that exert themselves in that way. Text Vis.: Their function is to crush stiffening in the [mental] body and in consciousness. They are manifested as nonresistance. N: The Tiika explains that by crushing stiffness they manifest themselves by being free of obstruction with regard to whatever object, or that they cause the accompanying dhammas to be non-resistant (appa.tighaata) in that way. Text Vis.: Their proximate cause is the [mental] body and consciousness. They should be regarded as opposed to the defilements of views, conceit (pride), etc., which cause stiffening of the [mental] body and of consciousness. **** N: Pliancy (muduta) of citta and cetasikas perform their function in assisting kusala citta. They suppress mental rigidity. When someone is stubborn in clinging to wrong view there is mental rigidity, one is not openminded to the Dhamma. Because of conceit he may not want to listen to true Dhamma and thinks that his opinion is the best. Malleability or pliancy suppresses such mental rigidity and causes the citta to be non-resistant, openminded to the Truth of Dhamma. ***** Nina. 43423 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 3:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Visuddhimagga - Nina / James Dear Azita, thanks for your mail. Wonderful. Yes, sweet memories about Mom Dusadee's house. Do you remember the discussions there? I hear the late Phra Dhhammadhari say to me about unpleasant feeling: 'I know how unpleasant it feels'. Anyway, it is only feeling. Nina. op 20-03-2005 03:06 schreef gazita2002 op gazita2002@y...: > Just 'voicing' my dis-ease at the time has made me feel better. 43424 From: Matthew Miller Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:27am Subject: re: Seeing with the Tongue RobK wrote: > Dear matthew, Not sure what you are describing is seeing, could you > explain why it is? Well, if we define "seeing" as sensitivity to light signals, then this is seeing. Ultimately, all of the input from the sense organs are converted into nerve impulses with which the brain assembles a "world." I have a lot of difficulty with the abhidhamms's segregation of the senses into rigid, unchanging categories. Our sense organs evolved. We primates are very visual creatures, but most of our ancestors and relatives are not. The vast majority of creatures on earth do not have light-sensitive organs. Many have such alien sensory systems that we can only imagine what it must be like to experience the world as they do -- such as the echolocation of bats. One of my principal objections to the abhidhamma is that it describes human consciousness in fixed, eternal categories carved in stone. The modern faculties of homo sapiens, the way we take in signals and process them, have evolved over millions of years. But they are not absolute and unchanging. Take vision for example. The earliest form of vision, amongst our invertebrate ancestors, was just a blurry sensitivity to changes in lightness and darkness. But this was sufficient for detecting, say, the shadow of a predator passing overhead, and so those organisms with the capability to see light survived and reproduced. Obviously, later developments that allowed for more refined perception of form, movement, color, etc survived and were passed on as well. The whole purpose of having sense "doors" is to be able to perceive the world -- to better avoid predators, forage for food, rear our young. We can only really understand the senses in this context. Amongst forest animals, for example, scent is a very important directional sense for perceiving things (prey or a mate) over great distances. This is because sound is quickly muffled by surrounding foliage, which also blocks vision. The same goes for "atta." We primates are very communal creatures. Forming cooperative social orders helped make up for the fact that we hairless apes are rather weak and scrawny. Having a social brain, we also developed a sense of "self." N.B. Doesn't anyone find it curious that nowhere in Buddhism is the question asked -- "Why do we have a sense of 'self' (illusory or not) in the first place?" What purpose does it serve? The sense of self, like the human brain, the human eye or the human foot, is an adaptation to help the organism survive and to reproduce. But the human brain became so large that it became possible for it to take things into its own hands. It could do things that might not actually benefit survival and reproduction. An obvious example is contraception. The Buddha arrived at a late stage in human biological and cultural evolution and pointed out that many of our behaviors have exceeded their usefulness. Their value for survival and reproduction has expired and they are causing unnecessary suffering. (though of course he did not use those terms) At the beginning of the 21st century, it is intellectually irresponsible to try to construct a model of human consciousness that does not take into account evolution. That would be like trying to construct a model of how the planets orbit the sun without taking into account the force of gravity. > I looked into neuroscience, have to say it looked more like > witchcraft than anything to help us understand. Just my opinion. That strikes me as a curious thing to say. Could you elaborate? Since I work in the medical field, every day I see ways in which neuroscience has helped us to understand the biology underlying the human mind and, more importantly, treat diseases of that biology. It is very hard for someone to practice vipassana or jhana if, say, imbalances of neurotransmitters are causing them to hallucinate or be frozen with anxiety. Although neuroscience is the youngest branch of medicine, it is undergoing a big bang of growth right now. Matthew 43425 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi, Charles Charles DaCosta wrote: >Jon, > >All you have to do is die. > > I'm afraid I don't quite see the connection. Anyway, why should this time be any different from all the previous times? ;-)) Jon > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jonothan Abbott > Sent: Thursday, 10 March, 2005 14:05 > Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions > Jon Wrote: > While I agree generally with James' reply about the important difference > between holding opinions about things and the knowledge that comes from > direct experience, I'm not so sure that the sutta you quote really says > what you say it does ('no opinions'). I think it's more about the danger > of clinging to opinions or ideas, having preconceived notions, etc. For > example, it talks about <>, < dependence on which you regard another as inferior>>, wrong view about > becoming or not, etc. I have my doubts as to whether the ideal of having > no opinions is really attainable. > > 43426 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi, Matthew What is described here seems to be the use of the various senses other than the eye-sense to get an experience of space and depth of the world "out there", or a sense of balance. (If I read the report correctly, it is the body sense located in the tongue that is put to use here -- i.e., it is not the taste sense that is used.) There is nothing particularly remarkable about that. Yes, the added input from the camera is interesting, but there are known parallels for other sense-doors (for example, using experiences through body sense to "improve hearing"). The abhidhamma says that there are only 5 sense-doors, and that the object experienced through each cannot be experienced through any other sense-door. Is there anything here that you see as calling that into question? It would be useful if you could be a bit more specific as regards the comments in your last paragraph. Jon Matthew Miller wrote: >There's a new technology that allows blind people to "see" with >different parts of the body. > >For example, a blind subject can "see" by having a camera mounted on >his or her forehead that feeds a signal into an electronic device that >turns the pattern of light and dark into electrical impulses. The >pulses stimulate an array of 144 electrodes on a grid about the size >of a postage stamp which zap the coded image into -- the blind >person's tongue! At first, the blind subjects describe the sensation >as being like candy pop rocks exploding, but later they experience >something more "out there" in the world -- a sense of space, depth and >shape. > >Using this device, knowns as a BrainPort, one blind woman who was >previously unable to stand upright without holding onto something and >concentrating, was able to dance. > >... > >I don't see how the abhidhamma, with its rigid categories of rupas, >vatthus, dvaras and so on, could possibly account for phenomena like >this. We need the careful, patient observation and experiment of >neuroscience to begin to understand the structure of consciousness. >Otherwise we're whistling in the dark and spinning fantasies. > > 43427 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Kel - In a message dated 3/19/05 9:35:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, kelvin_lwin@y... writes: > Kel: Does wrong 'practice' include Mogok sayadaw's teachings? Is > his circle of D.O wrong with arrows at vedana-tanha link? > ===================== I'm going on what I've read in the suttas and what makes sense to me, and they seem to go together. I haven't read this particular Sayadaw's writings yet. Perhaps he's right, perhaps I'm wrong. It is what it is, and I have no axe to grind in this matter. BTW, the *practice* of being clearly and precisely attentive to the mind, and particularly to be mindful of our mental reacting to vedana, is, IMO, an important, even essential, practice in any case. I believe that such practice cultivates important insight that can contribute to diminishing and even uprooting aspects of ignorance. Ultimately, however, it is the uprooting of ignorance with the sword of wisdom that I consider to be critical, and not some "link-cutting operation". Most essentially, we are enslaved by avijja and freed by vijja. Much cultivation of a variety of sorts, including cultivation of calm, is needed to produce, support, and enable the liberating vijja. 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) 43428 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Matheesha, op 20-03-2005 10:16 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...:> >> N:Also now: a sound is remembered, and words are formed, and so >> the meaning of a word is understood.... > M: Yes, that does seem to show the flow of information and also it's > processing. Storage would be the next step. N: Yes, but I avoid storage, because that suggests lastingness. Also what is accumulated changes, new experiences are also accumulated and added, but even the word added is not good. There isn't anything that stays the same. M: In a way since there is > no doubt that it occures its not essential to find out the exact > nuts and bolts of how it happens. N: I quite agree, that is not the purpose of the teachings. The Dhamma does not teach neurology, it teaches liberation. M:> N:because understanding conditions will lead to less clinging to my >> kusala, my akusala. > M: This is a movement towards Right View. Do you think purely > learning and applying this way to day to day life (without formal > sathipattana meditation) is a path to nibbana? N: Understanding is first intellectual, and it will grow through satipatthana. By satipatthana I do not mean anything formal, it all has to do with daily life. The satipatthanasutta points to the development of understanding in daily life, no matter which of the four sections we take. This is the sure way to enlightenment. But we have to beware of clinging! M: I suspect for some it > might be and possible there is 'proof' in the suttas for this. N: I think for all, and sutta and commentaries explain this. The monk's life is different from the lay life, but also the monk has to be aware while washing his robes, going pindapatha, etc. The Vinaya is closely connected with satipatthana. **** Part 2: N:The maggacitta eradicates defilements and experiences the unconditioned element, nibbaana. .. M: How can an unconditioned element be experienced? Shouldnt there be no experience of it? (ie- identified by not having felt anything ..sort of like sleep?) N: It can be experienced by paññaa which has been developed to that stage. Not like sleep at all. The greatest alertness Lokuttara pannñaa is supported by many sobhana cittas which are also lokuttara. Does the lokuttara vipaka citta mean that phala is arising as an Effect of experience while on the path. Thank you, Metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Matheesha, > op 17-03-2005 08:33 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: > >> N: We have accumulated so much attachment and ignorance. > > > > M:This idea of accumilation is interesting. Does the word skandas > > refer to the fact that certain things can accumilate? If they do they > > must be the same as thinking habits/memory is it not? > N: Each citta (viññaa.nakkhandha) falls away but since it is immediately > succeeded by the next one there are conditions for accumulating good and bad > inclinations (the formations khandha), all experiences, all we learnt, from > moment to moment, from life to life. > When we think of life as an uninterrupted series of cittas, the fact of > accumulation becomes more understandable. > Indeed, you can notice that habits are formed, what you experienced is > remembered. Saññaa that accompanies each citta remembers. We can remember > things that happened long ago. What has been accumulated is a condition for > the arising again of akusala citta and cetasikas, and of kusala citta and > sobhana cetasikas. Paññaa, a sobhana cetasika, is also accumulated and can > develop from life to life. > Kamma, good and evil deeds, are accumulated and can produce result, even in > future lives. > M: What does abhidhamma state about magga and phala citta. This is > > another area i would like to explore. > N: When paññaa has been developed in stages of insight it can become > accomplished to the degree that enlightenment can be attained. The > maggacitta eradicates defilements and experiences the unconditioned element, > nibbaana. The phala citta is the lokuttara vipaakacitta that succeeds the > maggacitta immediately in the same process, and this also experiences > nibbaana. > Since defilements are deeply rooted, they are eradicated in the subsequent > stages of enlightenment, until they are all eradicated at the fourth stage, > the stage of the arahat. > However, for us now it is more important to understand the right Path > leading to enlightenment. > Nina. 43429 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi again, Kel - In a message dated 3/20/05 9:00:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, Upasaka writes: > ... the *practice* of being clearly and precisely attentive to the mind, > and particularly to be mindful of our mental reacting to vedana, is, IMO, an > important, even essential, practice in any case. I believe that such practice > cultivates important insight that can contribute to diminishing and even > uprooting aspects of ignorance. Ultimately, however, it is the uprooting of > ignorance with the sword of wisdom that I consider to be critical, and not some > "link-cutting operation". ====================== One more point Kel, which I think may serve to clarify. There is no question that in the unraveling reading of D.O., with the cessation of vedana there is the cessation of tanha. Some folks think this then means that "all we have to do" is pay careful, concentrated attention to the arising of vedana, with the mind in a calm state, so as not to react with craving/aversion. I think this is a fallacious piece of reasoning. First of all, even if there are multiple times that one feels but, due to clear mindfulness and calm, does not react in that instance with tanha, that will only serve to usefully cultivate the mind, but not directly liberate the mind. The actual dispositional link from vedana to tanha, is only uprooted when the core basis for that link is removed, and that core basis is avijja. When ignorance has ceased, vedana is no longer infected with that virus, and it will no longer lead to craving, clinging, becoming, and suffering. Also, "not reacting" is not something one can just "decide" to do. When the deep-seated, ignorance-based disposition to react with craving is still in place, our occasions of non-reaction are few and far between, and generally weak, incomplete, and inadequate. So long as avijja is operative, the forward cycle of D.O. will be repeatedly operative. By practice of the Dhamma, which includes careful attention to all aspects of the 12-link chain as they arise, the mind is cultivated, and useful conditions produced, culminating in the destruction of ignorance, at which time the entire 12-link chain will almost instantaneously fold up like line of dominoes or a house of cards. The entire practice of the Dhamma is based on all sorts of skillful means conditioning the obliteration of ignorance. 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) 43430 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Kel kelvin_lwin wrote: >Hi Jon & Howard, > > > > Kel: Does wrong 'practice' include Mogok sayadaw's teachings? Is >his circle of D.O wrong with arrows at vedana-tanha link? > >http://www.triplegem.plus.com/tdaing1.htm > > I have looked at the link; it is a very long article ;-)) Perhaps a better approach would be to discuss anything from the article that represents your own view on the subject (trying to discuss the views of (absent) third parties is usually not so fruitful, due to the difficulty of agreeing on what the person means to say anyway). Do you have a view on 'breaking the chain' at the vedana link in particular? Please bring up for discussion, especially any sutta references on the point. Jon 43431 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:51am Subject: Re: Seeing with the Tongue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > ROBK> > I looked into neuroscience, have to say it looked more like > > witchcraft than anything to help us understand. Just my opinion. > ==================== > That strikes me as a curious thing to say. Could you elaborate? > > ========- Dear matthew, Perhaps like apes playing with computers is a better description of what I meant. Say some aliens came to earth and saw the internet working on a computer. They take the computer back to mars , absolutely sure that the internet is in the computer. So they do tests, find hotspots etc. Maybe they zero in on the battery pack and find that if they prod it or cool it or something funny things happen. So they think the battery is key. They spend vast resorces and make a pefect battery, the monitor becomes brighter.. Progress!... Or they pull out a wire and the monitor looks funny. AH! that must be it.... The Abhidhamma is different it points to actual realities, namas and rupas, that are arising now, it is the only way (I believe) that anyone can ever come to understand what mind and matter are. Robertk 43432 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge 2 Dear Matheesha, something happened to my post to you. I shall finish part 2. It was broken off. op 18-03-2005 22:34 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: Part 2: N:The maggacitta eradicates defilements and experiences the unconditioned element, nibbaana. .. M: How can an unconditioned element be experienced? Shouldnt there be no experience of it? (ie- identified by not having felt anything ..sort of like sleep?) N: It can be experienced by paññaa which has been developed to that stage. Not like sleep at all. Lokuttara pannñaa is supported by many sobhana cittas which are also lokuttara. There is a high degree of direct understanding and mindfulness and great alertness. M: Does the lokuttara vipaka citta mean that phala is arising as an > Effect of the magga citta, (which is the Cause)? N: Yes, it is the result. M: Does abhidhamma explain why defilements are eradicated with magga > citta? N: It explains that the latent tendencies are eradicated stage by stage, so that these cannot condition the arising of akusala cittas. M: Is it possible for say ..a sothapanna to experience phala citta again > on a later date at will? I have heard this mentioned in some schools > of theravada meditation. N: Only those who are proficient in jhana. They can have phalacitta experiencing nibbana again. > M: Interestingly i wonder if it is possible for there to be more than > just the 4 x 2 magga-phala citta depending on the maturity of the > mental faculties of the practitioner. But I would suspect that the > answer is no :) N: Those who are proficient in jhana and have reached the different stages can have forty (if we count jhanas as fivefold) lokuttara cittas instead of eight. M: The suttas seem to suggest that there maybe other ways of getting rid > of defilements as well. Would the abhidhamma support this? N: Which sutta? By samatha defilements can be temporarily subdued. Only by the development of the eightfold Path/satipatthana, defilements are completely eradicated. M: The suttas also seem to suggest that nibbana is possible by just > using void/emptiness/letting go as an object of meditation. N: Do you have a sutta at hand? Emptiness is emptiness of the self. We take seeing for self now. How to let go? By understanding it precisely as an element that experiences visible object. There is no other way leading to detachment. M: Would > abhidhamma insist on udaya-vya nana/insight knowledge of impermenence > to give rise to magga-phala citta? N: The three characteristics of dhammas, including impermanence have to be clearly realized by paññaa before enlightenment can be attained. > N:> However, for us now it is more important to understand the right > Path >> leading to enlightenment. > > M: Yes, but I feel my needs are met in that department :) I'm trying > to find out what abidhamma provides as explanation for things we > experience while on the path. N: We experience many defilements while on the Path. If we do not know exactly when we are clinging to result it is very dangerous. We are bound to mislead ourselves, taking for the Path what is not the Path. The Abhidhamma is a great help for understanding defilements in more detail. Nina. 43433 From: Matthew Miller Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 7:27am Subject: Re: Seeing with the Tongue Robertk wrote: > Perhaps like apes playing with computers is a better description of > what I meant... they pull out a wire and the monitor looks funny. AH! > that must be it.... > I agree. Apes playing with computers is a delightful analogy for science. We did not evolve to do science. We evolved to rear our young, forage for food, and so on. Our ability to see patterns and understand the world arose for practical purposes, activities of daily living. In general, our capacity to understand reality only applies to things at a limited human scale. Just as our eyes and upright posture are best suited for hunting on the African savannah, and not in the jungles of our gorilla brethren, so too our brain gave us survival and reproductive advantages in a specific environment. But the brain is poorly suited to really understanding the ultimate nature of reality. That takes (to borrow a Buddhist phrase) "going against the stream." > The Abhidhamma is different it points to actual realities, namas and > rupas, that are arising now, it is the only way (I believe) that > anyone can ever come to understand what mind and matter are. How so? Through introspection? Matthew 43434 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 2:59am Subject: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi, all - This is a different sort of post for DSG, I think. ;-) Yesterday we rented a DVD of a film entitled The Forgotten. We haven't viewed it yet, but I did read the plot description. It is about a woman for whom more and more aspects of her life, starting with her son, seem to be missing. She remembers things which others tell her never were! More and more of her apparent life appears to have been complete illusion. In the middle of the night last night, I began to think about this film and its theme. It occurred to me that it describes exactly what my life, and everyone's life, actually is. I realized, not as just a matter of theory, but deeply and emotionally, that the entire past is gone. There is no mother of mine [Was there ever?], there is no father and no grandparents. Aunts & uncles are "missing", a friend of mine, dear as the dearest brother, is nowhere to be seen. And more than this - gone are my young sons, though older ones now seem to exist. Where are those young sons of mine? Where are the teachers and friends of my so-called childhood? Where is anything, even what seemed to be but moments ago? Then I *saw* that there is nothing at all that remains even for a moment, and I saw that nothing *truly* exists at any time. Everything flies away so radically that I had to ask if anything is ever "here" at all! And then a tremendous terror arose in me and renewed itself constantly, and there was an unbearable suffering that nothing could seem to allay. Only by finally turning my mind to the thought that there is a haven of safety at the base of all this was I able to induce sufficient calm to fall back asleep. Now it is the morning, and everything seems "normal". What that means is that I am back to my standard out-of-touch-with-reality mode, my ignorance-is-bliss mode. And my choice appears to be between an in-touch terror, and an out-of-touch calm, a no-win choice, a choice suited for fools. Part of what I conclude from all this is that without cultivating a solid, dependable base of calm and equanimity, I will run from the terror of seeing the radical impermanence and unreality of all dhammas, and so long as I cannot stand and face the facts, genuine liberation and peace can never be attained. And thus, as I see it, samatha bhavana is a critically important part of Dhamma practice, a part that I must work on at all costs. 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) 43435 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 8:19am Subject: Dhamma Thread (283) Dear Dhamma Friends, The first citta to arise in so called fine-material-being is called patisandhi citta or rebirth-consciousness or linking consciousness. This consciousness is one of 5 rupavipaka citta or 5 fine-material- resultant-consciousness. These 5 rupavipaka cittas are the resultant consciousness of 5 rupakusala cittas or simply 5 rupa jhaanas. These 5 rupa jhaanas are simply 1st jhana, 2nd jhana, 3rd jhana, 4th jhana and 5th jhana. These jhanas are jhana cittas in their immediate past life. Because of the power of jhana, when they are dying rupa-brahmas-to-be escaped from their bodily pain by staying in rupa jhana. In these jhanas especially in the early jhanas that is the first three rupa jhanas there is no pain at all because of sukha which is a constituent of the first three rupa jhanas. When they are dying these jhanas arise because of their tendency which was raised by their frequent practice in their immediate past life. But if they did not do jhana near dying there will not be any jhana at all when they were dying. When jhanas arose near dying, they served as marana-aasanna-javana- cittas or dying-frequenting-mental-impulsive-consciousness and because of the power of these jhanas they are reborn in corresponding rupa bhumis or 'fine-material-realms. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. 43436 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 8:55am Subject: Dhamma Thread (284) Dear Dhamma Friends, The first citta in rupa brahma or fine material being is one one 5 rupavipaka cittas or 5 'fine-material-resultant-consciousness' depending on what was their marana-asanna-javana in their immediate past life. This earliest citta is called patisandhi citta and this citta is followed by the first bhavanga citta which is characteristically almost the same with patisandhi citta. This citta is then followed by indefinite numbers of bhavanga cittas. When there arises vithi cittas, bhavanga cittas have to stop to arise and the first vithi citta that arise in rupa brahma is mano- dvaravajjana-citta or mind-door-adverting-consciousness. This citta is followed by jhana vithi vara. In a given brahma there will be only a single paytisandhi citta and this is followed by the same citta serving as bhavanga cittas and it is this citta that will end up as cuti citta when this brahma leaves his world of brahma. In between are vithi cittas. Again these vithi cittas are mostly jhana vithi varas. But they may well be kamavacara cittas. In rupa brahmas there are possibilities that cakkhuvinnana cittas, sotavinnana cittas and their related cittas to arise. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. 43437 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 9:04am Subject: Re: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi Howard, I heard a similar story once by another Yogi during interview time. He was diligently practicing at home and unending anicca nature of things kinda hit him squarely in the face. I guess he was scared and dejected at the fruitility of everything. So he felt the need to come to the center and deal with it there. The presiding sayadaw said "oh, you barely missed panna". Don't let kilesa turn the path from panna to akusala. I think it relates to posts about samvega and using the opportunity. Sometime the mind gets overwhelmed and I believe that's why sayadaws give an anchor of some kind. Ultimately though the anchor doesn't increase panna and merely prevent one from getting swept away. I wonder what if you saw the experience not as terror but as precursor to baya-nana. - Kel 43438 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 9:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi Howard, I believe Mogok sayadaw's teaching is summarized in the diagram of chapter 2. Avijja is smack in the middle with tanha so he would agree with panna being the key. I mostly asked out of curiosity if you're familar with his teachings and what position you were trying to refute. > H: Some folks think this then means that "all we > have to do" is pay careful, concentrated attention to the arising of vedana, > with the mind in a calm state, so as not to react with craving/aversion. I think > this is a fallacious piece of reasoning. Kel: Can't panna also arise by doing this? I guess I don't see what's so bad about the position since it's mostly all we can do. Of course it would depend on the level of concentrated attention. - kel 43439 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 9:23am Subject: Dhamma Thread (285) Dear Dhamma Friends, For those who are new to Dhamma Threads, I would like to summarise what have been written under the heading of Dhamma Threads. Dhamma Thread posts are primarily written directly at DSG site. And then each post is forwarded to JourneyToNibbana, where I am available most of the time. Dhamma Thread posts are also forwarded to triplegem Yahoo Group and dhamma-list Yahoo Group. The site dhamma-list does not receive early posts under the heading of Dhamma Threads. Dhamma Thread is strated with simple words and explore the real world. In the first few posts ultimate realities are explained in simple words. After a few posts, Dhamma Thread is moved to discussion on different classifications on consciousness or cittas. After many posts on classifications of citta, Dhamma Thread is navigated to be under discussions on cetasika dhammas. Different types of cetasikas are compiled into a few groups. Regarding 19 universal beautiful cetasika 19 cetasikas are grouped into 2 by repeating 'saddha' cetasika or 'confidence' or 'faith' or 'belief'. After completion of discussions on cetasikas, citta and cetasikas are discussed in different ways. After that different rupas are discussed. Nibbana is also discussed in a post as summary. After that Dhamma Thread is moved to procession of consciousness or vithi cittas and vithi varas. There are pancadvara kama javana vithi vara or '5-sense-door sensuous mental impulsive procession of consciousness' and mind-door procession or manodvara vithi vara. In manodvara vithi vara there are kama javana and appana javana. In appana javana there are jhana vithi vara, magga vithi vara, and abhinna vithi vara. When there is a continuous flow of cittas which are the same or when there is a continuous state like cessation, such states are called samapatti or attainment. There are 3 kinds of attainment. They are jhana-attainment or jhana-samapatti, fruition-attainment of phala- samapatti, and cessation-attainment or nirodha-samapatti. These are happenings when vithi cittas are working. When cittas arenot vithi cittas then they have to be bhavanga cittas or patisandhi citta if it is the very first citta in a life or it is cuti citta if it is the very last citta in a life. These cittas have to depend on rupas and there always is interactions between rupa and nama, which includes cittas and cetasikas. These are explained as beings and beings are living in their places called bhumis or realms. Currently Dhamma Thread posts are on bhumis or realms or planes of existence. First manussa bhumi or human realm and the cittas that can arise in human beings have been explained. This is followed by beings in 4 planes of woeful existence or 4 apaya bhumis. After a few posts, they are followed by explanation on deva realms and their possible cittas. Currently Dhamma Thread is running on rupa brahma bhumis and the possible cittas that arise in rupa brahma bhumis. Dhamma Thread posts can easily be navigated at JourneyToNibbana Yahoo Group, which is a Buddhism Discussion Group. Anyone who is interested in Dhamma are welcome to any of JTN, DSG, dhamma-list, and triplegem Yahoo Group. As long as I am available I will be happy to answer any queries that arise related to Dhamma Thread posts and any other Buddhism related things particularly practical approach to liberation. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. 43440 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi, Kel - In a message dated 3/20/05 12:06:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, kelvin_lwin@y... writes: > I wonder what if you > saw the experience not as terror but as precursor to baya-nana. =================== That would have been useful. But how one "sees" an experience cannot be faked or imposed in the moment. Kel, something similar to this happened to me once at a Goenka retreat. I was close, I believe, to a "breakthrough", but terror prevented it. This is why I see an ongoing practice of samatha bhavana, cultivating a layer of calm, as so important. 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) 43441 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 9:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi Jon, I just asked since you seem to have knowledge of some 'techniques' that are wrong. To orient myself I gave you the link to Mogok sayadaw who is known for emphasis on use of paticcassamupadda as depicted in chapter 2 diagram. His position is pretty well stated in the link I thought and gave sutta references. I'm not looking for a discussion, just wanted to know if you include his teachings under your original statement or not. If you're not already familar with it then I guess the answer is no. - kel 43442 From: shakti Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 9:44am Subject: to Christine and Azita Hi Ladies, I sent another email a week or so ago and wondered if you got it, as I am having problems with my computer. Please contact me off line, as I am coming to Australia soon and would love to see you both, if our schedules work. With metta, Shakti Christine Forsyth wrote: Hello Azita, and all, Just came home from the Cooran weekend ... you were missed, everyone sends hugs - a shame you were a thousand kilometres north this time. Just think, if you had come, you could have been put on the right track about Right View by KenH - like the rest of us. :-) Things could be worse, girl. Andrew can tell you about the crash of a branch falling, and how, when an investigation was made, there was a large python compressing a ringtail possum in order to make it fit into is dislocated jaws. To save or not to save? Not. Pythons have to eat ... but what's a little domanassa compared to that? I can relate to your 'down' feelings - I'd love to have a happy- chappy response ... but all I can advise is 'endure' - fortunately there is anicca. This too shall pass. :-) Looking forward to seeing you in a week in Bangkok, on the evening of Monday 28th. Nothing like being with admirable friends to refresh and revitalise the spiritual life. :-) metta, Chris 43443 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 10:05am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread (285) RENUNCIATION Tiresome are they, mind comes to still Trying done are days, shrine comes to will. Dirtsome are frail, mind comes to still Trying done are days, applying comes to will. HTOO NAING PS: I will be on top of a mountain for 9 days. One day for preparation and one day for leaving take 2 extra days beyond a week. I will be sinking in for the whole week. Htoo 43444 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 10:27am Subject: Re: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Kel - > > In a message dated 3/20/05 12:06:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, > kelvin_lwin@y... writes: > > > I wonder what if you > > saw the experience not as terror but as precursor to baya-nana. > =================== > That would have been useful. But how one "sees" an experience cannot > be faked or imposed in the moment. Kel, something similar to this happened to > me once at a Goenka retreat. I was close, I believe, to a "breakthrough", but > terror prevented it. This is why I see an ongoing practice of samatha bhavana, > cultivating a layer of calm, as so important. > > With metta, > Howard Interesting experience. I have also had similar experiences of terror during meditation and therefore decided to begin cultivating jhana and the brahmaviharas (I believe mentioned this before in DSG?). I don't know if this is an unfair characterization, but in my case I blame the teaching technique of S.N. Goenka (funny you mention one of his retreats). Following his technique, I jumped right into the practice of vipassana without a firm establishment of calm beforehand. Reading the Buddha's discourses, I now see that this was a grave error. Insight, at the beginning stages, is naturally unsettling and disturbing- and downright terrifying. I don't think the Buddha ever spoke about this because it was a non- issue for his monks since they were taught the proper way of practice (But, of course, if it isn't in the texts, some in this group aren't going to believe it. Very unfortunate.) Metta, James 43445 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi, James - In a message dated 3/20/05 1:28:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Interesting experience. I have also had similar experiences of > terror during meditation and therefore decided to begin cultivating > jhana and the brahmaviharas (I believe mentioned this before in > DSG?). I don't know if this is an unfair characterization, but in > my case I blame the teaching technique of S.N. Goenka (funny you > mention one of his retreats). Following his technique, I jumped > right into the practice of vipassana without a firm establishment of > calm beforehand. Reading the Buddha's discourses, I now see that > this was a grave error. > ------------------------------------ Howard: Perhaps not for everyone. For the most part it was an error for me. However, even though the ultimate fruit of my Goenka practice was subverted by lacking an adequate layer of calm and equanimity, I still did benfit enormously. --------------------------------------- Insight, at the beginning stages, is > > naturally unsettling and disturbing- and downright terrifying. I > don't think the Buddha ever spoke about this because it was a non- > issue for his monks since they were taught the proper way of > practice (But, of course, if it isn't in the texts, some in this > group aren't going to believe it. Very unfortunate.) > > Metta, > James > ========================== I am 99.4% (an exact figure! ;-) in agreement with you on this, James, and I thank you for writing. 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) 43446 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 10:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi Kel, very good what the Sayadaw said. But perhaps people did not get it. When a person is scared he should not miss the opportunity but develop understanding of such akusala citta. Also that is conditioned, not self. If someone would develop samatha alone, he merely suppresses defilements and he would not get to know them as only conditioned dhammas. Whereas, if he begins to see also his defilements as conditioned realities there is at that moment kusala citta with understanding. Some people may have misunderstandings about the stage of insight that sees fear, bhaya ñaa.na. The meaning is: seeing the danger and disadvantages of conditioned realities. It is not the fear going together with aversion, dosa. Understanding is kusala and thus there cannot be unwholesome fear at that moment. Nina. op 20-03-2005 18:04 schreef kelvin_lwin op kelvin_lwin@y...: > He was diligently practicing at home and unending anicca > nature of things kinda hit him squarely in the face. I guess he was > scared and dejected at the fruitility of everything. So he felt the > need to come to the center and deal with it there. The presiding > sayadaw said "oh, you barely missed panna". Don't let kilesa turn > the path from panna to akusala. I think it relates to posts about > samvega and using the opportunity. 43447 From: matheesha Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 11:50am Subject: [dsg] Re: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi Howard, I had a similar experience with vipassana, but that was on a foundation of jhana practice. I doubt if it made it any less frightening, because at that moment there is fear and havging samadhi isnt necessarily going to take it away. But I suppose it might make it smoother. I also think different personalities react to it differently. Those who are prone to depression might have it really bad. It is a hard truth to face, but that seems to be something we need to process if we are to permanently give up this desire for existence. metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, James - > > In a message dated 3/20/05 1:28:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, > buddhatrue@y... writes: > > > Interesting experience. I have also had similar experiences of > > terror during meditation and therefore decided to begin cultivating > > jhana and the brahmaviharas (I believe mentioned this before in > > DSG?). I don't know if this is an unfair characterization, but in > > my case I blame the teaching technique of S.N. Goenka (funny you > > mention one of his retreats). Following his technique, I jumped > > right into the practice of vipassana without a firm establishment of > > calm beforehand. Reading the Buddha's discourses, I now see that > > this was a grave error. > > > ------------------------------------ > Howard: > Perhaps not for everyone. For the most part it was an error for me. > However, even though the ultimate fruit of my Goenka practice was subverted by > lacking an adequate layer of calm and equanimity, I still did benfit > enormously. > --------------------------------------- > Insight, at the beginning stages, is > > > naturally unsettling and disturbing- and downright terrifying. I > > don't think the Buddha ever spoke about this because it was a non- > > issue for his monks since they were taught the proper way of > > practice (But, of course, if it isn't in the texts, some in this > > group aren't going to believe it. Very unfortunate.) > > > > Metta, > > James > > > ========================== > I am 99.4% (an exact figure! ;-) in agreement with you on this, James, > and I thank you for writing. > > With metta, > Howard > 43448 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 0:01pm Subject: Re: to Christine and Azita Hi Shakti (and Azita), Much excitement this end. :-) Have been talking to Azita per phone. Am replying privately with A Plan. If you don't receive it, let me know on dsg - otherwise we can continue off-list. Best to you and Tom,:-) metta, Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, shakti wrote: > Hi Ladies, > > I sent another email a week or so ago and wondered if you got it, as I am having problems with my computer. Please contact me off line, as I am coming to Australia soon and would love to see you both, if our schedules work. With metta, Shakti > 43449 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 7:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi, Matheesha - In a message dated 3/20/05 2:51:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, dhammachat@h... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I had a similar experience with vipassana, but that was on a > foundation of jhana practice. I doubt if it made it any less > frightening, because at that moment there is fear and havging > samadhi isnt necessarily going to take it away. But I suppose it > might make it smoother. > ------------------------------------- Howard: All that it needs to do, as I see it, is to make it possible for one not to run away. Fear beyond a certain threshhold, with the threshhold varying from person to person, will lead to a speedy and urgent withdrawal unless there is a countervailing condition to prevent that. A layer of equanimity provides such a condition. This is why, IMO, the Buddha put so much emphasis on the 4th jhana as a base for investigation of dhammas and why that jhana served as the Buddha's own base from which full awakening occurred. -------------------------------------------- I also think different personalities react > > to it differently. Those who are prone to depression might have it > really bad. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: More likely those prone to anxiety. I am not at all a "depressed type", but I am somewhat prone to anxiety. ----------------------------------------- > > It is a hard truth to face, but that seems to be something we need > to process if we are to permanently give up this desire for > existence. > > metta > > matheesha > ======================= 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) 43450 From: mnease Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 0:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew, I've just jumped into this thread so apologies if my comments are redundant: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matthew Miller" To: Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 9:06 AM Subject: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue > I don't see how the abhidhamma, with its rigid categories of rupas, > vatthus, dvaras and so on, could possibly account for phenomena like > this. As I see it, the Dhamma (including abhidhamma) is not meant to account for phenomena in the sense that science etc. is. It is relevant only to suffering and the way out of suffering. Where it fails to overlap science etc., the science--no matter how true it may be--is irrelevant to the Dhamma and the Dhamma irrelevant to science. Science couldn't and shouldn't be expected to lead to the destruction of the fetters and the Dhamma can't and shouldn't be expected to explain natural phenomena except as they pertain to suffering and the end of suffering. > We need the careful, patient observation and experiment of > neuroscience to begin to understand the structure of consciousness. A scientific understanding of neuroscience (or linguistics e.g. or any other science) is completely irrelevant to the Four Noble Truths, I think. > Otherwise we're whistling in the dark and spinning fantasies. Whether we're theorizing and conceptualizing about science or Dhamma, we're always 'darting among unrealities'. A theoretical understanding of Dhamma (pariyatti) can point in the right direction though--to the direct understanding of the experience of present realities, the insight that leads to the arising of the Path. Just my opinion! mike 43451 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma challenge Some times, I think we all need to be reminded that when talking about ancient religious/physiosophical text (abhidhamma included), it is a mistake/waste to get caught up in whether the text is authentic or not, unless you are a historian. I find it better to explore whether the text is useful or not. This is an individual thing, and even some-timey. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Nina van Gorkom Sent: Thursday, 10 March, 2005 09:50 Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma challenge Hi Joe, op 10-03-2005 06:19 schreef Joe Cummings op joe@j...: > On another Buddhism-related online forum I post to on occasion, a > member has challenged the authenticity of the Abhidhamma Pitaka. > Here's the link in case anyone here would like to respond (I hope > someone will!) N: There have been many posts on the authenticity of the Abhidhamma Pitaka, especially from Sarah, see U.P. under Abhidhamma. No need to repeat those posts. I would like another approach. The fact that you or someone else asks this question must have a cause. Some people do not quite understand what the Abhidhamma is, they merely think of texts. Do you have a topic of Abhdidhamma that interests you? It would be nice if you could give some input on this. It is more important to know what interests you. ... Nina. 43452 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions It was late and I was falling a sleep when I replied to this. However, the point I was trying to make was about the idea of "having no-opinions." To never have an opinion sounds very unrealistic, I would think you would have to be dead. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, 20 March, 2005 14:25 Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Charles DaCosta wrote: >All you have to do is die. > I'm afraid I don't quite see the connection. Anyway, why should this time be any different from all the previous times? ;-)) Jon <....> 43453 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi Joop, You asked the follow (aswell as made the following points): 1. What exactly is "things (ideas) change as you progress..."? I hope this example helps: emptiness -- When I began studying Buddhism it meant the same as "clear your mind" - it was a practice; and now it means a characteristic of exist - a view/thought/feeling. 2. Where do they change? see question 3 3. In my [our] brains or somewhere outside the brains of sentient beings? BOTH it also changes in books, on TV, in other documents, on the internet, etc... 4. In the last case I don't agree: ideas exist only in my (or somebody else) mind; things are only perceived in my mind. Whether we perceive it or not, it can still exists. Example: Deep in the forest a tree falls but there was no-one around that was close enough to hear, see, etc... it fall. Does that mean it really didn't fall? CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Joop <....> Hallo Charles, I think I agree with you. But what exactly is "things (ideas) change as you progress..." Where do they change? In my brains or somewhere outsinde the brains of sentient beings? In the last case I don't agree: ideas exist only in my (or somebody else) mind; things are only perceived in my mind Joop 43454 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 8:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dependent origination in daily life (Was Re: To Connie: BB's Article Dear Joop, You asked and stated the following: {Who of them is right? Because BB states DO is about three lifetimes and Nanavira states that's about nothing else than one lifetime. So it's not possible both are right. But how to prove ? Analysis of the Sutta-texts, as both gentlemen do, is one possibility. I prefer another possibility: compare it with our daily reality as an empirical test.} DO has been a confusing issue for many, and many centuries. This is because all of the teaching on the Wheel of life are designed to be taught to people at many levels. So YES they are both right but under different circumstances (people at different levels); oh ya there is also the two life time model (the current and the next) and the radiant wheel model (the process beginning from Wisdom leading to no-suffering) also. AND YES again, you should compare it with your daily life (try to see it working in your life, and how it may be really working in your life). "BUT HOW TO PROVE?" To do this you would have to study the history of Indian Beliefs around the time of the Buddha and how they evolved (in there lies your answer). PS: I use to tell people that it is one of the teachings where Sutra and abidharma meet (one of my favorite subjects). ----- Original Message ----- From: Joop To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, 13 March, 2005 15:08 Subject: [dsg] Dependent origination in daily life (Was Re: To Connie: BB's Article Connie wrote: > Nanavira's and BBodhi's articles will be at > http://www.intergate.com/~dhammapatha for awhile in case anyone's Dear Connie, James, RobM and all I have read the articles of Bhikkhu Bodhi and Ven. Nanavira. Or tried to do; because, to be honest, neither of them mirror my sense of spirituality. Who of them is right? Because BB states DO is about three lifetimes and Nanavira states that's about nothing else than one lifetime. So it's not possible both are right. But how to prove ? Analysis of the Sutta-texts, as both gentlemen do, is one possiblility. I prefer another possiblility: compare it with our daily reality as an empirical test. "DEPENDENT ORIGINATION IN DAILY LIFE" is then the theme. <....> 43455 From: mnease Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 3:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Test Your Knowledge .../ Hi Again Azita, ----- Original Message ----- From: "azita gill" To: "mnease" Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2005 5:20 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Test Your Knowledge .../ > > You know, the Buddha once stated that the higher > > jhaanas were so mysterious > > that you couldn't imagine them (more or less--Yena > > yena his maññanti tato > > tam hoti aññathaa. See, e.g., Majjhima Nikaaya No. > > 113 (III 42 foll.) > > A: I know next to nothing about jhaana states, only > what I read. Yes, I've heard Nibbaana is the cessation > of everything, including the jhaanic states. Did I already reply to this? I thought it worth mentioning that the Buddha spent a lot of time in the higher jhaanas, often for relief of pain from the back injury due to Devadatta's Buddhicide attempt. So I think the jhaanacittas of a Buddha or an arahant must either be kiriya or vipakka (obviously no more mahakusala). There's a reference in the Dispeller to the Dhammasanga.ni, "...Therefore the meaning of all jhaanas, described there as profitable, resultant and functional...". I hope Nina can tell us if I've understood this correctly, as I really don't understand jhaanacittas either. mike 43456 From: Matthew Miller Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 3:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Mike wrote: > As I see it, the Dhamma (including abhidhamma) is not meant to > account for phenomena in the sense that science etc. is. > It is relevant only to suffering and the way out of suffering. > Where it fails to overlap science > etc., the science--no matter how true it may be--is irrelevant to > the Dhamma and the Dhamma irrelevant to science. Some abhidhammikas claim that the abhidhamma and science are totally separate activities -- the abhidhamma deals with "liberation from suffering" and not the description of reality found in science. On the other hand, they claim that science is "irrelevant" to the liberation from suffering. Forgive me, but this is rubbish. First of all, the Abhidhamma (and many of the posts on this list) are filled with bold assertions about reality (the nature of memory, consciousness, physical reality, causality, etc, etc) which are the realm of science. For the most part, these assertions are simply based on 1) the authority of scripture, and/or 2) personal introspective observation. While not useless, these are probably the two least reliable forms of evidence. > the Dhamma is irrelevant to science... Science couldn't and > shouldn't be expected to lead to the destruction of the fetters Why not? Isn't medicine the application of science for the elimination of suffering? And I'm not just talking about drugs and surgery. Take, for example, modern cognitive therapy. Jeffrey M. Schwartz MD, a psychiatrist at UCLA SChool of Medicine, he has developed a four-step method for overcoming Obsessive Compulsive Disorder based on his study (and personal practice) of vipassana meditation. This method involves training the patients in mindfulness techniques specifically designed to "un-lock" the compulsive patterns in the brain. What's most remarkable about Dr. Schwartz's work is that, through brain imaging, he has proven that these techniques can alter the subject's brain chemistry without relying on psychopharmaceuticals. He has written a book called "Brain Lock" which is a popular account of these studies. It can be found here: http://tinyurl.com/5b5c6 If we apply science to the liberation from suffering, then we can potentially get ourselves on much more solid ground as to what is and is not "good dhamma" (and discover how this may vary from individual to individual). For example, we may be able to avoid the endless and irresolvable philosophical squabbles over arcane scriptural dogma, the arguments over the relative value of sitting meditations, and so forth that we find on this list. If we begin to quantitatively measure the effects of different dhamma practices on the behavior and brain chemistry of real people, we may find our way out of this thicket of opinions. Matthew 43457 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:03pm Subject: Re: Tep /Buddha Nature Dear Tep >To my surprise, after more study, Buddha > Nature is more closely related to the "Acariya Mun's school" than I > would have thought of a few years ago. I just read the "THE HEART IS KNOWING" at http://www.dhammasala.org/content/view/67/115/ *excerpt* "When practicing the Six perfections (Paramita) or any of the many similar customs or in accumulating as much limitless merit as there are sands in the Ganges River "When words are no more, the citta will appear, completely pure. "In practicing the six perfections (Generosity, Virtue, Patience, Effort, Mindfulness, Wisdom) and in the many and various similar methods with the intention of becoming one of the Buddhas," *end* The words and phrases above also shows the author was familiar with Maha-yaha, especially with Zen to some extent. I remember Ajaan Chan took up a Scripture written by ancient chinese Zen master like "Sutta" in one of his dhamma talks. Kindest regards from LK 43458 From: Andrew Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:07pm Subject: Re: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew I have just checked in on this thread and seen that you have taken over my position as "resident evolutionist" on DSG! (-: I lost that mantle when I became a bit like Mike N and decided that it wasn't useful to mix science and Dhamma (although there are many esteemed Dhamma teachers who do this on a regular basis). Have you formed a view on this threshhold question yet? Ven Dhammananda says that science "cannot offer moral control and guidance". That's also what Stephen Jay Gould used to say, isn't it (i.e. that it is a mistake to look for moral lessons in nature)? The Buddha said that saddha (faith/confidence) was a "treasure": doesn't that suggest to you that he was not involved in a purely scientific endeavour? Re the rigidity of Abhidhamma classifications, it seems to me that the incredible speed of mind-moments permits of a huge degree of flexibility. Would you mind expanding a bit on the place of Dhamma in your life, especially regarding your work? Best wishes Andrew T 43459 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga XIV, 145, 146, and Tiika. Hi Nina, Do each of the 'mental body' cetasikas (tranquility, lightness, malleability, wieldiness, proficiency, and rectitude) affect the physical body in a corresponding way like tranquility of mental body does? It probably wasn't intended so but all these subtle details certainly bring a very interesting richness to experience. Larry 43460 From: robmoult Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:32pm Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > Mike wrote: > > As I see it, the Dhamma (including abhidhamma) is not meant to > > account for phenomena in the sense that science etc. is. > > It is relevant only to suffering and the way out of suffering. > > Where it fails to overlap science > > etc., the science--no matter how true it may be--is irrelevant to > > the Dhamma and the Dhamma irrelevant to science. > > Some abhidhammikas claim that the abhidhamma and science are totally > separate activities -- the abhidhamma deals with "liberation from > suffering" and not the description of reality found in science. On the > other hand, they claim that science is "irrelevant" to the liberation from > suffering. > > Forgive me, but this is rubbish. > > First of all, the Abhidhamma (and many of the posts on this list) are > filled with bold assertions about reality (the nature of memory, > consciousness, physical reality, causality, etc, etc) which are the realm > of science. For the most part, these assertions are simply based on 1) > the authority of scripture, and/or 2) personal introspective observation. > While not useless, these are probably the two least reliable forms of > evidence. ===== I am one of those Abhidhammikas who see Dhamma/Abhidhamma and science as separate. I am sincerely interested in understanding your perspective as it differs from mine. I have never learned anything from anybody who agreed with me :-) I could quote Suttas, Culamalunkya Sutta (Mn 63) and Simsapa Sutta (SN LVI.31), as a basis for discussion. However, from your comments above, I am not clear that you would accept this. If we cannot use scriptures nor personal experience to discuss the Buddha's teachings, where are we to turn? We could look at experiments on the impact of meditation on brain functions such as those by: - Schwartz (quoted by you) - Newberg / D'Aquili (Why God Won't Go Away) - Alterations in Brain and Immune Function Produced by Mindfulness Meditation (Article in Psychosomatic Medicine, August 2003) - Long-term meditators self-induce high-amplitude gamma synchrony during mental practice (Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, November 2004) From reading these articles, I conclude that: - Meditation has a measurable impact on the brain and body - Science is at the stage of identifying / measuring the impact; there is no attempt being made for a unified theory of how / why this impact exists How do you suggest that we go from here? Metta, Rob M :-) 43461 From: mnease Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matthew Miller" To: Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2005 3:53 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue > Mike wrote: > > As I see it, the Dhamma (including abhidhamma) is not meant to > > account for phenomena in the sense that science etc. is. > > It is relevant only to suffering and the way out of suffering. > > Where it fails to overlap science > > etc., the science--no matter how true it may be--is irrelevant to > > the Dhamma and the Dhamma irrelevant to science. > > Some abhidhammikas claim that the abhidhamma and science are totally > separate activities -- the abhidhamma deals with "liberation from > suffering" and not the description of reality found in science. On the > other hand, they claim that science is "irrelevant" to the liberation from > suffering. > > Forgive me, but this is rubbish. OK Matthew, thanks and adios. mike 43462 From: Matthew Miller Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 7:26pm Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Rob wrote: > I am one of those Abhidhammikas who see Dhamma/Abhidhamma and > science as separate. > > We could look at experiments on the impact of meditation on brain > functions such as those by: > - Schwartz (quoted by you) > - Newberg / D'Aquili (Why God Won't Go Away) > - Alterations in Brain and Immune Function Produced by Mindfulness > Meditation (Article in Psychosomatic Medicine, August 2003) > - Long-term meditators self-induce high-amplitude gamma synchrony > during mental practice (Article in Proceedings of the National > Academy of Science, November 2004) > > How do you suggest that we go from here? > > Rob I did not mean to imply that we should not use scripture and personal observation. I think we should use everything at our disposal! From your references, I see that you are familiar with some of the ways in which science and dhamma are coming together. But doesn't that undermine your claim that dhamma and science are separate? Matthew P.S. Mike, I'm sorry if my language ("rubbish") was offensive. But I really don't see how science has "nothing to do" with the liberation from suffering (what is medicine? psychiatry?) or how abhidhamma has nothing to do with making assertions about scientific reality (what are all these theories of perception, memory, conciousness, karma, rebirth)? 43463 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 7:37pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Mat, I would have to agree with you to a point. As I see it, the goal of science is to quantitatively describe the nature of all phenomena from observation with or without the aid of instrumentation. The goal of Buddhism is to realise the nature of phenomena through observation with the final goal of liberation. And this is where there is a difference. Science does what it does because phenomena exist (i.e. why climb the mountain? - because it's there). Buddhism does what it does because there is a higher goal to be achieved - that of liberation. Buddhism has identified that there is a problem to be solved and a goal to be achieved and therefore there is a reason for its enquiry into the true nature of all things. Science flounders trying to solve one problem after another depending on where the money is coming from without real direction. There is another critical difference. The true nature of all phenomena in Buddhism is to be personally experienced and because of this personal experience, this leads to wisdom and wisdom leads to liberation. Science examines phenomena "objectively" therefore is collects knowledge. This does not lead to wisdom therefore it cannot lead to liberation. Hope this helps. Kind Regards, Evan Stamatopoulos -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Miller [mailto:bupleurum@y...] <...> Some abhidhammikas claim that the abhidhamma and science are totally separate activities -- the abhidhamma deals with "liberation from suffering" and not the description of reality found in science. On the other hand, they claim that science is "irrelevant" to the liberation from suffering. Forgive me, but this is rubbish. First of all, the Abhidhamma (and many of the posts on this list) are filled with bold assertions about reality (the nature of memory, consciousness, physical reality, causality, etc, etc) which are the realm of science. For the most part, these assertions are simply based on 1) the authority of scripture, and/or 2) personal introspective observation. While not useless, these are probably the two least reliable forms of evidence. <...> 43464 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 11:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 Hi Andrew L, wrote: > OK so then let me ask: What is sati? And are you saying reflecting on > a particular nama or rupa can condition sati for that bit? That holds > pretty good implications for the course of practise. ... S: As you know, sati arises with all wholesome kinds of consciousness. It is the ‘door-keeper’ which guards the senses and does not ‘allow the floating away of moral states’ (Atthasalini). When there is wise reflection, sati must be there at those moments, conditioning more wise reflection in future and also satipatthana, if it is right reflection on presently arising dhammas. This is how pariyatti can condition patipatti and eventually pativedha. .... <...> > Sarah I can't agree with you that wrong view based on self can be > unwholesome kamma-patha. ... S: firstly, we read how all wrong views arise dependent on self view. When self view is eradicated (at the stage of sotapatti magga), so are all wrong views. “Now, householder, as to those divers views set forth in the Brahmajaala, it is owing to the personality view that they arise, and if the personality view exists not, they do not exist” (S IV.7.3 Bodh). As for the danger of wrong views, let me repeat a couple of quotes from suttas that Nyantiloka gives: http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/b_f/ditthi.htm >Wrong or evil views (ditthi or micchá-ditthi) are declared as utterly rejectable for being a source of wrong and evil aspirations and conduct, and liable at times to lead man to the deepest abysses of depravity, as it is said in A. I, 22: "No other thing than evil views do I know, o monks, whereby to such an extent the unwholesome things not yet arisen arise, and the unwholesome things already arisen are brought to growth and fullness. No other thing than evil views do I know, whereby to such an extent the wholesome things not yet arisen are hindered in their arising, and the wholesome things already arisen disappear. No other thing than evil views do I know, whereby to such an extent human beings at the dissolution of the body, at death, are passing to a way of suffering, into a world of woe, into hell." Further in A. I, 23: "Whatever a man filled with evil views performs or undertakes, or whatever he possesses of will, aspiration, longing and tendencies, all these things lead him to an undesirable, unpleasant and disagreeable state, to woe and suffering."< ***** >The Buddha really described wrong view as > more of a general view of things, even conventionally using the term > 'beings' numerous times in it. .... S: Let’s be clear that when the Buddha referred to wrong views, he wasn’t talking about wrong views about the weather, about scientific theories, about numbers of Abhidhamma classifications, about the details of brahma realms, but about wrong views concerning the 6 worlds presently arising and appearing, i.e about the khandhas or namas and rupas as being conditioning, impermanent, unsatisfactory and void of any self. ***** “The Perfect One is free from any theory (ditthigata), for the Perfect One has seen what corporeality is, and how it arises and passes away. He has seen what feeling ... perception ... mental formations ... consciousness are, and how they arise and pass away. Therefore I say that the Perfect One has won complete deliverance through the extinction, fading away, disappearance, rejection and casting out of all imaginings and conjectures, of all inclination to the 'vain-glory of 'I' and 'mine." (M. 72). ***** > That the type of wrong view you describe is a hindrance to practise at > all times, I am not decided on yet. ... S: Wrong view is always a hindrance to practice when it arises. At such moments of wrong view, the practice has to be wrong, i.e silabbata-paramasa (attachment to rites and rituals). Of course this can arise at any time, even whilst reflecting on ‘a particular nama or rupa’. For example, one might have the idea at such a time that focusing on visible object is the way to develop awareness of visible object. It can be very subtle. ... >.I have seen a lot leading one to > use the terms 'you' and 'being' suggesting a view of self to do some > rudimentary practise tasks, and I really think the Buddha taught that > there are some things we can consciously decide to do. ... S: The Buddha taught about all dhammas (realities) as being anatta. Whatever language he used according to what was appropriate, there is never any self that can practice or decide to do anything. Metta, Sarah ========= 43465 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 11:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 Hi Andrew L, --- Andrew Levin wrote: > > Aren't there greater forces at work than just kamma? I mean was it > the kamma of 6 million Jews and 2 million others to be incinerated or > have other methods of torture or persecutions put on them so much? ... S: There are always many different conditions at work. Without kamma condition, however, the other conditions cannot bring about the present results through eyes, ears, nose, tongue and body-sense. Did you see my post to Howard and others recently (Mar 17th)? I wrote: “We think we or our governments can play a major role in the results that others will experience, but this is because we have so little real appreciation of kamma and its results and of other complex conditions. As we know, not even a Buddha could prevent kamma from bringing its results when it was the right time, even for arahants such as MahaMoggallana. Of course, this doesn’t mean we don’t do our best to help others in whatever ways we can, but we know that we have very limited abilities to really affect outcomes and the greatest help we can offer when we have a chance is by understanding and sharing the Dhamma with anyone who might benefit.” .... > Explain to me how karma can work if I, say, got an organization > together to decrease penalties for marijuana laws and was later > ticketed for using. Had I not done that, I might have been arrested > and subjected to criminal charges. .... S: We never know. We think, ‘if we go to Thailand, we’ll have a wonderful holiday’ or ‘if I didn’t work for such and such a cause, then XYZ’ will happen. But we don’t know. These are conventional situations we talk about, whereas the result of kamma is just a moment of seeing or hearing or momentary birth or death affected by many complex conditions. ... >Was my activism good karma ... S: Depends on the cittas at the time .... >or > destructive karma that ruined the kamma of being put in jail or did it > merely put off when that karma will be experienced? .... S: When we talk about supportive or destructive kamma etc, it is referring to momentary cittas which affect the arising of other momentary vipaka cittas. ‘Being put in jail’ is a long story involving many different cittas. ... >There are so many > things that could demonstrate this. I could do either idle chatter > here hours on end day after day week after week and go outside and > take a walk down the same stretch of road between 6 and 7 pm, or > instead discuss dharma and do programming work. Assuming this karma > can generate vipaka in this life, how can what I hear, see and feel in > terms of pleasant or painful or neither-pleasant-nor-painful during > that daily walk possibly be related to or a consequence of, what I did > online at my computer hours earlier? .... S: Good and difficult questions. While we think of kamma in terms of situations such as ‘what I did online at my computer hours’, I think it’s impossible to understand, even intellectually, about kamma and its results. However, I think it’s a little easier to understand that at moments of right understanding or kindness or calm that the results are different from moments of gossip or wrong view or anger. For example, When someone’s angry, the rupas in the body are immediately affected and so are experiences through the senses, though it's very easy to confuse the perception, unpleasant mental feeling and aversion towards these for the actual vipaka cittas such as bodily experiences. As for the experiences through the senses when you take a walk, we can never pin-point what the causes of the pleasant and unpleasant bodily feelings were, but we can know that they are conditioned in many ways and quite beyond control. Who can see pleasant visible objects or hear pleasant sounds at will? .... <...> > How can we expect to non-deliberately know paramattha dhammas? ... S: This is the function of panna or right understanding. ... >We can > see them when they are arising and passing away for what they are, > maybe not in total clarity, registering every moment, but we can get a > general picture. Why not? ... S: this is thinking, as I understand you. ... > We take videos of actions happening in > sequence, and we are able to extract enough information to make > connections in our mind based on that, why not the same with the six > senses? ... S: First, there has to be very clear direct understanding of many, many namas and rupas over and over again before the arising and passing away of those namas and rupas can be known when they appear. I look forward to more discussion. I'll be responding to your posts in order, but please keep your comments and queries up meanwhile. They are all good and useful topics. Metta, Sarah ========= 43466 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 11:42pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 151 - Determination/adhimokkha & Energy/viriya (a) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.9 Determination (adhimokkha) & Energy (viriya)] Adhimokkha, determination or resolution, is another cetasika among the six “particulars” which arises with cittas of the four jåtis but not with every citta. The Visuddhimagga ( XIV, 151) gives the following definition of adhimokkha: * "The act of resolving is resolution. It has the characteristic of conviction. Its function is not to grope. It is manifested as decisiveness. Its proximate cause is a thing to be convinced about. It should be regarded as like a boundary-post owing to its immovableness with regard to the object." * The “Paramattha Mañjúså” (489), the commentary to the Visuddhimagga, states that: * “ the act of resolving should be understood as the act of being convinced about an object”. * The Atthasåliní (I, Part IV, Chapter I, 133) gives a definition similar to the one of the Visuddhimagga (1). *** 1) The Dhammasangaùi does not mention adhimokkha in its list of dhammas, but it adds: “or whatever other factors there are” (§1). The Atthasåliní and the Visuddhimagga classify adhimokkha among the nine “whatsoevers” (ye vå panaka). Manasikåra is also classified among the “whatsoevers”. Manasikåra and adhimokkha are mentioned in the “Discourse on the Uninterrupted” (Middle Length Sayings III, no. 111). See Abhidhamma Studies by Ven. Nyanaponika, in Chapter 4, p. 49, and in his Appendix. B.P.S. Kandy, 1976. ***** [Ch.9 Determination (adhimokkha) & Energy (viriya)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43467 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 0:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Dear Htoo, I don’t know if you’ll see this before you head to the summit of the mountain, but in any case, I hope you have a good trip. Please tell us a little more about which mountains you’re heading for and whether this is for trekking or some other purpose. I want to tell you (and others) that we just received a package from Myanmar which took months to arrive. Very exciting – it contains a translation of the Dhammasangani by U KKyaw Khine and of the Dhp verses and stories by Daw Mya Tin. I believe they’re new copies, but one would not know it as they started falling apart as soon as I opened the package and look like they’re hundreds of years old already and I need to open the windows:-). Still, they are great treasures. .... --- htootintnaing wrote: Htoo: > > If not uddhacca-citta and if not vicikiccha-citta, a citta is not > moha-citta. I am talking on moha-citta and not on moha cetasika. > These 2 new sentences open a new front. But I am trying to relate > this to the above topic. > > So when a child is learning there are many cittas. That is a mixture > of vithi cittas and bhavanga cittas. > > Among vithi cittas the most prominent cittas are javana cittas. The > largest number of vithi cittas can be found in 'ati-mahantarammana'. > There are 14 vithi cittas. Half of these vithi cittas are javana > cittas. That is why I told javana cittas are the most prominent. > > When a child is learning there is a mixture of vithi cittas and > bhavanga cittas. Among vithi cittas, the most abundant cittas are > javana cittas. > > His learning is not daana, siila, bhavanaa. ... S: all agreed so far ... > No one will say 'that child is doing daana or siila or bhavanaa when > he is reading or learning'. ... S: probably not, but maybe. He may be studying to make his mother or teacher happy. He may be refraining from bad deeds or speech. He may be helping his friend. ... > But there are javana cittas. These cittas are not kiriya cittas. So > they have to be akusala cittas or kusala cittas. ... S: yes. .... > He is not doing daana, siila, bhavana. So what will you say? > Again he is not killing, stealing, sexing, lying, intoxicating. > Does he do any akusala? What will you say? ... S: Akusala doesn’t have to be concerned with one of the above. .... > He is clearly learning. He is following the meaning of things what he > has been studying. Apparaently he is not in vicikicchaa, which is > moha-cittas. I mean his javana cittas when learning are not > vicikicchaa cittas. > > Uddhacca cittas may happen. But not all the time. So mostly he is not > in moha-javana. ... S: I think the subtle kinds of moha are nearly always quite unknown to us. Uddhacca (restlessness) can be very, very subtle, for example. .... > As he is learning, there is no dosa except the time when he is angry > with his power of understandability. ... S: Again, I disagree. Dosa can also be very, very subtle. Just when there is the slightest hint of uneasiness about the colour of the book or a word, for example. What we think of as anger is a very gross kind of dosa. .... > So apparent there are 2 alternatives. > > 1. mahakusala cittas as javana cittas > 2. lobha muula akusala cittas as javana cittas ... S: Well, I think your logic is rather simplified so far, but yes, if there is no dosa or moha, these are the only remaining options. ... > Mahakusala cittas are 8 and 4 cittas are not accompanied by > pannindriya cetasikas. Then 4 cittas left and they are called > dvihetuka cittas. That is they have alobha and adosa as 2 root > cetasikas. > > Lobha muula akusala cittas are also dvihetuka cittas. Their roots are > lobha and moha cetasika. > > So the child is learning. There are javana cittas. These javana have > 2 roots whatever they are kusala or akusala if there is no panna in > hamakusala cittas. > > 2 alternatives are now > > 1. lobha and moha > 2. alobha and adosa ... S: Yes, IF there is no dosa, no moha javana and no panna of course. .... > > If there is NO ADOSA all javana cittas are not akusala citta. ... S: ‘are akusala citta’, I think you mean. ... >Because > ADOSA cetasika always accompanies all kusala cittas. > Sometimes, lobha is so subtle to be detected. > The differentiating point here is adosa cetasika. ... S: Why not alobha too and of course, other accompanying mental factors? ... I like the assumption that 'purely learning mind' is not akusala .... S: :-) Oh we all like this assumption, but it’s a fantasy, I believe. I’ll look forward to more of your posts on your return. We’ll also be going on a trip next week. Metta, Sarah ======= 43468 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 0:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sila Visuddhi (purity of sila) Hi Ken H, --- kenhowardau wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Thanks for this information on sila visuddhi. At the risk of > sounding obstinate, I still don't see the dangers > of "personlessness" that Suan warned against. I think if someone > seems to be taking anatta too far he is actually not taking it far > enough. ... S: I agree with your last sentence - I don't think we can take it far enough:-) I'm not sure if you were agreeing or disagreeing with anything I said or what Suan was waring against, if you wish to elaborate on any of it. ... > We have another weekend of Dhamma discussion at Cooran starting > tomorrow (or tonight for some people). The topic is "Right > Understanding," and I'm just on my way to the Useful Posts file to > plagiarise a contribution. :-) ... S: Why not share a little more - what you used, discussed and concluded:-). Any dissension in the ranks or did they all tow 'your' party line this time??? Btw, loved your momentary post to Charles which ended with the following: "Even the Eight-fold Path is just a fleeting moment in which the five khandhas exist in their supramundane form". Also, another recent sign-off you gave: "Conditioned existence is basically the same in all realms: there is a moment of birth and a moment of death and many moments in between. Gods have more moments in between than we do." You could compile a book of signature lines for people to select from:-) Metta, Sarah p.s In Andrew's last 'New Satipatthana 2' (34244), he picked up on a couple of your quotes I had used....if you'd like to follow-up too, I'm sure he'd be glad. ====== 43469 From: robmoult Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 0:50am Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > Rob wrote: > > I am one of those Abhidhammikas who see Dhamma/Abhidhamma and > > science as separate. > > > > We could look at experiments on the impact of meditation on brain > > functions such as those by: > > - Schwartz (quoted by you) > > - Newberg / D'Aquili (Why God Won't Go Away) > > - Alterations in Brain and Immune Function Produced by Mindfulness > > Meditation (Article in Psychosomatic Medicine, August 2003) > > - Long-term meditators self-induce high-amplitude gamma synchrony > > during mental practice (Article in Proceedings of the National > > Academy of Science, November 2004) > > > > How do you suggest that we go from here? > > > > Rob > > I did not mean to imply that we should not use scripture and personal > observation. I think we should use everything at our disposal! From > your references, I see that you are familiar with some of the ways in > which science and dhamma are coming together. But doesn't that > undermine your claim that dhamma and science are separate? ===== To use an analogy, on my desk calendar, there is a beautiful photograph of a flower. A book on botany will allow me categorize this flower according to genus, etc. Photography and botany can take the same subject yet be separate becuase they have a different scope. Similarly, Dhamma and science can take the same subject (the way the mind works) yet be quite separate because they have different scope. In the two Suttas mentioned above, the Buddha clearly defined the scope of the Dhamma and clearly identified what was not within the scope of the Dhamma: "Why have I left [answers to speculative questions] undeclared? Because it is unbeneficial, it does not belong to the fundamentals of the holy life, it does not lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbana. That is why I have left it undeclared. And what have I declared? 'This is suffering' - I have declared. 'This is the origin of suffering' - I have declared. 'This is the cessation of suffering' - I have declared. 'This is the way to the cessation of suffering' - I have declared. Why have I declared that? Because it is beneficial, it belongs to the fundamentals of the holy life, it leads to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbana. That is why I have declared it." According to my on-line dictionary, science seeks to understand how nature behaves by observing and correlating available factual information. In summary: - Science seeks to understand how nature behaves - Dhamma focuses on the fundamentals of the holy life and how to get to Nibbbana Do you agree with my definitions and do you see these two as overlaping in scope? Metta, Rob M :-) 43470 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study corner 151 - Determination/adhimokkha & Energy/viriya (a) Dear Nina and Rob M & All, I just quoted from a footnote in Nina’s ‘Cetasikas: ..... > 1) “The Dhammasangaùi does not mention adhimokkha in its list of dhammas, > but it adds: “or whatever other factors there are” (§1). The Atthasåliní > and the Visuddhimagga classify adhimokkha among the nine “whatsoevers” > (yevå panaka). Manasikåra is also classified among the “whatsoevers”. > Manasikåra and adhimokkha are mentioned in the “Discourse on the > Uninterrupted” (Middle Length Sayings III, no. 111). See Abhidhamma > Studies by Ven. Nyanaponika, in Chapter 4, p. 49, and in his Appendix. > B.P.S. Kandy, 1976.” ... S: As the subject of the classification of cetasikas in the Dhammasangani vs the classification in the Abhidammattha Sangaha comes up so often, I’d like to quote from the introduction to U Kyaw Khine’s translation of the Dhsg as we’ve just received it and it may be helpful to go through the perceived discrepancy again. The introduction is by U Ko Lay. ***** “The dhamma factors which constitute the first meritorious thought, numbering fifty-six, are first listed and then defined in the section on the definition of dhamma factors. Of these, 18 dhamma factors occu once in the list; 7 dhamma factors occur twice; 1 dhamma factor occurs 3 times; 2 dhamma factors occur 4 times; 1 dhamma factor occurs 6 times; 1 dhamma factor occurs 7 times. Thus the list in this section in reality consists of only 30 dhamma factors.” * S: It then goes through it detail to show which dhamma factors occur once, twice and so on. The dhamma factor which appears 6 times is “samaadhi (concentration), as samatha (calm or tranquility of mind), as cittassekaggata (one-pointedness of mind), as samaadindriya (faculty of concentration), as samaadhibala (power of concentration), as sammaa samaadhi (Right concentration) and as avikkhepa (non-distraction). The dhamma factor which occurs 7 times is “Pa~n~naa (wisdom), as pa~n~nindriya (faculty of wisdom), as sammaadi.t.thi (Right View) as a constituent of the Ariya Path), as pa~n~naabala (power of wisdom), as amoha (non-bewilderment), as sammaadi.t.thi (Right View as a mental factor for good action), as sampaja~n~na (clear comprehension) and as vipassanaaa (insight).” Later it summarises and says that though we talk about, for example, contact (phassa) and other mental factors as being the proximate cause for wholesome cittas to arise, “this is only an analytical view. The actual fact is that there are thirty dhamma factors occurring as fifty-six items in the complete list and these arise simultaneously.” It goes on to stress that besides these 56 dhamma factors, there are also 9 more which may occur, "wherever appropriate, on the occasion of the arising of those fifty-six dhamma factors", making a total of 65. These 9 are the ‘yevaapana...dhammaa’, i.e chanda, adhimokkha, manasikaara, tatramajjhattataa, karu.naa, muditaa, sammaavacaa, sammaakammanta and sammaa-aajiva. Down to the maths: a)30 dhamma factors. Exclude mind (citta) = 29 cetasikas. b) 29 cetasikas + 9 yevaapanakas = 38 sobhana cetasikas arising in the sensuous sphere. c) Also 14 akusala cetasikas. 38 sobhana + 28 akusala = 52 cetasikas as given in the Abhidammattha Sangaha. .... I know I'm just repeating what has already been clarified, but I've found it helpful to read through in detail. Metta, Sarah ======= 43471 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 9:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Good Post, I would have to agree. ----- Original Message ----- From: Matthew Miller <...> Some abhidhammikas claim that the abhidhamma and science are totally separate activities -- the abhidhamma deals with "liberation from suffering" and not the description of reality found in science. On the other hand, they claim that science is "irrelevant" to the liberation from suffering. Forgive me, but this is rubbish. First of all, the Abhidhamma (and many of the posts on this list) are filled with bold assertions about reality (the nature of memory, consciousness, physical reality, causality, etc, etc) which are the realm of science. For the most part, these assertions are simply based on 1) the authority of scripture, and/or 2) personal introspective observation. While not useless, these are probably the two least reliable forms of evidence. <....> 43472 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 9:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue The goal of Science is to understand the reality around you, both relative and absolute. This way the quality of life can be improved. The Abidharma attempts to do the same. The only real difference is that most look at the Abidharma as a closed book, and science as an open book. However, keep in mind that the Abidharma was written about 2 millenniums ago and science at that time was very much in the dark. Today science offers much more details on the nature of existence/reality from both the relative and the absolute, and like most bodies of knowledge, not all of it can be used to ease ones sufferings, this includes the abidharma. One of my Buddhist teachers called the abidharma as a boring read. However, he felt the same way about science. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Evan Stamatopoulos To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, 21 March, 2005 04:37 Subject: RE: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Mat, I would have to agree with you to a point. As I see it, the goal of science is to quantitatively describe the nature of all phenomena from observation with or without the aid of instrumentation. The goal of Buddhism is to realise the nature of phenomena through observation with the final goal of liberation. And this is where there is a difference. <...> 43473 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 8:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue In a message dated 3/21/2005 12:52:36 AM Pacific Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: According to my on-line dictionary, science seeks to understand how nature behaves by observing and correlating available factual information. In summary: - Science seeks to understand how nature behaves - Dhamma focuses on the fundamentals of the holy life and how to get to Nibbbana Do you agree with my definitions and do you see these two as overlaping in scope? Metta, Rob M :-) Hi Rob M. Just jumping in. Investigation of states and how and why they behave as they do is a major thrust in Buddhism. Investigation is one of the Seven Enlightenment Factors. All of that sounds scientific to me. Buddhism's science is with a definite purpose of overcoming suffering, while modern science seems in general to be more of an 'investgation at random' -- which may not be totally fair to science. >- Science seeks to understand how nature behave< I understand Dhamma to mean above all else... "The nature of things." If we are studying Dhamma, we are studying the nature of things. Sounds like your definition of science to me. >- Dhamma focuses on the fundamentals of the holy life and how to get to Nibbbana< This is pretty vague in every regard. Pretty hard to even find Buddhists who can agree as to what Nibbana is. "The fundamentals of the holy life" might be summed up in one way as the 37 requisites of enlightenment. Investigation, insight, and mindfulness -- as to conditional actualities -- to me is the heart of that development. Once again I feel that's a scientific oriented component of the Buddha's teachings. TG 43474 From: Joop Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:02am Subject: Re: Tep /Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > Dear Tep > > >To my surprise, after more study, Buddha > > Nature is more closely related to the "Acariya Mun's school" than I > > would have thought of a few years ago. > > I just read the "THE HEART IS KNOWING" at > http://www.dhammasala.org/content/view/67/115/ > The words and phrases above also shows the author was familiar with > Maha-yaha, especially with Zen to some extent. > > I remember Ajaan Chan took up a Scripture written by ancient chinese > Zen master like "Sutta" in one of his dhamma talks. Dear Lokuttaracitta, Tep, all Joop: I'm glad to hear because till now I got the impression that (all) Theravadins are orthodox and not interested in any Mahayana- texts simply because Mahayana is wrong. I know it's subjective but I like some (Mahayana) sutras and still want to be a (liberal) Theravadin. Another topic of course is: are the author of 'The heart is knowing', and his teachers right ? The essay starts with: "All Buddhas and all beings in the world are nothing but the single citta. Outside this single citta nothing at all exists. The single citta, free from the conventional self, is something that was not made and is something, which cannot be destroyed. It is not a thing with color, such as green or yellow and has neither form nor appearance. It is not included in existing things or non-existing things. One cannot have the view that it is something new or old, longer short, large or small because it is beyond all limitations, beyond all measuring, beyond labels, beyond leaving a trace and beyond all comparisons. " (end quote) My first theravadin-abhidhammical answer when reading this, is: No, this is atta-belief. My second and subjective answer is: No, I don't belief that such a citta does exist. My third answer is: I still like this text, and it's a possibility for fruitful (worldwide) discussion between Mahayanists and Theravadins, somethingthing Connie in her initial message and I hope to promote. So I should like to read a reaction from a (buddhological) expert to it. (BTW It's a funny Zen-like joke to talk about a master with the name 'Sutta') Metta Joop 43475 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:58am Subject: Re: [dsg ]Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 145, 146, and Tiika. Hi Larry, op 21-03-2005 01:20 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Do each of the 'mental body' cetasikas (tranquility, lightness, > malleability, wieldiness, proficiency, and rectitude) affect the > physical body in a corresponding way like tranquility of mental body > does? N: I quote again:The Commentary to the ŒAbhidhammattha Sangaha¹ (T.A. p 64) mentions that calm of cetasikas also conditions bodily phenomena: It states: tranquillity etc. and that means that this is said for the other five as well. Then, in the Tiika, under Vis. XIV, 149, they are all summarized again and then almost the same is said as the T.A. with regard to ruupas of the body. It clarifies that naama conditions ruupas of the body. At first one may feel tired, but when kusala citta arises the tiredness is gone. Nina. 43476 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhanas, to Mike. Hi Mike, op 21-03-2005 00:11 schreef mnease op mlnease@z...: I thought it worth mentioning that the Buddha > spent a lot of time in the higher jhaanas, often for relief of pain from the > back injury due to Devadatta's Buddhicide attempt. So I think the > jhaanacittas of a Buddha or an arahant must either be kiriya or vipakka > (obviously no more mahakusala). N: They would be kiriyacittas. When someone attains jhana, it cannot produce vipaka in the same life, only in a next life as rebirth-consciousness and bhavangacitta. for the arahat there is no more rebirth. M: There's a reference in the Dispeller to the > Dhammasanga.ni, "...Therefore the meaning of all jhaanas, described there as > profitable, resultant and functional...". N: In Ch 16? I did not see the text. M: I hope Nina can tell us if I've understood this correctly, as I really don't understand jhaanacittas either. N: I don't either and I tell you why. I enjoy the good things of life: music, paintings, a nice house, good food, good company, etc. But, but: we have to rmember that the aim of the jhanas is being removed from the sense objects and the enjoyment bound up with them. If we do not have this as our goal, I do not think jhana can be developed. We have to be very sincere and truthful with regard to our intentions, otherwise we delude ourselves all the time. If a person dedicates himself to samatha only for a limited time jhana cannot be attained. He has to drastically change his lifestyle, he should not enjoying sense objects anymore. Moreover, great pañña and also mindfulness are necessary to know when there is calm and when there is clinging to the result of the development of samatha. One has to be mindful of and directly understand the cetasikas which are the jhanafactors such as applied thinking and sustained thinking. One has to know when rapture, piiti, is kusala and when it accompanies attachment. If paññaa is not keen one may take for jhana what is only a kind of trance that has nothing to do with the purity of kusala jhanacitta. In order to abandon some jhanafactors in order to attain higher jhanas, paññaa has to investigate the jhanafactors and know them very precisely. This has to be investigated at each stage of jhana, not merely at the fourth stage. He has to have the masteries, vasiis: entering jhana whenever he wants, emerging from it whenever he wants, etc. When someone truly has accumulations for jhana, he can use jhana as a base of insight. But one should not underestimate the development of samatha to the degree of jhana. Nina. 43477 From: Matthew Miller Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Rob: > - Science seeks to understand how nature behaves > - Dhamma focuses on the fundamentals of the holy life and how to get > to Nibbbana Evan: > As I see it, the goal of > science is to quantitatively describe the nature of all phenomena > from observation with or without the aid of instrumentation. > The goal of Buddhism is to realise the nature of phenomena > through observation with the final goal of liberation. > And this is where there is a difference. Science does what > it does because phenomena exist > (i.e. why climb the mountain? - because it's there). Buddhism does > what it does because there is a higher goal to be achieved - that > of liberation. Buddhism has identified that there is a problem to > be solved and a goal to be achieved and therefore there is a > reason for its enquiry into the true > nature of all things. Science flounders trying to solve one > problem after another depending on where the money is coming > from without real > direction. > This distinction only works if you have in mind a pure, unapplied branch of science like astrophysics or geology. But could you say that medical science does not have "a higher goal to be achieved"? Could you say that psychiatry or cardiology or oncology is "without real direction"? > There is another critical difference. The true nature of all > phenomena in Buddhism is to be personally experienced and > because of this personal experience, this leads to wisdom > and wisdom leads to liberation. Science examines phenomena > "objectively" therefore is collects knowledge. This > does not lead to wisdom therefore it cannot lead to liberation. > Again, is not the goal of medical science the "personally experienced" liberation from suffering and disease? Hasn't the Buddha often been described as the "master physician"? There are even branches of medicine (e.g. cognitive therapy, psychotherapy) which involve introspection on the part of the patient himself or herself as part of the liberation from suffering. Let me take this out of the realm of abstract definitions into the concrete. All the evidence we have suggests that people who meditate have figured out a way to directly alter their own brain chemistry. Through practice, they have learned to switch on or off the release of different neurotransmitters in the brain. For example, you can trigger an out-of-body experience by stimulating an area of the right parietal cortex. Electrical activity in the temporal lobe (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) has been associated with various religious experiences. As for Buddhist practice specifically, I don't find anything there that is not a potential area for scientific understanding (and perhaps improvement). Take the experience of "atta," of having a self -- this can be identified with the activities of certain centers in the brain. We know this because we've studied people with damage to these areas and they lose one of the various attributes of "self" -- embodiment, agency, unity or continuity. Someone who reaches a state of "anatta" has figured out a way, through a kind of vipassanic biofeedback, to deactivate these centers. Jhana is a bit easier. These practitioners have activated the "calm" pathways in the brain, many of which have already been identified. The obvious next step, from a medical point of view, is to figure out ways to facilitate and optimize this process, either chemically, electrically or via cognitive therapy or some form of biofeedback. In the beginning, we will have to continue our study of the "master meditators" of the various contemplative religious traditions. But given the extraordinary amount of time and energy required by these traditions to achieve "wisdom" (think of the whole lifetimes spent in monasteries!) I can't help but think that we can learn to do it much more efficiently. :-) Matthew P.S. Rob, I enjoy your use of summary points. Very useful for those of us who tend to ramble in our posts :-) Here are my points: - Science (most notably medicine) *is* involved in liberation from suffering - Dhamma (most notably abhidhamma) *is* involved in making scientific assertions - We are brains - dhamma practice occurs in the brain and can be understood (and potentially improved) by science 43478 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:44am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Sarah wrote: Dear Htoo, I don't know if you'll see this before you head to the summit of the mountain, but in any case, I hope you have a good trip. Please tell us a little more about which mountains you're heading for and whether this is for trekking or some other purpose. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Regarding 'mountain' I wrote as P.S at the foot of the poem. I am not going pleasure journey but renunciation. That is why I wrote the heading as 'Renunciation'. People have tendencies. Because there are many many conforming factors. Difference in society, belief, culture, environment, education, experience, knowledge etc all contribute the tendencies. Bhikkhu Samahita goes for meditation on a mountain for a month. His Buddhism discussion group site has a picture seemingly on a mountain and secluding sensual pleasure. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: I want to tell you (and others) that we just received a package from Myanmar which took months to arrive. Very exciting – it contains a translation of the Dhammasangani by U KKyaw Khine and of the Dhp verses and stories by Daw Mya Tin. I believe they're new copies, but one would not know it as they started falling apart as soon as I opened the package and look like they're hundreds of years old already and I need to open the windows:-). Still, they are great treasures. .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Sayamagyi (great teacher) Daw Mya Tin (MA) wrote many books. Purefaith of 'TeachingsOfBuddha' Yahoo Group regularly posts Sayamagyi's translations at his site of TOB. Yes. These are treasures. Please just open the window gently. Otherwise you know. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- htootintnaing wrote: Htoo: > If not uddhacca-citta and if not vicikiccha-citta, a citta is not > moha-citta. I am talking on moha-citta and not on moha cetasika...snip..snip.. > His learning is not daana, siila, bhavanaa. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ... S: all agreed so far ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I snipped away some parts as you agreed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo's old post:> No one will say 'that child is doing daana or siila or bhavanaa when he is reading or learning'. ... S: probably not, but maybe. He may be studying to make his mother or teacher happy. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: No. Pleasing behaviour to his teacher or his mother is initial javana cittas just before he is sinking in reading. It will be akusala if it is lobha loaded or dosa loaded. What I used as simile was that he is 'purely reading or learning'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: He may be refraining from bad deeds or speech. He may be helping his friend. ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: No. This example shifts to others. Reading is not related with refraining from bad deeds or speech. If you do not agree then please consult '3 virati cetasikas' again. They are 'aniyata yogi cetasikas'. Yoga in Pali means 'co-existing' 'co-arising' 'in parallel'. Yogi means 'someone who is in parallel or is co-existing'. Yoga the word is different one. Do not confue with that Yoga. I am talking a Pali word 'yoga' and 'yogi'. Example is there are 7 cetasikas in cakkhuvinnana citta. They are yogi cetasikas of cakkhuvinnana citta. Because they co-arise (yoga) with cakkhuvinnana citta. 3 virati cetasikas are 'aniyata yogi cetasikas'. They do not co-arise unless co-arising citta is lokuttara citta. So the boy will not have any of virati when he is reading or learning. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > But there are javana cittas. These cittas are not kiriya cittas. So > > they have to be akusala cittas or kusala cittas. ... S: yes. .... > > He is not doing daana, siila, bhavana. So what will you say? > > Again he is not killing, stealing, sexing, lying, intoxicating. > > Does he do any akusala? What will you say? ... S: Akusala doesn't have to be concerned with one of the above. .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I know. But for simplicity I wrote those things because they are kamma patha. :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > He is clearly learning. He is following the meaning of things what he > > has been studying. Apparaently he is not in vicikicchaa, which is > > moha-cittas. I mean his javana cittas when learning are not > > vicikicchaa cittas. > > > > Uddhacca cittas may happen. But not all the time. So mostly he is not > > in moha-javana. ... S: I think the subtle kinds of moha are nearly always quite unknown to us. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: True. When you can detect moha, it has been far away. I mean moha arises and falls away. You will not know its arising. It is so subtle that even anagams will have some difficulties to detect it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Uddhacca (restlessness) can be very, very subtle, for example. > .... > > As he is learning, there is no dosa except the time when he is angry > > with his power of understandability. ... S: Again, I disagree. Dosa can also be very, very subtle. Just when there is the slightest hint of uneasiness about the colour of the book or a word, for example. What we think of as anger is a very gross kind of dosa. .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I know. There are 9 causes of dosa. But even in the absence of cause dosa can arise. Actually I was talking on 'the boy's reading or learning'. His reading is not dosa. And not lobha if it is a simple wish to learn. When there is no lobha, no dosa and there is no vicikiccha then the only akusala citta will be uddhacca. When he is concentrating on reading or learning there is no uddhacca. All these are my logical thinking. But the initial idea that I wrote was from the book by Dr Mehn Tin Mon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > So apparent there are 2 alternatives. > > > > 1. mahakusala cittas as javana cittas > > 2. lobha muula akusala cittas as javana cittas ... S: Well, I think your logic is rather simplified so far, but yes, if there is no dosa or moha, these are the only remaining options. ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Mahakusala cittas are 8 and 4 cittas are not accompanied by > > pannindriya cetasikas. Then 4 cittas left and they are called > > dvihetuka cittas. That is they have alobha and adosa as 2 root > > cetasikas. > > > > Lobha muula akusala cittas are also dvihetuka cittas. Their roots are > > lobha and moha cetasika. > > > > So the child is learning. There are javana cittas. These javana have > > 2 roots whatever they are kusala or akusala if there is no panna in > > hamakusala cittas. > > > > 2 alternatives are now > > > > 1. lobha and moha > > 2. alobha and adosa ... S: Yes, IF there is no dosa, no moha javana and no panna of course. .... > If there is NO ADOSA all javana cittas are not akusala citta. ... S: `are akusala citta', I think you mean. ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Thank you. Yes. 'are akusala citta'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Because > > ADOSA cetasika always accompanies all kusala cittas. > > Sometimes, lobha is so subtle to be detected. > > The differentiating point here is adosa cetasika. ... S: Why not alobha too and of course, other accompanying mental factors? ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Please see the example again. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > I like the assumption that 'purely learning mind' is not akusala .... S: :-) Oh we all like this assumption, but it's a fantasy, I believe. I'll look forward to more of your posts on your return. We'll also be going on a trip next week. Metta, Sarah ======= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: To clarify again, I am not going for a pleasure trip but for meditation. When I am back we will continue the discussions. With regards, Htoo Naing 43479 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:46am Subject: Re: Seeing with the Tongue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" <> I agree. Apes playing with computers is a delightful analogy for science. > We did not evolve to do science. We evolved to rear our young, forage > for food, and so on. Our ability to see patterns and understand the world > arose for practical purposes, activities of daily living. In general, our > capacity to understand reality only applies to things at a limited human > scale. Just as our eyes and upright posture are best suited for hunting > on the African savannah, and not in the jungles of our gorilla brethren, > so too our brain gave us survival and reproductive advantages in a > specific environment. But the brain is poorly suited to really > understanding the ultimate nature of reality. That takes (to borrow a > Buddhist phrase) "going against the stream." ======== Dear Matthew, I see a few of your posts where you mention evolution; also you say "We are brains - dhamma practice occurs in the brain and can be understood (and potentially improved) by science" I include some things I said from an old post: I am not especially impressed by science. It is surely the outstanding cutural achievement of the west - but when I compare it with the Dhamma of the Buddha it seems more like stamp collecting than an investigation into what is real and crucial. Scientists, despite their metaphysically neutral pose, operate with certain assumptions about life: i.e. they have views. And the dominant view in science at this time is that the universe and life was a chance occurence. The big bang occured (no one knows why or what were the conditions ) and then a billion or so years later it happened that this matter came together to form stars and planets. On one planet, earth, it happened, purely by chance, that there were the right elements and conditions to form amino acids. These then formed complex proteins, which later formed bacteria. Life all arose out of matter. The fact that even a tiny cell is an incredibly complex organism (indeed so complex that scientists cannot make even one, despite all their technology) is not a hindrance to this view. Why? Well, as biologist Richard Lewontin explains: "We have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism..... we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door." (from Lewontin's review of The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, Carl Sagan, in the New York Review of Books, January 9, 1997). Richard Dawkins writes that in a universe governed by materialistic evolution (as he claims our universe to be) "some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice." (1995, pp.132-133). And "the universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is at bottom no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless indifference." (quoted in Easterbrook, 1997, p.892). In case anyone thinks Dawkins ideas are idiosyncratic I quote some more leading Biologists/scientists: George Gaylord Simpson: "Man is the result of a purposeless and natural process that did not have him in mind." (1967, pp.344-345). Jacques Monod: "Pure chance, absolutely free but blind, lies at the very root of the stupendous edifice of evolution...." (Monod, 1972, p.110); and "Man at last knows that he is alone in the unfeeling immensity of the universe, out of which he emerged by chance." (p.167) As Futuyma explains: "By coupling undirected, purposeless variation to the blind, uncaring process of natural selection, Darwin made theological or spiritual explanations of the life processes superfluous. Darwin's theory of evolution was a crucial plank in the platform of mechanism and materialism, of much of science, in short that has since been the stage of most Western thought." (Futuyma, 1986, p.2). So this is where we (the 'west') have arrived at in our thinking. It is not a pretty place in my opinion. In fact I predict that the current scientific picture of the world is completely skewed and will be viewed in the near futures with derision: Darwin's theories will be remembered more for their amusement value than becuase they point to any deep truths about life and the universe. BTW I do not believe that dhamma practice occurs in the brain. Robertk 43480 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi, Charles Charles DaCosta wrote: >However, the point I was trying to make was about the idea of "having no-opinions." To never have an opinion sounds very unrealistic, ... > Then we agree here. >... I would think you would have to be dead. > > And also here (taking your meaning as being that a corpse has no opinions ;-)) Jon 43481 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Kel kelvin_lwin wrote: >I'm not looking >for a discussion, just wanted to know if you include his teachings >under your original statement or not. If you're not already familar >with it then I guess the answer is no. > > No, I'm not familiar with Mogok Sayadaw's teachings, and I did not in fact have any particular individual in mind when I made the remark. I do not know of any sutta support for the idea that the PS chain can be broken at one of its links, or at the 'vedana' link in particular. (On a quick glance at the article you gave us, there is no sutta reference cited there on the point either.) Jon 43482 From: Joop Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: > > Hi Joop, > You asked the follow (aswell as made the following points): Hallo Charles Quote: "2. Where do they change? see question 3 3. In my [our] brains or somewhere outside the brains of sentient beings? BOTH it also changes in books, on TV, in other documents, on the internet, etc... 4. In the last case I don't agree: ideas exist only in my (or somebody else) mind; things are only perceived in my mind. Whether we perceive it or not, it can still exists. Example: Deep in the forest a tree falls but there was no-one around that was close enough to hear, see, etc... it fall. Does that mean it really didn't fall?" Joop: Yes, it still can exist, but we are never sure. 'Deep in the forest' doesn't exist in my small and crwowded country, so take another example: 'In the centre of our Galaxy there is an massive black hole'. This is a theory, a perception of the reality Conclusion: one can only talk on a phenomenological way about dhammas. Metta Joop 43483 From: Joop Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hallo Jon, Charles --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi, Charles > > Charles DaCosta wrote: > > >However, the point I was trying to make was about the idea of "having no-opinions." To never have an opinion sounds very unrealistic, ... > > > > Then we agree here. > > >... I would think you would have to be dead. > > > > > > And also here (taking your meaning as being that a corpse has no > opinions ;-)) > > Jon I think that's too easy said, Jon When an opinion is not 'kept' by rupa; is it then kept by nama? I don't think so. An opinion is a concept, kept in somebody's brains. That in rupa, in livinf rupa, feed by oxygen in the blood, but still rupa. Metta Joop 43484 From: mnease Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhanas, to Mike. Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 2:58 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhanas, to Mike. M: There's a reference in the Dispeller to the > Dhammasanga.ni, "...Therefore the meaning of all jhaanas, described there as > profitable, resultant and functional...". N: In Ch 16? I did not see the text. M: Sorry Nina, Chapter 12, paragraph 1838--I'll respond more soon. mike 43485 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 7:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhammasangani translation. Dear Sarah, That is very interesting. Good to compare with the existing PTS translation of the Dhammasangani that could be improved on. Could you perhaps quote one or two lines from it? Howard will also be interested as he was waiting for another English translation. I just saw your quote, thank you. Nina. op 21-03-2005 09:10 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > I want to tell you (and others) that we just received a package from > Myanmar which took months to arrive. Very exciting – it contains a > translation of the Dhammasangani by U KKyaw Khine and of the Dhp verses > and stories by Daw Mya Tin. 43486 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 7:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Dear Rob M, You explained this very clearly and I find the sutta quote most appropriate, Nina. op 21-03-2005 09:50 schreef robmoult op rob.moult@j...: > "Why have I left [answers to speculative questions] undeclared? > Because it is unbeneficial, it does not belong to the fundamentals of > the holy life, it does not lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to > cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to > Nibbana. That is why I have left it undeclared. And what have I > declared? 'This is suffering' - I have declared. 43487 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 7:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Answers to Q. Cetasikas Applied thinking Sustained thinking Dear friends, Phil being absent, helas, I answer the Questions. op 20-03-2005 08:33 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...:> > [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] > > Questions > > i Through how many doors can vitakka and vicåra experience > an object? N: through six doors. > ii Can vitakka and vicåra think of paramattha dhammas? N: yes. They share any kind of object with the citta they accompany, be it a paramattha dhamma or a concept. > iii What is the difference between vitakka and vicåra? N: Vitakka directs the citta to the object and vicaara keeps the citta occupied with the object. Vitakka is gross and vicaara is more subtle. But they perform their function only for the duration of one citta. They both arise together with the citta. > iv Do vitakka and vicåra always arise together? N: In the case of cittas of the sensesphere they always arise together. > v Can vitakka and vicåra arise in a sense-door process? N:Yes, they perform their functions also in a sense-door process. Vitakka directs the citta to the rupa which is the object and vicaara keeps the citta occupied with it. > vi Which types of kåmåvacara cittas (cittas of the sensesphere) > are not accompanied by vitakka and vicåra? N: The six pairs of sense-cognitions (seeing etc.) are not accompanied by vitakka and vicåra. Seeing, for example, sees visible object and it does not need vitakka and vicåra in order to experience visible object. The other cittas of that process need vitakka and vicåra in order to experience visible object. > vii In which stages of jhåna does vitakka arise? N: Vitakka is among the jhaanafactors and it is still needed in the first stage of jhana. It is abandoned in the second stage of jhaana. > viii Why is vitakka abandoned in the higher stages of jhåna? N: In the higher stages one has acquired more skill in jhaana and calm has grown. Therefore, vitakka is then no longer needed in order to experience the meditation subject with absorption. > ix In which stages of jhåna does vicåra arise? N: In the first stage of jhaana. Some people have abandoned both vitakka and vicaara at the second stage of jhaana, and for them ruupa-jhaanas are counted as fourfold. Some people still need vicaara at the second stage and they have abandoned it at the third stage. For them ruupa-jhaanas are counted as fivefold. > x Both vitakka and vicåra accompany the citta which is mindful of nåma and rúpa. Are both vitakka and vicåra factors of the eightfold Path? N: Only vitakka is a factor of the eightfold Path, it is called right thinking, sammaa-sa.nkappa. Right thinking touches or hits the nama or rupa which appears, so that sammaa-di.t.thi can investigate its characteristic. Right understanding and right thinking are together the wisdom of the eightfold Path. The other factors are classified as the siila of the eightfold Path and the concentration of the eightfold Path. **** Nina 43488 From: Matthew Miller Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:33am Subject: Re: Seeing with the Tongue Thanks for your reply, Robert. You raised many big issues and I disagree with you on almost all of them :) I will try to address a couple of your points. Of course, most of this is fairly off-topic, but interesting nevertheless. RobertK: > I am not especially impressed by science... when I compare it > with the Dhamma of the Buddha it seems > more like stamp collecting than an investigation into what is real > and crucial. Stamp collecting? Hmm. Again, I think that your low assessment of science comes from thinking of it only in terms of pure, unapplied sciences such as taxonomy and particle physics. What about medical science? The next time you have an infection or (God forbid) a tumor, I wonder if you'll look at the scientific achievements of antibiotics and radiation therapy as "stamp collecting." More people's suffering has been relieved by modern medical science than all of the Buddhist lineages on earth combined. Is this not "real and crucial"? > > In fact I predict that the current scientific picture of the world > is completely skewed and will be viewed in the near futures with > derision: Darwin's theories will be remembered more for their > amusement value than becuase they point to any deep truths about > life and the universe. > Well, all I can say is -- don't hold your breath! The evidence for evolution is overwhelming. As a theory, it is about as shaky as the theory of gravity or the theory that the earth is round. I have occasionally come across Christian creationists who hold similarly dim views of evolution. The problem is, they are never able to offer any alternate theory for the evidence. They never seem to have anything beyond intuitive aversion to the idea of evolution and faith in some scriptural authority. In science, the word "theory" has a special meaning that is different from its ordinary usage. A theory is not just an "idea" or a "hypothesis" or a "philosophy." It is a comprehensive explanation which attempts to account for ALL of the available evidence. The "theory" of evolution, like the "theory" of the atom or the "theory" of the cell, has been repeatedly and rigorously tested against the evidence and has prevailed. Take a stroll through the library of any major university and you will find thousands of journals filled with 100,000's of articles all giving evidence of evolution's validity. Everything that we've learned from molecular biology, genetics, radiocarbon dating, biogeography, the fossil record, comparative anatomy and comparative embryology points toward the fact that complex forms of life evolved from simpler ones. You could easily undermine the theory of evolution. All you would need to do is, say, find a hominid fossil at the level of the pleistocene. That would do it. But again, I wouldn't hold my breath. As we sit here, thousands of new fossils are being unearthed all over the planet. So far every single one of them has been exactly where evolution predicted it would be. This is quite remarkable if you think about it. But evolution is even more special. It is a core theory, the overarching theme of ALL biological science. Nothing that we know in biology makes sense outside of evolutionary theory. It is the unifying thread that ties together all of our biological knowledge. Matthew 43489 From: Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew, All In a message dated 3/21/2005 4:32:07 AM Pacific Standard Time, bupleurum@y... writes: Rob: > - Science seeks to understand how nature behaves > - Dhamma focuses on the fundamentals of the holy life and how to get > to Nibbbana Evan: > As I see it, the goal of > science is to quantitatively describe the nature of all phenomena > from observation with or without the aid of instrumentation. > The goal of Buddhism is to realise the nature of phenomena > through observation with the final goal of liberation. > And this is where there is a difference. Science does what > it does because phenomena exist > (i.e. why climb the mountain? - because it's there). Buddhism does > what it does because there is a higher goal to be achieved - that > of liberation. Buddhism has identified that there is a problem to > be solved and a goal to be achieved and therefore there is a > reason for its enquiry into the true > nature of all things. Science flounders trying to solve one > problem after another depending on where the money is coming > from without real > direction. > This distinction only works if you have in mind a pure, unapplied branch of science like astrophysics or geology. But could you say that medical science does not have "a higher goal to be achieved"? Could you say that psychiatry or cardiology or oncology is "without real direction"? > There is another critical difference. The true nature of all > phenomena in Buddhism is to be personally experienced and > because of this personal experience, this leads to wisdom > and wisdom leads to liberation. Science examines phenomena > "objectively" therefore is collects knowledge. This > does not lead to wisdom therefore it cannot lead to liberation. > Again, is not the goal of medical science the "personally experienced" liberation from suffering and disease? Hasn't the Buddha often been described as the "master physician"? There are even branches of medicine (e.g. cognitive therapy, psychotherapy) which involve introspection on the part of the patient himself or herself as part of the liberation from suffering. Let me take this out of the realm of abstract definitions into the concrete. All the evidence we have suggests that people who meditate have figured out a way to directly alter their own brain chemistry. Through practice, they have learned to switch on or off the release of different neurotransmitters in the brain. For example, you can trigger an out-of-body experience by stimulating an area of the right parietal cortex. Electrical activity in the temporal lobe (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) has been associated with various religious experiences. As for Buddhist practice specifically, I don't find anything there that is not a potential area for scientific understanding (and perhaps improvement). Take the experience of "atta," of having a self -- this can be identified with the activities of certain centers in the brain. We know this because we've studied people with damage to these areas and they lose one of the various attributes of "self" -- embodiment, agency, unity or continuity. Someone who reaches a state of "anatta" has figured out a way, through a kind of vipassanic biofeedback, to deactivate these centers. Jhana is a bit easier. These practitioners have activated the "calm" pathways in the brain, many of which have already been identified. The obvious next step, from a medical point of view, is to figure out ways to facilitate and optimize this process, either chemically, electrically or via cognitive therapy or some form of biofeedback. In the beginning, we will have to continue our study of the "master meditators" of the various contemplative religious traditions. But given the extraordinary amount of time and energy required by these traditions to achieve "wisdom" (think of the whole lifetimes spent in monasteries!) I can't help but think that we can learn to do it much more efficiently. :-) Matthew This is incredibly well put. I hope you are (or will) write a book on the subject. Buddhists have a propensity to look down on science. I think because science is so highly regarded in society, and Buddhists legitimately believe they have found something overall superior, science is almost seem as a rival. The interesting thing is, most Eastern Buddhists I know enjoy the idea of connectivity between science and Buddhism. Ven. Dr. K Sri Dhammananda has said, for example that -- "the more science learns, the closer it gets to Buddhism." A sentiment I agree with. The educated Sri Lankan Monks I've known have no problem with a certain level or correlation between science and Buddhism. But God help science when it comes to Western Buddhists. ;-) It usually is in for a trashing. Yes, even many 'Abhidhammists,' who follow a doctrine that "scientized" the Dhamma even further, don't have good things to say about science. Again, I suspect it is born out of an elitist point of view. Whatever helps in understanding conditional principles is beneficial. The Buddha said to consider such teachings his own as well. TG 43490 From: nina Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:17am Subject: quote Phra Dhammadharo, to Azita Dear Azita, When reading Vipassana Letters to Lodewijk at dinner, I came across a quote from the late Phra Dhammadharo and I thought of you. It is a good encouragement. I read first: Now the quote: (taken from "Be here now", Adelaide): end quote. More patience, courage and good cheer, Nina. 43491 From: Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhammasangani translation. Hi, Nina (and Sarah) - In a message dated 3/21/05 10:56:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > Dear Sarah, > That is very interesting. Good to compare with the existing PTS translation > of the Dhammasangani that could be improved on. Could you perhaps quote one > or two lines from it? Howard will also be interested as he was waiting for > another English translation. --------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I would very much like to see some of it. The current PTS translation I sure do hope ;-) is a very poor one! --------------------------------- > I just saw your quote, thank you. > Nina. > =================== 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) 43492 From: Matthew Miller Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 0:55pm Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Rob writes: > To use an analogy, on my desk calendar, there is a > beautiful photograph of a flower. A book on botany will > allow me categorize this flower according to genus, etc. > Photography and botany can take the > same subject yet be separate becuase they have a different scope. > You seem to be suggesting that the photograph of the flower deals with its aesthetic beauty whereas the botany merely analyzes and categorizes it. This reminds me of a wonderful passage from the opening of the book "The Pleasure of Finding Things Out" by Richard Feynman, the Nobel-prize winning physicist. Here Feynman very eloquently refutes this false distinction between "aesthetic" and "scientific" experience: "I have a friend who's an artist and he's sometimes taken a view which I don't agree very well. He'll hold up a flower and say, "Look how beautiful it is," and I'll agree, I think. And he says - "you see, I as an artist can see how beautiful this is, but you as a scientist, oh, take this all apart and it becomes a dull thing." And I think that he's kind of funny. First of all, the beauty that he sees is available to other people and to me, too, I believe, although I might not be quite as refined aesthetically as he is. But I can appreciate the beauty of a flower. At the same time, I see much more about the flower than he sees. I can imagine the cells in there, the complicated actions inside which also have a beauty. I mean it's not just the beauty at this dimension of one centimeter, there is also a beauty at a smaller dimension, the inner structure. Also the processes, the fact that the colors in the flower evolved in the order to attract insects to pollinate it is interesting - it means that insects can see the color. It adds a question: Does this aesthetic sense also exist in the lower forms? Why is it aesthetic? All kinds of interesting questions which shows that a science knowledge only adds to the excitement and mystery and the awe of a flower. It only adds; I don't understand how it subtracts." -- Richard Feynman, "The Pleasure of Finding Things Out" p.2 43493 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions YES YES ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, 21 March, 2005 13:41 Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi, Charles Charles DaCosta wrote: >However, the point I was trying to make was about the idea of "having no-opinions." To never have an opinion sounds very unrealistic, ... > Then we agree here. >... I would think you would have to be dead. > > And also here (taking your meaning as being that a corpse has no opinions ;-)) Jon 43494 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Joop, You don't believe ideas can exist on paper? or in the spoken word? If not, then what do you call the content of most of our posts? or should I ask, what do you mean by "one can only talk on a phenomenological way about dhammas"? Just curious. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Joop To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, 21 March, 2005 15:25 Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hallo Charles Quote: "2. Where do they change? see question 3 3. In my [our] brains or somewhere outside the brains of sentient beings? BOTH it also changes in books, on TV, in other documents, on the internet, etc... 4. In the last case I don't agree: ideas exist only in my (or somebody else) mind; things are only perceived in my mind. Whether we perceive it or not, it can still exists. Example: Deep in the forest a tree falls but there was no-one around that was close enough to hear, see, etc... it fall. Does that mean it really didn't fall?" Joop: Yes, it still can exist, but we are never sure. 'Deep in the forest' doesn't exist in my small and crwowded country, so take another example: 'In the centre of our Galaxy there is an massive black hole'. This is a theory, a perception of the reality Conclusion: one can only talk on a phenomenological way about dhammas. Joop 43495 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 0:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Joop, I have no clue as to what you mean by: "I think that's too easy said, Jon When an opinion is not 'kept' by rupa; is it then kept by nama? I don't think so. An opinion is a concept, kept in somebody's brains. That in rupa, in living rupa, feed by oxygen in the blood, but still rupa. " Can you start out by explaining what you mean by rupa and nama? Because it sounds like you are agreeing, but the statement "I think that's too easy said" make me think you want to disagree; so... CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Joop To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, 21 March, 2005 15:29 Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hallo Jon, Charles Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi, Charles > > Charles DaCosta wrote: > >However, the point I was trying to make was about the idea of "having no-opinions." To never have an opinion sounds very unrealistic, ... > > > > Then we agree here. > > >... I would think you would have to be dead. > > And also here (taking your meaning as being that a corpse has no > opinions ;-)) > Jon I think that's too easy said, Jon When an opinion is not 'kept' by rupa; is it then kept by nama? I don't think so. An opinion is a concept, kept in somebody's brains. That in rupa, in livinf rupa, feed by oxygen in the blood, but still rupa. Joop 43496 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 0:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Seeing with the Tongue Matthew, you have me shaking in my boots:) good points, but I have to add a correction: Today all science is applied in one form or another (e.g., particle physics is giving us faster and faster computers). And, even the Abidharma provides a taxonomy. For my first degree, my thesis was on the evolution of matter and the Bible, and I only found two points of disagreement (i.e., which came first man or woman, and which came first the sun or the earth). CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Matthew Miller To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, 21 March, 2005 17:33 Subject: [dsg] Re: Seeing with the Tongue Thanks for your reply, Robert. You raised many big issues and I disagree with you on almost all of them :) I will try to address a couple of your points. Of course, most of this is fairly off-topic, but interesting nevertheless. ... In science, the word "theory" has a special meaning that is different from its ordinary usage. A theory is not just an "idea" or a "hypothesis" or a "philosophy." It is a comprehensive explanation which attempts to account for ALL of the available evidence. The "theory" of evolution, like the "theory" of the atom or the "theory" of the cell, has been repeatedly and rigorously tested against the evidence and has prevailed. Take a stroll through the library of any major university and you will find thousands of journals filled with 100,000's of articles all giving evidence of evolution's validity. Everything that we've learned from molecular biology, genetics, radiocarbon dating, biogeography, the fossil record, comparative anatomy and comparative embryology points toward the fact that complex forms of life evolved from simpler ones. 43497 From: Matthew Miller Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:44pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Seeing with the Tongue > For my first degree, my thesis was on the evolution of > matter and the Bible, and I only found two points of > disagreement (i.e., which came first man or woman, and > which came first the sun or the earth). > The Bible. What a trip. God creates plants on the third day before he creates the sun on the fourth. Have you seen this site? It's a fun resource: http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/ Matthew 43498 From: Andrew Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: Here are my points: > > - Science (most notably medicine) *is* involved in liberation from > suffering > - Dhamma (most notably abhidhamma) *is* involved in making scientific > assertions > - We are brains > - dhamma practice occurs in the brain and can be understood (and > potentially improved) by science Hello Matthew and others interested in this thread. Re Matthew's first point above, can somebody tell me whether or not the Nazi medical experiments on Jewish concentration camp interns were science and, if so, how they were "involved in liberation from suffering"? Andrew T 43499 From: Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:10pm Subject: Vism.XIV,147 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 147. (xxii)-(xxiii) The wieldy state of the [mental] body is 'wieldiness of body'. The wieldy state of consciousness is 'wieldiness of consciousness'. They have the characteristic of quieting unwieldiness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. Their function is to crush unwieldiness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. They are manifested as success in making (something) an object of the [mental] body and consciousness. As bringing trust in things that should be trusted in and as bringing susceptibility of application to beneficial acts, like the refining of gold, they should be regarded as opposed to the remaining hindrances, etc., that cause unwieldiness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. 43500 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:56pm Subject: To James: Re: To Connie: BB's Article 2 Hi James, ------------- J: > I am reminded of the time before the Buddha was enlightened, when he was Gotama, and he became very upset when he encountered three different types of people: old, sick, and dead. And he thought to himself `Since I am also subject to old age, sickness, and death it would not be fitting, it would not be proper, for me to pursue things which are also subject to old age, sickness, and death. That would be an ignoble quest. Therefore, since I am subject to old age, sickness, and death, I should pursue that which is not subject to those things. That would be a noble quest.' ------------------------- I haven't read the story lately, but I wonder if you are correct when you say Gotama became "very upset." As you have already pointed out, the Buddha never became upset, so I would think the Bodhisatta, too, was an extremely even-tempered person - at least by worldling standards. The quote you have given would seem to describe calm wise-consideration (kusala) more than anxiety-ridden unwise- consideration (akusala). -------------------------- C: > Compare this to what BB writes, "And, as I will show presently, these terms are intended quite literally as signifying biological birth, aging, and death, not our anxiety over being born, growing old, and dying." But what about the dukkha that made Gotama seek the truth? It seems to me that Gotama had a lot of anxiety over sickness, aging, and death and he hadn't experienced them directly (at least not aging and death- and he didn't recall his past lives). This is not a cut-and-dry issue; there seems to be some gray area. And, again, we have to get back to how this all relates to DO. Anyone have an Advil? ;-)) ------------------------------------- Good luck with your research, and sorry for missing your "Advil" joke - it's not in my dictionary. :-) Ken H PS: just Googled Advil - a headache tablet. Now I get it! :-) 43501 From: connie Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:04pm Subject: Re: the alley-walk Hi, Walkers, Just a bit of graffito & graffiti in passing: Sam.ii, 105: Even so have I, monks, seen an ancient way, an ancient road followed by the wholly Awakened Ones of olden times. ... Along that have I gone, and the matters that I have come to know fully as I was going along it I have told to the monks, nuns, men and women layfollowers... Nina: Until we are sotapanna, a person who walks straight, we are going to have misunderstandings about sati, very normal. Nyanaponika Thera: ... mindfulness means just "to watch one's steps" so that one may not stumble or miss a chance in the pursuit of one's aims. ... Mindfulness walks slowly and deliberately, and its daily task is of a rather humdrum nature. Yet where it places its feet it cannot easily be dislodged, and it acquires and bestows true mastery of the ground it covers. Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw: ...wandering thoughts are called "hindering thoughts". Soma Thera: ...walking fast is comparable to the bhikkhu's entry into the state of unskillful thinking; the walking slowly, to the cutting off of unskillful thought-conduct SN XXXV.95: Malukyaputta! When you have nothing to do with the sense-objects that you perceive, you will get no foothold on them. Malukyaputta! When you lose your foothold on the objects of sense, your namarupa (aggregates of mind and matter) will neither be here in this world, nor there in the other world. And this being not anywhere in both worlds means the end of suffering. Dan: When a mind that is harboring dosa or lobha or moha is said to be "following the path", that path cannot be the Buddha's. peace, connie 43502 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:14pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Charles, ------------------ KH:> > There is only the present moment." ------------------ C: > So beings can't have existed in the past? --------------------------------- When you consider a 'being' as the momentarily existing five khandhas, then beings have certainly existed in the past. But those beings no longer exist. There are only the present five khandhas. --------------------------------------------- C: > And, the future doesn't exit? ---------------------------------------------- No. Nor has it ever. ---------------------------------- C: > Have you experience this, or do you not experience? When you look in the mirror in the morning, do your image disappear after a billionth of a second, or a moment? ---------------------------------- An image in the mirror is a concept and, as such, it has no actual existence at all. The only ultimately real thing that meets the eye is visible object, and it lasts for one moment of rupa. Seeing consciousness, which experiences visible object, lasts for one moment of nama. ---------------- C: > In ultimate reality there is space, emptiness, but you may not find it, unless you search for the essence. ---------------------------- You and I are approaching the Dhamma from different perspectives and so I don't see the meaning you obviously see in the above. According to the Theravada teaching, a dhamma is empty of self but it is not nothingness. -------------------------------- KH: > > and moments of thought creation (conceptualizing). In many of those moments, the mental factor known as lobar has arisen, performed its function (of attachment to its object) and fallen away. > > ---------------------------------- I have noticed lately that your spell-checker changes my spellings - and not always for the better. :-) ----------------- KH: > > Conditioned reality is the five khandhas as they arise in this present, fleeting moment. They can arise in one of six ways, or, as the Buddha said, "as one of the six worlds." There is one world for each of the six kinds of consciousness - seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and mentally cognising. In a moment of seeing (the eye world) the ........................ C: > Have you experienced this, and how would you describe that experience? ------------------ According to the Buddha, this is all I ever really experience. The best way of describing it would be to cut and paste from the Theravada texts. Or, I could just continue with what I have been doing - putting my understanding of those texts into my own words. --------------------- KH: > > they exist for only the briefest possible moment. Even the Eight-fold Path is just a fleeting moment in which the five khandhas exist in their supramundane form. ...................... C: > how have you experienced these briefest possible moments? ------------- As I have explained, I experience them all the time - as moments of seeing or hearing etc. But I think you must be asking which parts (if any) of the teaching have I personally verified. Is that of any relevance? Where did the Buddha say we should divide the Dhamma into two sections - the parts we have personally verified and the parts we have not? If anything, the opposite is true: concepts of self should be excluded from our understanding. ---------------- C: > How have you experience the ending of your existence? ---------------- According to the Abhidhamma, the falling away of a conditioned nama or rupa can be directly known, but only by well-developed panna. So too can its arising and persistence. Ken H 43503 From: Matthew Miller Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Andrew: > can somebody tell me whether or not the Nazi > medical experiments on Jewish concentration camp interns were > science and, if so, how they were "involved in liberation > from suffering"? Matthew: Well, no, they weren't. But what is your point? Throughout history, one can find extreme examples of the perversion of anything. Here's an example of how Buddhism was perverted by the Nazi's allies, the Japanese: *** "Before the foe my heart / Is calmed, composure-blessed / While belching cannons sing / A lullaby of rest." The poetic words of a Zen Buddhist chaplain to the Japanese armed forces in the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-05 offer the equivalent to any tank-blessing sermon by a British bishop in the first world war. And in that Japanese victory - a crucial one since it is the first modern war in which a western power was defeated - Buddhism played a crucial role. The religion had long since been state-sponsored in Japan - part of how it defined itself against the west and asserted its modern military identity. By the 19th century there were almost half a million Buddhist temples in Japan and every household was obliged to affiliate itself to one. And when Japan defeated China in 1894-95, it was proof for the Japanese that their kind of Buddhism worked because it was less pessimistic than any other variety. Buddhism now justified war in the name of a higher "civilising" purpose - just as Christianity and Islam had done. As Shaku Soen, the poetic chaplain, wrote: "Many material human bodies may be destroyed - but from a broader point of view these sacrifices are so many phoenixes consumed in the sacred fire of spirituality." Generals noted approvingly how their Buddhist soldiers were simply the best. In the 1904-05 war, General Hayashi Senjuro lost 4000 of his 5000 men. But even as they died, he noted approvingly, they recited the name of the Buddha. And Sawaki Kodo, who survived that war to become one of the great 20th century Zen masters, described how he and his colleagues "gorged ourselves in killing people ... Just what you'd expect from a Zen priest. A man with guts." People who are ill at ease in their own skin will be attracted by the Buddhist recommendation to sacrifice all that egoism. But the same message can also be used to justify militarism and power lust. General Nogi, the Zen-trained hero of the 1904-05 war, committed ritualistic suicide with his wife on the death of the Emperor Meiji in 1912. For by then Buddhism was part of the cult of emperor worship - what was technically classified as "imperial-way Buddhism". The emperor ("Golden wheel turning Sacred King") could use force and go to war. Like a parent, said the Buddhist state-theologians, the emperor was at his most compassionate when he was being most coercive. -- Hywel Williams, The Guardian, Monday April 21, 2003 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,2763,940513,00.html) 43504 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:47pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue With all due respect, TG, I am not giving science a trashing. I am merely putting it in perspective. I am an Electronics Engineer so I would be trashing something I make a living from. One does not pursue a branch of Engineering if one does not have a high regard for science to begin with. Science and Buddhism have areas of overlap and this is where the confusion occurs. Overlap does not mean equal. Kind Regards, Evan -----Original Message----- From: TGrand458@a... [mailto:TGrand458@a...] Sent: Tuesday, 22 March 2005 4:25 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew, All ... Buddhists have a propensity to look down on science. I think because science is so highly regarded in society, and Buddhists legitimately believe they have found something overall superior, science is almost seem as a rival. The interesting thing is, most Eastern Buddhists I know enjoy the idea of connectivity between science and Buddhism. Ven. Dr. K Sri Dhammananda has said, for example that -- "the more science learns, the closer it gets to Buddhism." A sentiment I agree with. The educated Sri Lankan Monks I've known have no problem with a certain level or correlation between science and Buddhism. But God help science when it comes to Western Buddhists. ;-) It usually is in for a trashing. Yes, even many 'Abhidhammists,' who follow a doctrine that "scientized" the Dhamma even further, don't have good things to say about science. Again, I suspect it is born out of an elitist point of view. Whatever helps in understanding conditional principles is beneficial. The Buddha said to consider such teachings his own as well. TG 43505 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:30pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Matthew, It is interesting to note that these days science is being "personalised". The whole idea of removing bias in science is to "de-personalise" it otherwise the results can be "adjusted" to reflect the views of the experimenter either deliberately or accidentally. Let's make no bones about this and let's not allow personal bias into this. What is the point of performing double-blind experiments if science is supposed to be personal? Science is objective. It always has been and by nature it always must be. So no, I do not go along with your assertion that science is personal. What it must be is: objective, observable and repeatable. Why is this so? Because its purpose is to collect data and classify. Knowledge is the objective of science. And knowledge in as many areas as possible without discrimination. Now, you bring up the area of medical science as an example of "a higher goal". They liberate us from suffering. That could be extracted to many other branches of science. Technology is supposed to make our lives easier, less stressful, liberate us from menial tasks. Agricultural science has meant that most of us in the western world don't have to grow our own food so we are liberated from frustrations of failed crops and the possible hunger that can result from that. Last week I was sick. I couldn't work for 3 days. I was in a great deal of pain. New diseases appear throughout the world from time to time and we are even unwittingly breeding new "super bugs" by overuse of our medical solutions like anti-biotics. Guess what, this sounds very much like samsara - a mass of suffering to me. Now, I must address the issue of "atta" that you raise. Particularly your summary statement "we are brains". So, when death occurs and the body lies still, are you still brains? When the maggots and micro-organisms have caused the body to bloat and stench, are you still brains? When the micro-organisms and maggots have had their fill and left leaving nothing behind, are you still brains? It would in fact be quite difficult to identify where these brains of yours are at any one time. When science figures out a way to sit and pass an exam on my behalf, then it may figure out how to achieve "wisdom" for me. Kind Regards, Evan PS I also like the idea of a summary. 1. All conditioned things are impermanent. 2. Atta is a permanent self or soul. 3. The brain is impermanent. 4. The brain is therefore Anatta. 5. The purpose of science is to accumulate knowledge of the universe. 6. The purpose of Buddhism is liberation which is achieved through wisdom whose by-product is knowledge. -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Miller [mailto:bupleurum@y...] Sent: Monday, 21 March 2005 11:30 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue ... - Science (most notably medicine) *is* involved in liberation from suffering - Dhamma (most notably abhidhamma) *is* involved in making scientific assertions - We are brains - dhamma practice occurs in the brain and can be understood (and potentially improved) by science 43506 From: Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 0:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Evan No disrespect intended for anyone and my comments were not directed toward you...in fact I don't think I read a post by you on this subject. But I have seen a lot of anti-science sentiment in Buddhist chat rooms and the like. I know several highly educated Sri Lankan Theravdin monks who consider Buddhism to be a science. TG In a message dated 3/21/2005 5:33:59 PM Pacific Standard Time, evan.stamatopoulos@p... writes: With all due respect, TG, I am not giving science a trashing. I am merely putting it in perspective. I am an Electronics Engineer so I would be trashing something I make a living from. One does not pursue a branch of Engineering if one does not have a high regard for science to begin with. Science and Buddhism have areas of overlap and this is where the confusion occurs. Overlap does not mean equal. Kind Regards, Evan 43507 From: Matthew Miller Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Evam wrote: > I do not go along with your assertion > that science is personal. Forgive me, my friend, but I don't recall asserting that science is "personal." However, as someone once said, "misunderstanding is one of the great engines of progress." So, since you brought it up, it occurs to me that one might argue that science is a human activity, carried out by people, so it will always be "personal." Even as it strives to be "objective," the initial motivation is always some personal goal. For example, while AIDS research is (in as sense) objective and impersonal, we wouldn't devote so much time to it if it didn't promise to relieve a great deal of suffering. Of course, there are sordid examples of science (the Nazis, Hiroshima) just as there are sordid examples of Buddhism, Christianity and anything else. We are, after all, only human. > Now, I must address the issue of "atta" that you raise. Particularly > your summary statement "we are brains". So, when death occurs and > the body lies still, are you still brains? When the maggots and > micro-organisms have caused the body to bloat and stench, are you > still brains? I would say no. When the brain dies, "you" no longer exist. Sorry, no karma or rebirth here. But that's the subject of another post! Matthew 43508 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:25pm Subject: Re:Buddha Nature Dear Joop: >I'm glad to hear because till now I got the impression that > (all) Theravadins are orthodox and not interested in any Mahayana- > texts simply because Mahayana is wrong. Theravadins in Myanmar seem very orthodox. while those in Thai are not and some of them seem to break bounds like "Dammakaya Foundation ". > I know it's subjective but I like some (Mahayana) sutras and still > want to be a (liberal) Theravadin. Let me make you much more glad by the followings. ------------------------------------------------. Seven Stages of Purification & Insight Knowledges — Ven. Matara Sri Nanarama. http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/bm7insight.pdf Some meditators are unable to go beyond the knowledge of equanimity about formations(sankhar'upekkha-ñana) due to some powerful aspirations they have made in the past,such as for buddhahood,or pacekabuddhahood,chief discipleship,etc.In fact, it is at this stage that one can ascertain whether one has made any such aspiration in the past.Sometimes when he has reached his stage the meditatior comes to feel that he is cherishing a powerful aspiration. ------------------------------------------------ Bodhisattva Ideal in Buddhism by Ven. Dr. W. Rahula (From: "Gems of Buddhist Wisdom", Buddhist Missionary Society, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 1996) http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha126.htm Although the Theravada holds that anybody can be a Bodhisattva, it does not stipulate or insist that all must be Bodhisattva which is considered not practical. The decision is left to the individual whether to take the Path of the Sravaka or of the Pratyekabuddha or of the Samyaksambuddha. But it is always clearly explained that the state of a Samyaksambuddha is superior and that the other two are inferior. Yet they are not disregarded. *snip* A Thera named Maha-Tipitaka Culabhaya who wrote the Milinda-Tika (about the 12th Century AD.) in the Theravada tradition of the Mahavihara at Anuradhapura, says at the end of the book in the colophon that he aspires to become a Buddha: Buddho Bhaveyyam "May I become a Buddha," which means that this author is a Bodhisattva. We come across at the end of some palm leaf manuscripts of Buddhist texts in Sri Lanka the names of even a few copyists who have recorded their wish to become Buddhas, and they too are to be considered as Bodhisattvas. *snip* There are many Buddhists, both bhikkhus and laymen, in Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Thailand and Cambodia which are regarded as Theravada countries, who take the vow or resolution to become Buddhas to save others. They are indeed Bodhisattvas at different levels of development. Thus one may see that in Theravada countries all are not Sravakas. There are Bodhisattvas as well. ------------------------------------------------ > > Another topic of course is: are the author of 'The heart is knowing', > and his teachers right ? His expressions must be against Pali tipitaka, but I can not say his teachings never lead to Nibbana. > The essay starts with: "All Buddhas and all beings in the world are > nothing but the single citta. Outside this single citta nothing at > all exists. The single citta, free from the conventional self, is > something that was not made and is something, which cannot be > destroyed. It is not a thing with color, such as green or yellow and > has neither form nor appearance. It is not included in existing > things or non-existing things. One cannot have the view that it is > something new or old, longer short, large or small because it is > beyond all limitations, beyond all measuring, beyond labels, beyond > leaving a trace and beyond all comparisons. " (end quote) > > My first theravadin-abhidhammical answer when reading this, is: No, > this is atta-belief. > > My second and subjective answer is: No, I don't belief that such a > citta does exist. > > My third answer is: I still like this text, and it's a possibility > for fruitful (worldwide) discussion between Mahayanists and > Theravadins, somethingthing Connie in her initial message and I hope > to promote. So I should like to read a reaction from a > (buddhological) expert to it. I am not interested in dry buddhological views, but why dont we start with "Lokuttaracitta" ? Abhiddhama says there are 33 to 36 cetasikas in each of lokuttaracittas. The object of lokuttarcittas is Nibbana. How can the 36 to 38 cetasikas in each of lokuttaracittas be known as such ? (I gave this question to Sarah, but I have not receive her answer yet. ) From LK 43509 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:29pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue That's OK. I was just trying to set the story straight. And while I would agree with a Theravadin Buddhist monk that Buddhism is a science, I would not agree that western science and Buddhism are the same thing. The confusion occurs because their common ground seems large. I would most certainly not speculate whether science and Buddhism will one day "meet". Kind Regards, Evan -----Original Message----- From: TGrand458@a... [mailto:TGrand458@a...] <...> Hi Evan No disrespect intended for anyone and my comments were not directed toward you...in fact I don't think I read a post by you on this subject. But I have seen a lot of anti-science sentiment in Buddhist chat rooms and the like. I know several highly educated Sri Lankan Theravdin monks who consider Buddhism to be a science. <...> 43510 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 7:15pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Matthew, Well, then, let's use a little year 12 calculus to prove that you do not exist even now. You said: "When the brain dies, "you" no longer exist". So you are only here in existence for this one lifetime. Let's say you fluke it in this lifetime and you live to be 100 years old (consider yourself lucky my friend). Now, let's pick a reasonable figure for the age of the universe of 10 billion years. That means you have lived 10^-8th of the age of the universe (this is hard to do in text only so bear with me). Now as the universe continues to age, of course "your" little portion of that will reduce. So we can conclude as the age of the universe tends to infinity, your life's portion of it tends to zero. i.e.: As ua -> oo, ma -> 0 Where: ua = age of the universe ma = age of Matthew oo = infinity So if we assume the age of the universe will tend to infinity, why not cut out all that waiting and say that you have already tended to zero. Ipso facto, you do not exist today. Well, quite aside from this light-hearted analysis, what is the purpose of existence if it is finite? What is the difference to anything if all ceases at the point of death? I am interested in your understanding of what existence is and what purpose it serves if any. Kind Regards, Evan -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Miller [mailto:bupleurum@y...] <...> Forgive me, my friend, but I don't recall asserting that science is "personal." However, as someone once said, "misunderstanding is one of the great engines of progress." So, since you brought it up, it occurs to me that one might argue that science is a human activity, carried out by people, so it will always be "personal." Even as it strives to be "objective," the initial motivation is always some personal goal. For example, while AIDS research is (in as sense) objective and impersonal, we wouldn't devote so much time to it if it didn't promise to relieve a great deal of suffering. Of course, there are sordid examples of science (the Nazis, Hiroshima) just as there are sordid examples of Buddhism, Christianity and anything else. We are, after all, only human. <....> 43511 From: Andrew Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > Andrew: > > can somebody tell me whether or not the Nazi > > medical experiments on Jewish concentration camp interns were > > science and, if so, how they were "involved in liberation > > from suffering"? > > Matthew: > Well, no, they weren't. But what is your point? Throughout history, > one can find extreme examples of the perversion of anything. Here's > an example of how Buddhism was perverted by the Nazi's allies, the > Japanese: Hi Matthew Yes, I have read about the persecution of Christians by Japanese Buddhists during nationalistic periods of their history. If pushed, I could write an essay analysing such "Buddhist" actions in Dhamma terms and concluding that those actions were not the Buddha's Middle Way. But you could write that essay too, so let's not waste time. However, if science is "learning or study concerned with demonstrable truths or observable phenomena, and characterised by the systematic application of scientific method" [dictionary], then I still need you to state why you contend that the Nazi scientists were not engaged in science. What part of science had they perverted, in your opinion? This seems to me to be the crux of the matter. You are suggesting that Dhamma is pseudo-science but also that science has some *inherent* ethical direction-finder (whether it is objective or subjective, I'm not yet clear). But I'd really like to hear more. Or have I misread you? Best wishes Andrew T 43512 From: Matthew Miller Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Andrew: > > I need you to state why you contend that the Nazi scientists were > not engaged in science. What part of science had they perverted, > in your opinion? > This seems to me to be the crux of the matter. You are suggesting > that Dhamma is pseudo-science but also that science has some > *inherent* ethical direction-finder (whether it is objective or > subjective, I'm not yet clear). But I'd really like to hear more. > Or have I misread you? > Yes, I think you have misread me, but I probably wasn't very clear. Again, misunderstanding is par for the course on the internet. Let me summarize my position: -- Science is a human activity, like religion, and has been used for both good and ill. -- The Nazis used it for ill. -- The Nazis were not engaged in "liberation from suffering." -- I never said that *all* science is engaged in the liberation of suffering. In response to listers who described all scientific activity as "random" and "without direction" I pointed toward whole branches of science whose (human-given) purpose is the liberation of suffering (e.g. medicine). -- "Science" does not have an inherent ethical direction-finder. -- social primates (including humans) do (though they don't always follow it) Matthew 43513 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:01pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 152 - Determination /adhimokkha & Energy/viriya (b) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.9 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya) contd] Adhimokkha is not the same as what we usually mean by the words “determination” and “decision” in conventional language. In order to understand the characteristic of adhimokkha we should know which types of citta it accompanies. Since adhimokkha is one of the “particulars” it accompanies cittas of the four jåtis and thus it can be kusala, akusala, vipåka or kiriya. As we have seen, the “particulars” do not arise with every citta. Adhimokkha does not accompany the dvi-pañcaviññåùas (sense-cognitions) which are accompanied only by the “universals”, not by other types of cetasikas. Seeing-consciousness, for example, arises at the eye-base and sees visible object. It does not need, apart from the seven “universals”, adhimokkha or any other cetasika in order to see visible object. Adhimokkha does not arise either with the type of moha-múlacitta (citta rooted in ignorance) which is accompanied by doubt (vicikicchå). When there is doubt there cannot be at the same time the cetasika adhimokkha which “does not grope” and is “convinced” about the object. Adhimokkha accompanies all cittas other than the aforementioned cittas. It arises in the sense-door process as well as in the mind-door process. ***** [Ch.8 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya))to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43514 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew & All, Just joining in the fun a little. I appreciate your spirited defence of science vs abhidhamma. I wrote this post a couple of days ago (before reading most the discussions), but was interrupted and then forgot to send it. So it's probably redundant at this stage, having read some of the other excellent comments on the thread....:-) ***** I googled ’seeing, tongue, science’ and read two articles: 1) from Science News on-line ‘the seeing tongue’ 2) from BBC on-line ‘see with sound’. --- Matthew Miller wrote: > > I don't see how the abhidhamma, with its rigid categories of rupas, > vatthus, dvaras and so on, could possibly account for phenomena like > this. We need the careful, patient observation and experiment of > neuroscience to begin to understand the structure of consciousness. > Otherwise we're whistling in the dark and spinning fantasies. ... S: I think that either way we’re ‘whistling in the dark and spinning fantasies’. However, based on those ‘rigid categories’ of the abhidhamma, we have a chance of beginning to understand ‘the structure of consciousness’ and to see the spinning of fantasies for what it is....::-) Brief comments on the articles in no special order: a) It’s well-known that particular areas of the body such as the tongue are extremely sensitive to touch- many sensations (or rupas) are experienced through the body-sense here. This has been well-known in Chinese medicine for thousands of years. b) It’s also well-known that many healing techniques occur by stimulating the experience of sensations in quite a different part of the body, such as the foot or tongue as in acupressure points. c) It’s clear that touch receptors are being triggered and the stimulation is then perceived and interpreted.. As the second article makes clear, the ‘visual content of the live camera....is carried by the soundscapes, so that they experience something akin to meaningful vision’. It is not vision, it is an interpretation of the sounds in this case. For example, ‘brighter areas sound louder, height is indicated by pitch’ etc. A blind person learns to become even more sensitive to physical sensations and sounds (all rupas) than blind people usually do. d) How scientific is science? In the first study above, there were a total of 6 sighted but blindfolded subjects and 6 congenitally blind subjects only! What is congenitally blind? I’ve taught students who are supposedly congenitally blind or deaf, but this seldom means zero sounds or visible objects are experienced. From an abhidhamma point of view, blind from birth means something quite different and is far more precise. e) From the second article, “There’s plenty of evidence...that even those brain regions devoted almost exclusively to a certain sense actually receive a variety of sensory signals. ‘We showed many years ago that even in the specialized eye region, auditory and tactile signals also arrive’...” Again, modern science is just learning what has been obvious to Chinese medicine and was clearly understood by the Buddha. There’s no reason, therefore, why stimulation of the tongue might not assist eye-sight if it’s done with skill. f) Loss of balance- it’s common after injuries, such as a twisted ankle, to be given specific exercises such as standing on one leg with eyes closed to re-train parts of the body and so on. It doesn’t mean one is literally learning to see in different ways. Conclusion: 1. Just as we read in the Abhidhamma, seeing consciousness only occurs as a result of visible objects (rupas) impacting on the eye-sense. 2. Those with poor vision learn to use other sense door experiences to ‘compensate’, such as the hearing of sounds and experience of rupas through the body-sense. 3. What we call images, shapes, forms and so on are really the mind-door interpretations of these rupas, depending on perceptions (sanna) and other mental factors which follow very rapidly. 4.From your article:“When it comes to seeing via the sense of touch, reorganization may involve switching portions of the visual cortex to the processing of touch sensations” The Abhidhamma would say, rupas experienced through the body-sense are marked and interpreted according to previous experiences and these interpretations determine how we perceive/see the world. **** Matthew, my background is in psychology and until recently I kept up my memberships and publications of various psychology societies, so I still have a professional interest, but honestly, as soon as I came across the Abhidhamma, it answered all the questions that science never gave me. I think we also have to question the entire premises of scientific experimentation, such as in the field of memory acquisition which Howard recently referred to and which is based on acquisition in this life only and the very limited hypotheses such as acquisition occurring as a result of genetic or ‘environmental factors’. None of this means that these studies and the kind of scientific research you're referring to isn't of immense value. The second article above in particular points to great practical benefits from scientific advances. Look forward to more:-) Metta, Sarah p.s Also, pls look at some posts under ‘Science’ in Useful Posts and add any comments if inclined. Have you read DN26 -comments? =========== 43515 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 0:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 3 & a q Hi Andrew L, [on mindfulness, right view, doubts, practice.....) --- Andrew Levin wrote: > <...> >So this gets me thinking, > maybe wrong view of self is indeed a significant matter when it comes > to wrong view, moreso than I thought. This makes me think right view > is something more significant than I had thought. As I have told you > in the last post, I am reading Bhikkhu Bodhi's "The Noble Eightfold > Path <...> > Bhikku Bodhi suggests that through reflection and recognition of > certain principles such as that of a moral law of cause and effect, we > can come to possess right view. This sort of gets me because, while > it does seem that there is a 'view' to be had, it does say recognition > of the principal of karma can constitute part of right view. .... S: This reflection is only conceptual right view and this is why there are bound to be doubts and questions as you rightly point out. There can only be direct understanding of kamma when there is direct understanding of the conditioned nature of dhammas. This understanding can only arise and develop when we first directly understanding namas and rupas appearing now. It’s like the comments about knowing the impermanence of dhammas. It’s bound to be theoretical right understanding at best unless there is a clear understanding of namas and rupas appearing, one at a time and not mixed with an idea of self. .... >I have > to say I don't know how this can be the case because for all I know I > have accepted the theory of karma for long, if nothing else but on > faith, but I can't say it feels like it fits into what would comprise > Right View ... S: I think this is right – first we consider and reflect ‘on faith’ and then gradually as there’s more understanding of dhammas, the higher insights may develop. Knowing what is directly known and what is just ‘on faith’ as you do here is very important. Otherwise we over-estimate our knowledge. .... >(having known wrong view in my mind on one occasion and > possibly seeing a projection of it unto reality), ... S: I think that right understanding can begin to see more and more wrong view when it develops. It’s common and even the subtlest kinds have to be known. ... <...> Good points of yours snipped for now because I agreed with them. .... > So I guess I mean to ask, how can we work with right view, to create > it? Is there a specific model right view must follow, and if so, how > can we bring it to its perfection? Or is having our views > 'straightened out' to be generally in line with the dhamma good > enough, all considered? How do we know, if reflecting on, and/or > accepting certain ideas, if we have this 'unshakeable' right view? > Your thoughts? .... S: As you said, we can reflect on what is right, but when wisdom or right view is so weak and infrequent, we can engage in any unwholesome actions out of habit, peer pressure, circumstance and so on. Having our views ‘straightened out’, as we’re trying to help each other with here, is very important. Not over-estimating the development of satipatthana but beginning to see how very, very common ignorance and attachment are is important too. I can only say that I think the more understanding there is, even at a beginner level, of basic dhammas appearing now, such as seeing and visible object etc, the more confidence there is in the teachings about life existing in the present moment. Even if we're feeling agitated, depressed, run-down or sick, there may then be lots of ignorance but not so much doubt about the present dhammas appearing. So I think that wisely reflecting, hearing/reading about namas and rupas, seeing wrong views for what they are and questioning a lot as you’re doing, are conditions for ‘unshakeable right view’ to develop. Of course, it has a long way to go for us all before it’s really unshakeable. There may not be much doubt now, but we have no idea about the future or next life. .... <...> > Hmm.. guarding the sense doors as a cause of morality? I hadn't > thought of that, but now I guess I can try it out. In the past, I > have behaved with morality after reading how it is practised by those > gone forth, emulating the behavior described, with regard to speech, > keeping the precepts, and so forth (practising compassion for beings > is another feat in and of itself but I got most of it). ... S: (See ‘Guarding..’ in U.P. too) As soon as you say ‘I can try it out’, it again sounds like self rather than understanding. I believe that guarding of the sense doors is a function of the development of awareness and wisdom. If there is awareness of visible object or sound now as rupas experienced through the senses, the sense doors are guarded already. It’s true that we can ‘behave with morality’ by emulating good behaviour and this is good. However, again such behaviour will only become ‘unshakeable’ by the development of the understanding of the mental states involved. .... <...> big snip ... >Another example of this would be where the author states if > you're crossing a street, or for example answering a phone, you dont > keep your mindfulness or attention on the body, but focus on what are > you going to say, and the interaction. ... S: This is a common idea about mindfulness, but it’s not the same as the development of satipatthana as I understand it. Whatever your attention or focus is on, whether you’re concentrating on the interaction or multi-tasking (as I tend to do when I’m on the phone:-)), there are conditioned dhammas arising and passing away without any rule at all about which one will be the object of the javana cittas next and therefore which one may be the object of mindfulness. When we set rules, it’s self again. ... >At one point I have shifted > awareness to answering a phone call and there was a deep knowing of my > faculties at that point, what I was doing, and expecting to say or > hear. This is the type of mindfulness I have experienced. ... S: I understand what you’re saying , but again we need to differentiate between this conventional mindfulness and awareness of namas and rupas at any given moment. .... > I ask how mindfulness as you know it is 'mindful of' certain > realities, not just ones you study, but ones that appear prominent at > any given time. I can say that this is a type of mindfulness, too, > having seen realities come to the fore or become very apparent in and > of themselves on occasion. ... S: What ‘realities come to the fore or become very apparent’? We need to be very specific, I think. For example, when we talk about awareness of ‘what I was doing’, what appears at that moment? Is there an idea of what should appear or is there detachment from any reality appearing, whether it’s hardness, restlessness, irritation or any other dhamma? To be honest, I don’t see a need to do anything special at all in order for awareness to develop. We read and consider the truths and if it arises, it arises. If it doesn’t, it doesn’t. The only big obstacle is wrong view and trying to make mindfulness arise in any way is a result of wrong view as I see it. .... > And I don't know how to reconcile the two with each other or the term > sati. ... S: The only way is by ‘testing out’ and being aware of the present dhamma. For example, at the moment of wondering the above, there’s thinking and doubt. These can be known instantly. .... <...> > Sarah, these are nearly interchangeable. I have read Bhikkhu Bodhi > assert that mindfulness of posture illuminates the selfless nature of > the body as it is in different positions- so whether or not this is > the case, I could just as well be doing mindfulness of the four > elements in my practise. In fact, sooner or later, I will be. ... S: What is posture, body, positions in reality? How are they experienced? Through the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body-sense or mind? What does it mean to ‘be doing mindfulness of the four elements’? .... > I have read a little from the U.P. Satipatthana section, but I still > think that the four foundations are to be practised sequentially, for > long periods of time. ... S: This is because of an idea of self that can control objects to arise or appear in order. ... >Sati conditions more sati, but can't sati be > cultivated? We can cultivate faith, to be honest I don't know if the > mindfulness I describe using is sati or whether it is something > different but mindfulness has the four foundations of mindfulness as > its proximate cause, right? ... S: 'Yes' to the two questions. What does it mean to have the ‘four foundations....as proximate cause’? As I understand, it means that any of the namas or rupas as contained in the four foundations is the proximate cause for satipatthana. Without a nama or rupa appearing, there could be no sati. .... <....> >And back to the gradual training, how is most of it done but > by 'doing' it? E.g. Contentment. One has to foster a sense of > contentment at the instructor's words. Even in some of the UP > Satipatthana 4 posts there is support for my notion of practise, as > the Buddha describes how mindfulness of breathing is of great fruit > when developed, and then goes on to give instructions for it. .... S: But it’s not self that follows a gradual training, develops contentment or satipatthana. ... > Heck, what about the Noble Eightfold Path? There's even a path factor > called Right Intention. It would be hard to truthfully dispute that > intentions need to be made on the path and practise has to be done. .... S: Samma-sankappa is not Right Intention. It is right vitakka (thinking/touching the object). Cetana (intention) is not a path factor. [See Thinking-right in U.P.]. Cetana (intention) arises with every citta. When the citta is kusala, so is cetana. ..... <...> > I don't think I've taken it to be 'my' metta. It is just > loving-kindness that can be given or applied to anyone. Metta and > compassion are a hard task. Here's hoping that they can be > successfully developed by us all. ... S: Nice:-) .... Andrew, I’ve snipped many of your comments. I read them all with great interest and appreciation and I look forward to more. I’ll be going away in a few days, so I’ll try to respond to your latest one I have, but may have to leave any further ones til my return. (The same applies to any posts from others that come in addressed to me from now on). Metta, Sarah ======= 43516 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 1:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature Hi LK, (Tep, Connie) Thanks for your efforts to clarify the ‘thitibhutam’. The article by A.Chah helped and made more sense, I think. (btw, Connie – for the record, in case you move on whilst we’re away, I remember A.Chah well for his good humour, very kind smiles and .....lots of laughter when we met:-)). .... --- lokuttaracitta wrote: > > S: I'm not familiar with this `thitibhutam?E Can anyone help me > with the > > Pali <...> > > S: Can you give me a sutta reference which uses this phrase or > helps me > > understand what he and you are talking about? ... <...> > "Clarity of insight by Ajahn Chah" > > http://www.abhayagiri.org/dhamma/clarity.pdf > > That means you must become your own witness, able to confirm the > results from within your own mind. <...> >Venerable Ajahn Mun referred this internal witness that exists > within the mind as thitibhutam. The authenticity of any knowledge > acquired simply from other people remains unsubstantiated, it is only > a truth proven to someone else .<...> .... S: I’m wondering if it is based on the Pali ‘Yathaa bhuuta’ (seeing things as they are)? Tep also referred to ‘bhutathata’ or’ the nature of ‘knowing’, literally ‘thusness’ or ‘suchness’ quoting BK. [More on yathaa bhuuta in U.P. under the pali if you’re interested]. ..... > >S: When no conditions arise at all?Emakes little sense to me. Even > lokuttara cittas > > are conditioned. > > But I do not think that "Object" of Lokuttaracittas is conditioned. .... S: No, I didn’t suggest this. However, unless there is a conditioned citta to experience nibbana, it’s not experienced. .... > By the way, could you please explain me how can 33 to 36 cetasikas in > lokuttaracittas be discerned ? .... S: By a Buddha’s wisdom:-). I believe the subsequent reviewing cittas ‘review’ the path, i.e the lokuttara cittas, but I imagine it will depend on accumulations as to exactly what appears, like with the reviewing of the defilements eradicated.. It may seem like it’s only thinking, but it’s not, it’s direct knowledge or insight into these characteristics. Do you have any further suggestions? Metta, Sarah p.s still hoping to get back on your luminous quote ====== 43517 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:30am Subject: [dsg] Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature Dear Sarah Thank you very much for your reply. I feel very lucky to get Abhiddhama lessons from experts like you !?I > > >S: When no conditions arise at allEmakes little sense to me. Even > > lokuttara cittas > > > are conditioned. > > > > But I do not think that "Object" of Lokuttaracittas is conditioned. > .... > S: No, I didn?ft suggest this. However, unless there is a conditioned citta > to experience nibbana, it?fs not experienced. > .... > > By the way, could you please explain me how can 33 to 36 cetasikas in > > lokuttaracittas be discerned ? > .... > S: By a Buddha?fs wisdom:-). I believe the subsequent reviewing cittas > ?ereview?f the path, i.e the lokuttara cittas, but I imagine it will depend > on accumulations as to exactly what appears, like with the reviewing of > the defilements eradicated.. It may seem like it?fs only thinking, but > it?fs not, it?fs direct knowledge or insight into these characteristics. Do > you have any further suggestions? According to Abhiddamma of Theravada, Lokuttaracittas can not directly know themselves as they really are because their object is "unconditioned nama" and Lokuttaracittas are conditioned nama. Lokuttacittas are known as such only by the "Subsequent" reviewing cittas which are conditioned. There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. How can Theravadin exclude the possiblity that lokuttaracittas are unconditioned nama? Metta from LK 43518 From: Joop Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:09am Subject: Re:Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > Dear Joop: > > >I'm glad to hear because till now I got the impression that > > (all) Theravadins are orthodox and not interested in any Mahayana- > > texts simply because Mahayana is wrong. > > Theravadins in Myanmar seem very orthodox. while those in Thai are > not and some of them seem to break bounds like "Dammakaya > Foundation ". Dear Lokuttaracitta Thanks for your answers and information. I have again stuff to study for some weeks. Still already some remarks. > > a possibility for fruitful > > (worldwide) discussion between Mahayanists and > > Theravadins, somethingthing Connie in her initial message and I > > hope to promote. So I should like to read a reaction from a > > (buddhological) expert to it. > I am not interested in dry buddhological views, Joop: That's a pity, because I am: the dryer, the more reliable. In the second place the reason I mentioned it here was to put the question: how can we have a language (a joint frame of reference) in which Mahayanists and Theravadins can discuss with each other ? > but why dont we start with "Lokuttaracitta" ? Joop: I doubt if this level is wise for me to start with, that is: to continue my path on this moment. Two questions: - Are the lokuttara cittas more than the 'lower' ones, special connected with Mahayana-thinking ? - Is lokuttaracitta special connected with what interests me most in Mahayana: emptiness ? > Abhiddhama says there are 33 to 36 cetasikas in each of lokuttaracittas. > The object of lokuttarcittas is Nibbana. > How can the 36 to 38 cetasikas in each of lokuttaracittas be known as such ? Joop: I real don't know Metta Joop 43519 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:21am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sila Visuddhi (purity of sila) Hi Sarah, -------------------------- S: > I'm not sure if you were agreeing or disagreeing with anything I said or what Suan was warning against, if you wish to elaborate on any of it --------------------------- I was agreeing with everything you said, although I had hoped the material you referred me to might explain how 'acceptance of training rules' can be described in paramattha terms. But it's not important. ------------------------------------------------------ KH: > > We have another weekend of Dhamma discussion at Cooran starting > tomorrow ... S: > Why not share a little more - what you used, discussed and concluded:-). Any dissension in the ranks or did they all tow 'your' party line this time??? ------------------------------------------------------- What we used: I used one of your posts on right understanding (41137). It was well received but I can't remember anything special from the discussion, so it might not have been the showstopper I hoped it would be. If it wasn't, it was because the delivery was lacking. Christine read out the Anatta-sutta (is that its correct name?). Steve said I shouldn't use it [any more than any other sutta] to validate the "no control" slogan. He pointed out that the lack of control described in that sutta was the inability to make the impermanent permanent, the painful pleasant and the non-self, self. We agreed, however, that the doctrine of anatta made "no control" a perfectly accurate thing to say in all other Dhamma contexts as well. Reg brought along a newspaper article by a Brisbane Buddhist. It was about . . . um, . . something to do with the Middle Way. I can't remember Andrew's contribution at all, but that doesn't mean there wasn't one. Steve brought a large bottle of orange juice for us to have with lunch. I'll bet you wish you had been there! :-) But, really, the weekend was much more deep and meaningful than it sounds. Oh yes, another thing we discussed was a discussion topic for our next meeting! It will be on Vesak Day and we think we should keep the eight precepts. We appointed Steve to collate material especially applicable to Vesak, which we will study in advance. Dissention: As usual, I was the most argumentative person there. Rightly or wrongly, I argued that the lack of personal verification - of rebirth or anything else - did not make any part of the Dhamma less valid than others (as I was saying to Charles today). There were no more toes on the line than usual. ---------------- S: > You could compile a book of signature lines for people to select from:-) ---------------- I'm glad you think some of my remarks come out well, but if I had to intentionally think of something pithy - like I'm trying to do now, for example - I couldn't. :-) Ken H 43520 From: Matthew Miller Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hello Sarah & All, Sarah, welcome to the party and thank you for your thoughtful reply. > S: I think that either way we're `whistling in the dark and spinning > fantasies'. However, based on those `rigid categories' of the > abhidhamma, we have a chance of beginning to understand `the > structure of consciousness' and to see the spinning of fantasies > for what it is. From a scientific point of view, abhidhamma is based on 1) scriptural authority, and/or 2) personal observation of one's own consciousness (introspection). While useful, these are actually the two poorest forms of evidence. The difficulties with scriptural authority should be obvious, so I'll focus on introspection. At best, introspection is one tool among many for learning about the mind. But it is not without its flaws. Some have held that introspective access to one's mental states cannot be erroneous or, at least, that it overrides all other evidence. Descartes is famous for this. The Abhidhamma seems to fall in this camp as well, with its insistence that nama/rupa arising in consciousness are "ultimate realities." But introspection can be very erroneous. Psychological research has found that, in introspection, we often misrepresent our own mental states. Many introspective judgments result from confabulation. People literally invent mental states to explain their own behavior in ways that are expected or acceptable. Daniel Dennett and others have argued that all introspective reports can be treated as reports of useful fictions. Introspection not only misrepresents our mental states, but also fails to reveal many concurrent states, both in ordinary and exotic situations (an illuminating example is "blindsight" which I will describe below). And it is likely that introspection seldom if ever reveals all the mental properties of target states. Many, moreover, would endorse Ashley's (1958) dictum that introspection never makes mental processes accessible, only their results. Blindsight is a well-documented phenomenon in which a blind person can accurately point to an object. In the time of the Buddha, this would certainly have been taken as a example of ESP or mystical power. Here is how neuroscience has been able to explain this... *** "The message from the eyeball on the retina goes though the optic nerve and goes to two major visual centers in the brain. One of these I'll call it the old system, the old visual centre, it's the evolutionary ancient centre, the old pathway that's in the brain stem and it's called the superior colliculus. The second pathway goes to the cortex, the visual cortex in the back of the brain and it's called the new pathway. The new pathway in the cortex is doing most of what we usually think of as vision, like recognizing objects, consciously. The old pathway, on the other hand, is involved in locating objects in the visual field, so that you can orient to it, swivel your eyeballs towards it, rotate your head towards it. Thereby directing your high acuity central foveal region of the retina towards the object so then you an deploy the new visual pathway and then proceed to identify what the object is and then generate the appropriate behaviour for that object. Let me now tell you now about an extraordinary neurological syndrome called Blindsight discovered by Larry Weiscrantz and Alan Cowey at Oxford. It's been known for more than a century that if the visual cortex which is part of the new visual pathway, if that's damaged you become blind. For example if the right visual cortex is damaged you're completely blind on the left side if you look straight everything to the left side of your nose, you're completely blind to. When examining a patient named GY who had this type of visual deficit, one half of the visual field completely missing, where he was blind, Weizcrantz noticed something really strange. He showed the patient a little spot of light in the Blind region. Weiscrantz asked him "what do you see"? The patient said "nothing" and that's what you would expect given that he was blind but now he told the patient "I know you can't see it but please reach out and touch it" The patient said well that's very strange - he must have thought this is a very eccentric request. I mean, point to this thing which he can't see. So the patient said, you know I can't, I can't see it how can I point to it? Weiscrantz said well just try anyway, take a guess. The patient then reaches out to touch the object and imagine the researcher's surprise when the patient reaches out and points to it accurately, points to the dot that he cannot consciously perceive. After hundreds of trials it became obvious that he could point accurately on 99% of trials even though he claimed on each trial that he was just guessing. He said he didn't know if he was getting it right or not. From his point of view it might as well have been an experiment on ESP. The staggering implication of this is that the patient was accurately able to point to an object that he denied being able to see. How is this possible? How do you explain his ability to infer the location of an invisible object and point to it accurately? The answer is obvious. As I said GY has damage to his visual cortex - the new pathway - which is why he is blind. But remember he still has the other old pathway, the other pathway going through his brain stem and superior colliculus as a back-up. So even though the message from the eyes and optic nerves doesn't reach the visual cortex, given that the visual cortex is damaged, they take the parallel route to the superior colliculus which allows him to locate the object in space and the message then gets relayed to higher brain centres in the parietal lobes that guide the hand movement accurately to point to the invisible object! It's as if even though GY the person, the human being is oblivious to what's going on, there's another unconscious zombie trapped in him who can guide the hand movement with uncanny accuracy." -- V.S. Ramachandran, "Synapses and the Self" Matthew 43521 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:54am Subject: [dsg] Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > > > Lokuttacittas are known as such only by the "Subsequent" reviewing > cittas which are conditioned. > There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. > > How can Theravadin exclude the possiblity that lokuttaracittas are > unconditioned nama? > >========== Dear LK, On the point about direct experience. It has subtle meanings. For example the Paramatthamanjusa (see note 7 VII Visuddhimagga) talks about the Buddhas knowledge of past and future "and the Buddha's knowledge that has past and future as its objective field is entirely actual experience since it is devoid of assumption based on inference, tradition or conjecture" Robertk 43522 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 6:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhammasangani translation, Howard. Hi Howard, op 21-03-2005 20:26 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Howard: > Yes, I would very much like to see some of it. The current PTS > translation I sure do hope ;-) is a very poor one! N: I find, for example, the way the word 'representative' is used not clear. A new translation may not completely help you, that is why you say that you hope... We also need the commentary, the Expositor. I have the Pali text and that helps. If you have certain phrases you want clarified you are always welcome. Nina. 43523 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma weekend Cooran Hi Ken H, Andrew T, Christine, How was your Cooran weekend? Looking forward to hearing about it, Nina. 43524 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cooran. Hi Ken H, Thank you, I just got your post. What a good idea to read a sutta and then discuss it. I like no control for anatta, but no control can also be misunderstood. People may think that no kusala can be developed. But recently Sarah wrote a post I read to Lodewijk in the restaurant, where she explained very clearly about the Middle Way. Nina. op 22-03-2005 13:21 schreef kenhowardau op kenhowardau@y... > > Christine read out the Anatta-sutta ... 43525 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:32am Subject: Re: [dsg]Lokuttara cittas Dear LK, op 22-03-2005 11:30 schreef lokuttaracitta op lokuttaracitta@y...: > According to Abhiddamma of Theravada, > > Lokuttaracittas can not directly know themselves as they really are > because their object is "unconditioned nama" and Lokuttaracittas are > conditioned nama. > > Lokuttacittas are known as such only by the "Subsequent" reviewing > cittas which are conditioned. > There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. > > How can Theravadin exclude the possiblity that lokuttaracittas are > unconditioned nama? N: You just said rightly: Lokuttaracittas are conditioned nama. This is correct, all cittas arise because of conditions. Only nibbaana is unconditioned, it does not arise and fall away. Lokuttara cittas arise because there are the appropriate conditions for their arising, because paññaa has been developed to that degree, and then they fall away immediately. They arise and fall away and are thus conditioned dhammas, like all other cittas. You write: There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. No citta can know itself, but shortly after it has fallen away paññaa can have direct understanding of its characteristic. There can be direct understanding of a dhamma even though it has just fallen away. Processes occur extremely fast one after the other. Nina. > 43526 From: Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhammasangani translation, Howard. Hi, Nina - In a message dated 3/22/05 10:06:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > N: I find, for example, the way the word 'representative' is used not > clear. > A new translation may not completely help you, that is why you say that you > hope... We also need the commentary, the Expositor. > I have the Pali text and that helps. If you have certain phrases you want > clarified you are always welcome. > ==================== Thanks. :-) Someday I'll get hold of a good translation plus the commentary. That is what I think I need. 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) 43527 From: Matthew Miller Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:55am Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Evan wrote: > what is the > purpose of existence if it is finite? Why would something have to be infinite to serve a purpose? For example, everywhere in nature we see that finite individuals pass their genes onto their offspring, raise them to adulthood, then die to make room for the next generation. All life on earth exhibits this purpose: the continuity of life. Matthew 43528 From: Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 6:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi, Matthew (and Evan) - In a message dated 3/22/05 11:04:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, bupleurum@y... writes: > Evan wrote: > >what is the > >purpose of existence if it is finite? > > Why would something have to be infinite to serve a purpose? > > For example, everywhere in nature we see that finite individuals pass > their genes onto their offspring, raise them to adulthood, then die to > make room for the next generation. All life on earth exhibits this > purpose: the continuity of life. > > Matthew > ==================== Just out of curiosity, Matthew, why do you refer to passing on genes to offspring, raising the offspring to adulthood, and then dying to make room for the next generation i.e., "the continuity of life," as "purpose" in some cosmic sense? Also, why is such a circumstance as genes and their passing on any more *significant* than any other random alternative circumstance such as there being no such thing as genes at all, or, for that matter, there being no world at all in any sense? Finiteness and infinity aside, the bottom line in my mind is that the whole business of "purpose" presupposes sentience and intention, and if sentience and intention are not fundamental to "the world" in some manner, whether in terms of primacy of consciousness and kamma - the Buddhist "take", or in theistic terms, then purpose in the grand sense goes right out the window and becomes merely empty terminology. 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) 43529 From: Joop Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 11:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: > > Joop, > > I have no clue as to what you mean by: "I think that's too easy said, Jon When an opinion is not 'kept' by rupa; is it then kept by nama? I don't think so. An opinion is a concept, kept in somebody's brains. That in rupa, in > living rupa, feed by oxygen in the blood, but still rupa. " > > Can you start out by explaining what you mean by rupa and nama? Hi Charles No. Because my remark was a mixture of joke and seriousness And because it deviates us more from the topic of the thread: having no opinions Joop 43530 From: Matthew Miller Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 0:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Howard: > Just out of curiosity, Matthew, why do you refer to passing on genes > to offspring, raising the offspring to adulthood, and then dying to > make room for the next generation i.e., "the continuity of life," > as "purpose" in some cosmic sense? I didn't intend to refer to the rearing of young as a purpose in some "cosmic sense." My intention was only to give an example, in response to Evan's post, of a finite individual serving a purpose. Perhaps I should have used "function" or some other word that does not imply a "cosmic sense." We see the convergence of form and function everywhere in biology, including our own bodies and brains. But I don't think that implies that there is some Grand Providential Design to the universe. See Richard Dawkins's book "The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design": http://tinyurl.com/55c2f Personally, I do not see any Cosmic Purpose to existence. God is an improbable proposition. I certainly find no evidence that human intelligence has any kind of privileged position in the cosmos. Nor do I see karma as anything more than a post hoc explanation of events which has no supporting evidence and is plagued by serious philosophical and practical problems. > then purpose in the grand sense goes right out the window and > becomes merely empty terminology. Yes, it does. Matthew 43531 From: Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 8:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi, Matthew - In a message dated 3/22/05 3:20:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, bupleurum@y... writes: > > Howard: > >Just out of curiosity, Matthew, why do you refer to passing on genes > >to offspring, raising the offspring to adulthood, and then dying to > >make room for the next generation i.e., "the continuity of life," > >as "purpose" in some cosmic sense? > > I didn't intend to refer to the rearing of young as a purpose in some > "cosmic sense." My intention was only to give an example, in response > to Evan's post, of a finite individual serving a purpose. Perhaps I > should have used "function" or some other word that does not imply a > "cosmic sense." > > We see the convergence of form and function everywhere in biology, > including our own bodies and brains. But I don't think that implies > that there is some Grand Providential Design to the universe. See > Richard Dawkins's book "The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of > Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design": > > http://tinyurl.com/55c2f > > Personally, I do not see any Cosmic Purpose to existence. God is an > improbable proposition. I certainly find no evidence that human > intelligence has any kind of privileged position in the cosmos. Nor > do I see karma as anything more than a post hoc explanation of events > which has no supporting evidence and is plagued by serious > philosophical and practical problems. > > >then purpose in the grand sense goes right out the window and > >becomes merely empty terminology. > > Yes, it does. > > Matthew > ======================== Thank you very much for your reply, Matthew. So, if I may ask, how do you see yourself? As a scientologist (lower-case 's') and also as a Buddhist? And from your materialist-scientist perspective (please correct me if I am mischaracterizing), what do you see as of value in the Dhamma, and why? I know a good number of materialist Buddhists [If some people consider themselves such, I accept that], but I've never had a clear picture of how fundamentally their Buddhism differs from the Dhamma as taught by the Buddha, though I have no question that it must differ significantly. At times, when in a persnickety mood, I wonder (usually not out loud) whether their Buddhism comes down to a "deep sounding" alternative to such self-help practices as chi gung, Rolfing, and regular running, but then I chasten myself and cut out such nasty thinking! ;-)) 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) 43532 From: sunnaloka Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 1:08pm Subject: Re: jhana & Abhidhamma Pitaka Hi all, Is there any specific mention of the learning sign and counterpart sign in the seven books of the Abhidhamma Pitaka? (I don't have access to these texts.) Any help with this matter will be greatly appreciated. Geoff 43533 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 6:44pm Subject: [dsg] Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" > wrote: > > > > > > > Lokuttacittas are known as such only by the "Subsequent" > reviewing > > cittas which are conditioned. > > There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. > > > > How can Theravadin exclude the possiblity that lokuttaracittas are > > unconditioned nama? > > > >========== > Dear LK, > On the point about direct experience. It has subtle meanings. > For example the Paramatthamanjusa (see note 7 VII Visuddhimagga) > talks about the Buddhas knowledge of past and future > "and the Buddha's knowledge that has past and future as its > objective field is entirely actual experience since it is devoid of > assumption based on inference, tradition or conjecture" > Robertk Dear RK Thank you for your instruction. I found a famous passage in the note . "The objective field of Enlightened Ones is unthinkable, it cannot be thought out; anyone who tried to think it out would reap madness and frustration"(A.ii,80) I do not like to reap them, but let me try ! Question ; As an orthodox theravadin, 1)Is it appropriate to say,"For the Buddhas, every nama and rupa and pannatti(concepts)of every sacred one and worldly being in the past and the present and the future can exist timelessly." 2)Can you say " Wisdom in lokuttaracittas of Sotapana or Sakadagami without any abhinna have entirely actual experience that has past and future as its objective field since it is devoid of assumption based on inference, tradition or conjecture" Metta from LK 43534 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:32pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Matthew: What is the point of passing genes onto offspring, raising them to adulthood and dying. Not to mention all the in between stuff like: getting sick, getting old, working, getting married, having children, paying off a mortgage, etc. Surely death negates all of this? Evan Matthew wrote: Why would something have to be infinite to serve a purpose? For example, everywhere in nature we see that finite individuals pass their genes onto their offspring, raise them to adulthood, then die to make room for the next generation. All life on earth exhibits this purpose: the continuity of life. Matthew 43535 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Lokuttara cittas Dear Nina Thank you for your clarification. I just like to know what is the truth in Theravadin. > > According to Abhiddamma of Theravada, > > > > Lokuttaracittas can not directly know themselves as they really are > > because their object is "unconditioned nama" and Lokuttaracittas are > > conditioned nama. > > > > Lokuttacittas are known as such only by the "Subsequent" reviewing > > cittas which are conditioned. > > There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. > > > > How can Theravadin exclude the possiblity that lokuttaracittas are > > unconditioned nama? > N: You just said rightly: Lokuttaracittas are conditioned nama. This is > correct, all cittas arise because of conditions. Only nibbaana is > unconditioned, it does not arise and fall away. > Lokuttara cittas arise because there are the appropriate conditions for > their arising, because paññaa has been developed to that degree, and then > they fall away immediately.They arise and fall away and are thus > conditioned dhammas, like all other cittas. Can you say, " Nibbana arises in us because of conditions such as the arising of the change-of-lineage or vodana(cleansing) citta " Or "Nibbana arises in us because there are the appropriate conditions for its arising, because paññaa has been developed to the degrees of the change-of-lineage or vodana citta or lokuttaracittas , and then it falls away immediately " And "It(Nibbana) arises and falls away in us, but is Unconditioned Dhamma.In likewise ,Lokuttaracittas are unconditioned " > You write: There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. No citta > can know itself, but shortly after it has fallen away paññaa can have direct > understanding of its characteristic. There can be direct understanding of a > dhamma even though it has just fallen away. Processes occur extremely fast > one after the other. Are you saying that paññaa in a certain citta can never know the other cetasikas in the same citta ? metta from LK 43536 From: Matthew Miller Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:40pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue > What is the point of passing genes onto offspring, raising them to > adulthood and dying. Not to mention all the in between stuff like: > getting sick, getting old, working, getting married, > having children, paying off a mortgage, etc. > Surely death negates all of this? > > Evan > Please read my previous post in this thread, in response to Howard asking basically the same question. Matthew 43537 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 8:10pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Matthew, OK, so why do you bother living or doing anything at all? If there is no purpose to anything then stop. Regards, Evan Matthew wrote: Personally, I do not see any Cosmic Purpose to existence. God is an improbable proposition. I certainly find no evidence that human intelligence has any kind of privileged position in the cosmos. Nor do I see karma as anything more than a post hoc explanation of events which has no supporting evidence and is plagued by serious philosophical and practical problems. > then purpose in the grand sense goes right out the window and > becomes merely empty terminology. Yes, it does. Matthew 43538 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 8:14pm Subject: [dsg] Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > > As an orthodox theravadin, > > 1)Is it appropriate to say,"For the Buddhas, every nama and rupa and > pannatti(concepts)of every sacred one and worldly being in the past > and the present and the future can exist timelessly." ===========] Dear LC, No that would be incorrect. All namas and rupas are incredibly temporary, they barely last at all. ============== > > > 2)Can you say " Wisdom in lokuttaracittas of Sotapana or Sakadagami > without any abhinna have entirely actual experience that has past and > future as its objective field since it is devoid of assumption based > on inference, tradition or conjecture" ===========-- Sotapanna and sakadagami without abhinna do not directly know the future. But they do know directly the immediately past cittas when reviewing knowledge of change of lineage occurs: as Nina said 'No citta can know itself, but shortly after it has fallen away paññaa can have direct understanding of its characteristic. There can be direct understanding of a dhamma even though it has just fallen away' RobertK > > > Metta > > from LK 43539 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 9:59pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 153 - Determination /adhimokkha & Energy/viriya (c) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.9 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya) contd] Adhimokkha is one among the cetasikas which assist citta in cognizing its object. Adhimokkha also accompanies the cittas which do not arise in a process: the paìisandhi-citta, the bhavanga-citta and the cuti-citta. It is “convinced” about the object these cittas experience. When we hear the word “decision” or “determination”, we usually associate this word with a decision we have to consider carefully. We may not have expected adhimokkha to arise in a sense-door process, but, as we have seen, it arises in sense-door processes as well as in mind-door processes and it assists the citta in cognizing the object. ***** [Ch.8 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya))to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43540 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 2:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhana & Abhidhamma Pitaka Hi Geoff, op 22-03-2005 22:08 schreef sunnaloka op sunnaloka@y...: > Is there any specific mention of the learning sign and counterpart > sign in the seven books of the Abhidhamma Pitaka? (I don't have > access to these texts.) Any help with this matter will be greatly > appreciated. N: The Visuddhimagga Ch IV, 24 etc. gives all the details. These are not given in the Book of Analysis, although this Book of the Abh. Ch 12 gives many details about the different stages of jhana. My eye just fell on an interesting passage: Interrogation, The Triplets: Also jhaanas can be objects of attachment. Are you in particular interested at the learning sign and counterpart sign? Nina. 43541 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature Warning: long, technical and full of Pali, Abhidhamma and commentary detail:-/ Dear LK, (Nina, Suan, Connie and all ‘luminous’ followers still reading), We were discussing the meaning of 'luminous mind' or luminous cittas and you gave me an extract from Pa auk Sayadaw's explanations (below) whch I find very interesting and helpful. I'm most grateful - I believe that its pointing to the rupas conditioned by cittas accompanied by panna (wisdom) is significant and now I'm reading the AN verses on ‘luminous’ with this in mind. It also stresses, I believe, why akusala cittas which (like all cittas) are pandara (clear), but can never be pabhassaram (luminous) if the latter term is really referring to the rupas conditioned by ‘pure’ cittas. To re-cap a little:from the sutta, AN 1, 51-52, Nina’s translation of the to the suttas can be found here in full: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/10268 The first one starts: >49. navame pabhassaranti pa.n.dara.m parisuddha.m. cittanti bhava"ngacitta.m. ki.m pana cittassa va.n.no naama atthiiti? natthi. >N: As to the ninth,² luminous². Luminous is clear, pure. citta is the life-continuum. But how does there exist indeed a colour of citta? No, it does not. >niilaadiina~nhi a~n~natarava.n.na.m vaa hotu ava.n.na.m vaa ya.mki~nci parisuddhataaya ``pabhassara''nti vuccati. >N: For anything which may be a certain colour, beginning with blue, or without colour, is called luminous because of its purity.< ***** S: Suan added his extremely helpful translation of the sub-commentary passages to both: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/10785: Here is the Pali and translation of the first part where in fact it’s made clear that the radiance or luminosity refers to the colour (vanna)only, as I understand. ***** >49. Navame pabhassaranti pariyodaatam sabhaavaparisuddhatthena. Tenaaha– "pandaram parisuddhan"ti. Pabhassarataadayo naama vannadhaatuyam labbhanakavisesaati aaha– "kim pana cittassa vanno naama atthii"ti? Itaro aruupataaya "natthii"ti patikkhipitvaa pariyaayakathaa ayam taadisassa cittassa parisuddhabhaavanaadiipanaayaati dassento "niilaadiinan"ti-aadimaaha. SUBCOMMENTARY TRANSLATION >Suan: "49. In the ninth statement, the expression `radiant' means complete purity due to natural complete cleanness. That is why the commentator said "pure, completely clean." Because the qualities like radiance are attributes available in the color element, the commentator posed the question "How could there be such a thing as the color of the mind?" Having negated that question as "No" due to the mind's immateriality, and showing the other argument for explaining complete cleansing of such a mind, the commentator made the statement beginning with "any color such as brown"....."< ***** S: I could easily add more and start discussing the thorny points about the bhavanga cittas, but I want to get to LK’s post which just concerns the reference of luminosity to the rupas conditioned by the cittas:-) .... LK:> You might get some sense from Pa auk sadadaw's explainations on what the light of wisdom is. > >http://www.btinternet.com/~maunglwin/nibbanacom/l_of_w01.htm#lightofwisdom > > *excerpt* > > ******************* > "But as to "light of wisdom", the questions arise: "Is there light in wisdom?", "Is there light in mental factors (Nama dhamma)?" This is explained in the subcommentary to Visuddhimagga, page 428, paragraph 733: Vipassanobhaso ti vipassana citta samuithitam, sasantatipatitam utu samutthananca bhasuram Rupam - What is the light of Vipassana insight? Two types of causes are mentioned. This bright light is caused by Vipassana Citta (mind) and also by the Tejo dhatu >called utu which occur in one's own continuity process of Rupa. ...." ..... S: I checked the reference which can be found in the Vism, XX, 107 (Nanamoli transl), under 'The Ten Imperfections of Insight' (Vipassanupakkilesaa). It starts off: "Herein, illumination is illumination due to insight(Tattha obhaasoti vipassanobhaaso)". And just as Pa auk Sayadaw clearly explains in the excellent note LK gave(and which continues below), the sub-commentary adds the following detail: >' "Illumination due to insight" is the luminous materiality originated by insight consciousness, and that originated by temperature belonging to his own continuity. Of these, that originated by insight consciousness is bright and is found only in the meditator's body. The other kind is independent of his body and spreads all round over what is capable of being experienced by knowledge. It becomes manifest to him too, and he sees anything material in the place touched by it' (Pm 816)'.< **** S: The reason the main text is under the Imperfections of Insight is because at this stage it is easy it seems to imagine that nibbana has been realized, insight is interrupted as 'the meditator' enjoys the 'illumination'. We read that the 'illumination arises in one bhikkhu illuinating only as much as the seat he is sitting on...........But in the Blessed One it arose illuminating the ten-thousandfold world-element". The imperfections (upakilesa) are particularly likely to arise in one who 'has acquired serenity and insight. Because the defilements suppressed by the attainments do not manifest themselves.' Examples are given. .... S:I think the following explanations the Sayadaw gave are particularly interesting and seem logical to me (as far as I follow), so I'll repeat them after signing off. Of course, many questions are left unanswered here concerning a)the AN suttas with the references in the commentaries to the bhavanga cittas and b)the connection between the passage in the Vism and the AN suttas, but I'm sure we'll continue to return to them:-). LK, I haven't checked the link you gave yet, as you already gave me a lot to work on, but pls share any further short extracts, though I won't be able to follow up for a while. Comments most welcome from anyone meantime. Metta, Sarah ======= Pa auk sadadaw’s further comments as quoted by LK: >”This explanation can be easily understood by the meditator who is meditating at the Rupa kammatthana stage: 1) For any person, any living beings who are composed of Nama and Rupa, every mind that arises dependent on hadaya vatthu (heart base) has the ability to produce Cittaja Rupa (matter cause by mind). These Cittaja Rupa arise as Cittaja Kalapa in the whole life. If one of these Kalapa is analysed, there are 8 kinds of Rupa factors: Pathavi, Apo, Tejo, Vayo, Vanna, Gandha, Rasa and Oja (Earth, water, fire, wind, colour, smell, taste and nutritive essence). The colour of it is called Vanna dhatu. Every Samatha Bhavana Citta (mind) and Vipassana Bhavana Citta (mind) can produce Cittaja Rupa. So, in this case the Vipassana Bhavana Citta can produce Cittaja Rupa. Every Kalapa of Cittaja Rupa has the Ruparammana called Vanna dhatu. This Ruparammana is 'Bhasuram Rupam', a brilliantly bright Rupa. 2) Also if discerned further, every Cittaja Kalapa has the 4 element: Pathavi, Apo, Tejo, Vayo. In these 4 elements, the Tejo dhatu is called utu. This Tejo dhatu called utu can produce new generations of Kalapa. Depending on how powerful the Samatha Bhavana Citta and Vipassana Bhavana Citta are, this production of new generations of Kalapa by Tejo datu has the ability to spread out, externally (bahiddha) from internal (ajjhata). If analysed, every Kalapa produced by Tejo dhatu has 8 kinds of Rupa factors: Pathavi, Apo, Tejo, Vayo, Vanna, Gandha, Rasa and Oja. Every Utuja Rupa Kalapa has the Ruparammana called Vanna dhatu. This Ruparammana is 'Bhasuram Rupam', a brilliantly bright Rupa. This explanation shows that both - 1) the brightness of the Vanna dhatu of every Cittaja Rupa Kalapa caused by the Vipassana Citta and 2) the brightness of the Vanna dhatu of every Kalapa caused by the Tejo dhatu called utu which is present in the Cittaja Rupa Kalapa - are called Vipassanobhasa, the light of Vipassana nana. The explanation above is similar for the light that appears in Samatha Bhavana Citta. So, is this really the light of Vipassana nana? No, it is not. It is used in the Text as a metaphor only. Instead of saying that the effect (Rupa) has light which is caused by nana (insight), it is said that the cause in itself has light as a metaphor. It is actually the name of the Vanna dhatu, Ruparammana present in Cittaja Rupa and Utuja Rupa”<. ======================================================= 43542 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature Hi LK, I'm glad to see Nina and Rob K are discussing your qus here and I'll look forward to reading your further discussions with them. let me just stress (and show I can be brief:-): --- lokuttaracitta wrote: > > According to Abhiddamma of Theravada, > > Lokuttaracittas can not directly know themselves as they really are > because their object is "unconditioned nama" and Lokuttaracittas are > conditioned nama. ... S: No cittas can know themselves, regardless of the object. .... > Lokuttacittas are known as such only by the "Subsequent" reviewing > cittas which are conditioned. ... S: Any cittas or cetasikas can only be known by subsequent or immediately following cittas which are conditioned. It's like a photocopy or replica of the characteristic which is directly known. Of course, in the case of the reviewing cittas, we're talking about a high level of wisdom following the lokuttara cittas, but the principle is the same. ... > There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. ... S: I believe there can. (see 'navattabbarammana' in U.P. perhaps, also 'reviewing') ... > How can Theravadin exclude the possiblity that lokuttaracittas are > unconditioned nama? .. S: Because nibbana is the only dhamma (reality) given as being unconditioned (asankhata), not subject to rise and fall. LK, look forward to chatting more after our trip probably. Thanks again for your contributions. Metta, Sarah ======== 43543 From: Matthew Miller Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:45am Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Evan: > > OK, so why do you bother living or doing anything at all? > If there is no purpose to anything then stop. > Umm... why does something have to have a purpose to be valuable? Can't it just be valuable in itself? Evan, since you enjoy math, you can see that this would lead to an infinite regress. If the purpose of X is Y... then what is the purpose of Y? Z? And the purpose of Z? And so on... Let X=X. Matthew 43544 From: connie Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:48am Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi, Evan, Matthew, > If there is no purpose to anything then stop. Exactly so. "The stopping of grasping is from the stopping of craving; the stopping of becoming is from the stopping of grasping; the stopping of birth is from the stopping of becoming; With the stopping of birth then grief, suffering, sorrow, despair and lamentation are stopped. Thus comes to be the stopping of this entire mass of ill." (M.i,337;S.ii,1-3) peace, connie 43545 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:55am Subject: Re: [dsg]Lokuttara cittas Dear LK, op 23-03-2005 04:27 schreef lokuttaracitta op lokuttaracitta@y... > Can you say, > > " Nibbana arises in us because of conditions such as the arising of > the change-of-lineage or vodana(cleansing) citta " N: Nibbana does not arise, it is unconditioned. It does not arise and fall away, it could never arise in us. > LK: "Nibbana arises in us because there are the appropriate conditions > for its arising, because paññaa has been developed to the degrees of > the change-of-lineage or vodana citta or lokuttaracittas , and then > it falls away immediately " N: No, for the same reason. > LK: "It(Nibbana) arises and falls away in us, but is Unconditioned > Dhamma.In likewise ,Lokuttaracittas are unconditioned " N: Again, a contradiction, see above. Lokuttara cittas are conditioned, see my previous post. I can see that you have some difficulties with this topic. Of course nibbaana far away so long paññaa has not been developed to that stage. At this moment the objects are very ordinary, like visible object, sound, hardness, etc. They are all conditioned dhammas, they arise and fall away. So long as there is not precise understanding of conditioned dhammas, we cannot imagine what it means that lokuttara citta arises and experiences the unconditioned dhamma. Is there a special reason that you ask about this subject? LK: You write: There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. > No citta >> can know itself, but shortly after it has fallen away paññaa can > have direct >> understanding of its characteristic. .... > Are you saying that paññaa in a certain citta can never know the > other cetasikas in the same citta ? N: No it cannot. Paññaa, and all other accompanying cetasikas share the same object with the citta, only that one object. For example citta with paññaa understands the characteristic of visible object, and that is the object at that moment. Citta and cetasikas arise and fall away very fast while they all experience that object. Nina. 43546 From: Matthew Miller Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:23am Subject: The Brain on Dhamma RobertK wrote: > I predict that the current scientific picture of the > world is completely skewed and will be viewed in the > near futures with derision... > > I do not believe that dhamma practice occurs in the brain. Then where does it occur? Some people seem to think that saying "We are the brain" somehow reduces the richness of human experience to a lump of clay. The fact is, the human brain is the most complex object in the known universe. Carl Sagan pointed out: The human brain is made up of one hundred billion nerve cells (neurons). Each neuron makes a thousand to ten thousand contacts with other neurons and these points of contact, called synapses, are where exchange of information occurs. Based on this data, we can calculate that the number of possible permutations and combinations of brain activity, in other words the numbers of brain states, exceeds the total number of elementary particles in the entire known universe. This almost inconceivable level of complexity is made even more complicated by the effects of hormones on the sensitivity of neurons to signals from other neurons, as well as other biochemical regulatory factors. In nature, form follows function. The kind of astronomical formal complexity we see in the brain begs a functional explanation. As it turns out, that complex form does have a function -- us! The brain can write sonnets, it can compose the Brandenburg Concertos, it can practice dhamma. The awesome complexity of the brain can easily account for the full richness of our minds. (Mind you, I'm not talking about Cosmic Purpose or Divine Plan, just biological form and function). There is a huge and ever-increasing amount of knowledge about the brain and its workings, all of which appears to point conclusively to the view that the mind simply cannot exist apart from the brain. The dependence of the mind on brain is easily demonstrated; it does not require detailed knowledge of modern neuroscience. Drinking a bottle of whisky should give a good demonstration of this. Without oxygen or under the influence of anestehtics or soporific drugs, we rapidly lose consciousness. Moreover, the quality of our consicousness can be influenced in spectacular ways by appropriate drugs or by mechanical stimulation of the brain. But if we do look at the evidence of neuroscience, the case becomes even more convincing and a much more detailed picture emerges. As Colin McGinn writes: What we call the mind is in fact made up of a great number of subcapacities, and each depends upon the functioning of the brain V.S. Ramachandran: When you look at these people who have had a small lesion in a specific part of the brain, what you see is not an across-the-board reduction in all their cognitive capacities, not a blunting of their mind. What you see is a highly selective loss of one specific function with other functions being preserved intact. As recent as 10 years ago, brain imaging studies were still pretty crude. But the technology has improved rapidly and the images are adding up, like bits in a jigsaw puzzle, to reveal something quite startling: a complete picture of the human mind at work. Rita Carter: Today's brain scans reveals our thoughts, moods, and memories as clearly as an X-ray reveals our bones. We can actually observe a person's brain registering a joke or experiencing a painful memory. This knowledge is only gradually seeping into the field of psychology, where we still find a lot of dense, jargon-laden psychobabbble (not unlike the abhidhamma ;-) An excellent overview of recent brain research can be found in Rita Carter's "Mapping the Mind": http://tinyurl.com/5tk4d Robert, if you'd care to offer some specific views contrary to what I've described (preferably with references to evidence) I'd be eager to hear them. Matthew 43547 From: matheesha Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:49am Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge 2 Hi Nina, Have been busy for the last few days. This egroup is like a river - if you dont keep up your posts will get swept away! > M: How can an unconditioned element be experienced? Shouldnt there be no > experience of it? (ie- identified by not having felt anything ..sort of like > sleep?) > N: It can be experienced by paññaa which has been developed to that stage. > Not like sleep at all. Lokuttara pannñaa is supported by many sobhana cittas > which are also lokuttara. There is a high degree of direct understanding and > mindfulness and great alertness. M: If magg-phala citta experiences nibbana, should it not experience what has been used to describe nibbana (if only in the negative)? One will have panna about it as well. > M: Is it possible for say ..a sothapanna to experience phala citta again > > on a later date at will? I have heard this mentioned in some schools > > of theravada meditation. > N: Only those who are proficient in jhana. They can have phalacitta > experiencing nibbana again. M: It is interesting to hear you say this. You are only the second person who has told me this. The first person being meditation guru Ven Amathagavesi who is a bit of a practical abhidhamma enthusiast. He developed a system of meditation incorporating jhana, and this was one of the reasons he used jhana extensively. > M: The suttas seem to suggest that there maybe other ways of getting rid > > of defilements as well. Would the abhidhamma support this? > N: Which sutta? By samatha defilements can be temporarily subdued. Only by > the development of the eightfold Path/satipatthana, defilements are > completely eradicated. M: Well, ones like the vitakkasanthana sutta/MN for example which seem to be using simple ways of changing the way one thinks. > M: The suttas also seem to suggest that nibbana is possible by just > > using void/emptiness/letting go as an object of meditation. > N: Do you have a sutta at hand? Emptiness is emptiness of the self. We take > seeing for self now. How to let go? By understanding it precisely as an > element that experiences visible object. There is no other way leading to > detachment. M: I'm sorry I dont. In this sutta a monk approaches the buddha and tell him that he is incapable of doing either samatha or vipassana. Then the buddha suggests that he try void as his object of meditation. I suspect it might be either from sutta nipata or the samyutta nikaya. I saw it as random post in another forum. Then there are the 10 recollections (dasa anussathi) which also seems to prescribe just conteplation of impermanence etc rather than actual direct observation. It makes me wonder whether panna from direct observation is essential or whether other types of panna (sutamaya, cintamaya) are equally valid in giving rise to enlightenment. N:The Abhidhamma > is a great help for understanding defilements in more detail. M: Yes, I suspect it must be. False enlightenment is a major pitfal on the path. metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Matheesha, > something happened to my post to you. I shall finish part 2. It was broken > off. > op 18-03-2005 22:34 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: > > Part 2: > N:The maggacitta eradicates defilements and experiences the > unconditioned element, nibbaana. .. > > M: How can an unconditioned element be experienced? Shouldnt there be no > experience of it? (ie- identified by not having felt anything ..sort of like > sleep?) > N: It can be experienced by paññaa which has been developed to that stage. > Not like sleep at all. Lokuttara pannñaa is supported by many sobhana cittas > which are also lokuttara. There is a high degree of direct understanding and > mindfulness and great alertness. > > M: Does the lokuttara vipaka citta mean that phala is arising as an > > Effect of the magga citta, (which is the Cause)? > N: Yes, it is the result. > M: Does abhidhamma explain why defilements are eradicated with magga > > citta? > N: It explains that the latent tendencies are eradicated stage by stage, so > that these cannot condition the arising of akusala cittas. > M: Is it possible for say ..a sothapanna to experience phala citta again > > on a later date at will? I have heard this mentioned in some schools > > of theravada meditation. > N: Only those who are proficient in jhana. They can have phalacitta > experiencing nibbana again. > > M: Interestingly i wonder if it is possible for there to be more than > > just the 4 x 2 magga-phala citta depending on the maturity of the > > mental faculties of the practitioner. But I would suspect that the > > answer is no :) > N: Those who are proficient in jhana and have reached the different stages > can have forty (if we count jhanas as fivefold) lokuttara cittas instead of > eight. > M: The suttas seem to suggest that there maybe other ways of getting rid > > of defilements as well. Would the abhidhamma support this? > N: Which sutta? By samatha defilements can be temporarily subdued. Only by > the development of the eightfold Path/satipatthana, defilements are > completely eradicated. > M: The suttas also seem to suggest that nibbana is possible by just > > using void/emptiness/letting go as an object of meditation. > N: Do you have a sutta at hand? Emptiness is emptiness of the self. We take > seeing for self now. How to let go? By understanding it precisely as an > element that experiences visible object. There is no other way leading to > detachment. > M: Would > > abhidhamma insist on udaya-vya nana/insight knowledge of impermenence > > to give rise to magga-phala citta? > N: The three characteristics of dhammas, including impermanence have to be > clearly realized by paññaa before enlightenment can be attained. > > N:> However, for us now it is more important to understand the right > > Path > >> leading to enlightenment. > > > > M: Yes, but I feel my needs are met in that department :) I'm trying > > to find out what abidhamma provides as explanation for things we > > experience while on the path. > N: We experience many defilements while on the Path. If we do not know > exactly when we are clinging to result it is very dangerous. We are bound to > mislead ourselves, taking for the Path what is not the Path. The Abhidhamma > is a great help for understanding defilements in more detail. > Nina. 43548 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge 2 Hi Matheesha, op 23-03-2005 19:49 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...> > M: If magg-phala citta experiences nibbana, should it not experience > what has been used to describe nibbana (if only in the negative)? > One will have panna about it as well. N: I do not understand your Q. True, nibbaana is described as the end of dukkha, the end of defilements. It is the effect of the lokuttara cittas experiencing nibbaana. There are many descriptions, but one only knows what the unconditioned element is in experiencing it. Now we only speculate about it. >> M: The suttas seem to suggest that there maybe other ways of > getting rid >>> of defilements as well. .. > > M: Well, ones like the vitakkasanthana sutta/MN for example which > seem to be using simple ways of changing the way one thinks. N: See the posts in U.P. I translated the Co from Thai. Satipatthaana is implied in the whole sutta, no matter he changes his thoughts. I just quote one part: Without understanding of the Abhidhamma we may misunderstand the Sutta and the Commentary. One may believe that the bhikkhu merely has to think of the contents of his bag in order to avoid unwholesome thoughts. However, we should remember that when the citta is not engaged with daana, siila or bhaavanaa, all thinking is done with akusala citta. When the bhikkhu¹s objective is siila he thinks with kusala citta. But when he merely thinks, this is a match, this is a needle, and defines different objects without mindfulness of naama and ruupa his thoughts are akusala, he is merely replacing unwholesome thoughts by other unwholesome thoughts. This can remind us that whenever we define what we see or hear there are mostly akusala cittas arising in mind-door processes. These cittas are often accompanied by indifferent feeling, and therefore we may believe that they are not akusala cittas. While we define different things after seeing or hearing we do not harm others, but we forget that thinking is either kusala or akusala, and that it is mostly akusala. This can remind us of the urgency to be aware of visible object, of seeing, and also of thinking.> >> M: The suttas also seem to suggest that nibbana is possible by > just >>> using void/emptiness/letting go as an object of meditation. .... In this sutta a monk approaches the buddha and > tell him that he is incapable of doing either samatha or vipassana. > Then the buddha suggests that he try void as his object of > meditation. ... Then there are the 10 recollections (dasa anussathi) which also seems to > prescribe just conteplation of impermanence etc rather than actual > direct observation. It makes me wonder whether panna from direct > observation is essential or whether other types of panna (sutamaya, > cintamaya) are equally valid in giving rise to enlightenment. N: Hearing and considering are very essential. Paññaa can develop, stage by stage until enlightenment is attained. Not without mindfulness of nama and rupa. When you read about contemplating impermanence etc., this is not merely thinking about it. Anybody could just think, but this is not enough. Defilements are deeply rooted. They cannot be eradicated by thinking. Nina. 43549 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:41pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Cooran. Hi Nina ------------------------ N: > Thank you, I just got your post. What a good idea to read a sutta and then discuss it. I like no control for anatta, but no control can also be misunderstood.People may think that no kusala can be developed. But recently Sarah wrote a post I read to Lodewijk in the restaurant, where she explained very clearly about the Middle Way. ------------------------- It is good of you to be concerned for people who have that particular wrong understanding (that anatta means no kusala can be developed). Do they honestly think that? Or is their attachment so great that they are simply not interested in kusala without self? This reminds me of a topic that came up repeatedly at the Cooran meeting. We were facing the fact that enlightenment has consequences that we, as unenlightened folk, find disagreeable: namely, it proclaims that final extinction of consciousness is nigh. A Sotapanna has, at most, seven more lives. To us unenlightened folk, it is as if he has jumped out of an aeroplane with no parachute - there is no turning back! We might pretend to want enlightenment and final extinction of the khandhas, but that is just bluff. Fortunately for us, the laws of nature save us from ourselves by not calling our bluff. :-) All this seems obvious to me now, but only after having met you and other DSG people. The Dhamma does not teach us to want to be other than we are. It teaches us to know the present five khandhas. Ken H 43550 From: sunnaloka Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 2:00pm Subject: [dsg] Re: jhana & Abhidhamma Pitaka Hi Nina, Good to talk to you again (we conversed in Pali group when I inquired about Sunnata Katha quotation, I've since ordered the Patisam. text). Anyway, my interest right now is in tracing the source of certain terms and ideas that arise in the commentarial literature but may not be specifically stated in the Tipitaka. Of course, not having access to the complete Tipitaka makes this endeavor somewhat difficult. Concerning jhana, I'd also like to find out if it specifically states in the Abhidhamma Pitaka that jhanacittas cannot have sensory objects (i.e. does jhana necessarily mean the cessation of visual, auditory, tactile awareness). I understand that the commentarial position is that this is indeed the case, but is there any specific canonical precedent for this position? I do have access to the V.M. as well as the material you've published online, and so am aware of the countersign, etc., commentarial methodology. I'm very curious though, why none (or very little) of this seems to be explicitly stated in the Sutta Pitaka, and I'm therefore wondering how much of this methodology is explicit in the Abhidhamma Pitaka. (I'm not taking any position as to right/wrong etc., just interested in the canonical precedence of commentarial assertions.) As always, any light you can shed on this matter would be greatly appreciated. Geoff 43551 From: sunnaloka Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:53pm Subject: Re: The Brain on Dhamma Hi Mathew, I'm new to this conversation and so am ignorant of the context of what you are trying to assert here: > There is a huge and ever-increasing amount of knowledge about the > brain and its workings, all of which appears to point conclusively to > the view that the mind simply cannot exist apart from the brain. Are you trying to state that consciousness can be reduced to material (i.e. neural, electric, etc.) activities and processes in the brain? If so, can you support this with any definative scientific discovery? More to the point, exactly what is consciousness made of? > Today's brain scans reveals our thoughts, moods, and > memories as clearly as an X-ray reveals our bones. > We can actually observe a person's brain registering > a joke or experiencing a painful memory. To be sure, thoughts, moods, and memories have material correlations in the brain which they are dependent upon for their arising, but is the neuroscientist, when looking at a brain scan, observing a thought, mood, memory, etc., or is s/he merely observing a visual reproduction of the material correlation of said thought/mood/memory? If the neuroscientist is actually observing a thought why is s/he not aware of the content of this thought? If s/he is observing a joke why doesn't s/he laugh? What I'm getting at, is that from a phenomenological perspective, the subjective experience of a thought is a distinctly different phenomena than the objective experience of a neuroscientist observing the material changes of this thought. And for this very reason it is a cognitive error to reduce the subjective experience to the objective one. They are related, but they are not the same. This phenomenological method (i.e. abhidhamma method) exposes the error of the materialist position that all mental phenomena can be reduced to mere material phenomena. A subjective experience of laughing is simply not the same phenomena as the material neurological activities occurring in the brain, and these material activities are not the same phenomena as the visual reproduction of said material neurological activities observed by the neuroscientist. They are related and interdependent, but they are not identical. One cannot be reduced to the other. Furthermore, because there is no irrefutable evidence that consciousness is a material substance, there is no valid reason to conclude that consciousness can't exist apart from the brain. True, visual consciousness is dependent upon the material visual sensory organ (eye, nerves, brain, etc.), as are all six sensory consciousnesses, but consciousness as such, the pure subjectivity that you are, hasn't been scientifically proven to be dependent upon the brain (the effects of alchohol on the average mind is no proof). And until such a time that pure subjective consciousness can be scientifically proven to be dependent on the brain, the materialist theory is only a mere theory, and as such is just another mental phenomenon that one could observe, if one so wishes, with clear seeing (vipassana) and thereby discern (panna) that it is not-self nor does it pertain to a self. In this way one could, if one so wishes, free oneself form the tangle of all limited views, positions, and opinions. The Buddha stated that such freedom is radically Deathless. Geoff 43552 From: Andrew Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 4:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma weekend Cooran --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Ken H, Andrew T, Christine, > How was your Cooran weekend? > Looking forward to hearing about it, > Nina. Dear Nina It is very kind of you to enquire about our humble discussion weekend and I'm glad to see Ken H has provided a response. The article which Reg brought along was "Why is Buddhism called the 'Middle Way'?" by Dr Peter Nelson: quite a strange article to find in a suburban Brisbane newspaper (The Westender). Reg considered it was relevant to the topic of Right View because the author points out that in the Discourse to Kaccayana (SN 2:17) the Buddha equated the 'middle way' with 'right view'. During the weekend, we also read the Mahacattarisaka Sutta and found parts of it very difficult to interpret without the assistance of notes and commentaries: so much for *just* reading the suttas! Then Ken H started testing our knowledge using the questions in ADL. It's always humbling to realise how little one really knows! But some of us did very well [names suppressed]. I hope you and Lodewijk are both well. Best wishes Andrew T 43553 From: matheesha Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 4:55pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge 2 Hi Nina, > > M: If magg-phala citta experiences nibbana, should it not experience > > what has been used to describe nibbana (if only in the negative)? > > One will have panna about it as well. > N: I do not understand your Q. True, nibbaana is described as the end of > dukkha, the end of defilements. M: Sorry about that. I'm reffering to the statements about nibbana saying it is devoid of this or that (sun moon etc!)-ie- it is stated in the negative in some places. Perhaps another point is that the buddha sought a state beyond the eigth jhana, which is nirodha. Is this not an 'experience' (or more acurately non experience) of nibbana? Or are these two seperate in some way? Ven Sariputta says nirodha is like sleep in some respects; this is why i mentioned sleep in an earlier post. A sothapanna also experiences nibbana for a moment through the lokuttara citta, even though there isnt a full eradication of defilements. So nibbana can be experienced before this final act. >N:While we define different things after seeing or > hearing we do not harm others, but we forget that thinking is either kusala > or akusala, and that it is mostly akusala. M: Yes, that is useful to remember. While there is a definite element of mindfulness involved in carrying out the vitakkasanthana sutta instructions, there seems to be an active element of changing akusala thoughts as well through contemplation etc which is not visible in the sathpattana (even though it happens via a different mechanism there). In the gradual teaching there are techniques given for getting rid of hinderances which seem to have little do with sathipatthana if i remember correctly. Rather they seem to be done in anticipation of sathipattana practice. But final removal of defilements does seem to require insight. I have my doubts whether simple prolonged contemplation of impermanence etc cannot achieve the same effect of removing defilements. This seems to be in effect the 'Dukka magga' which Ven moggalana tread. The Buddha himself mentions the dvedhavitakka type of practice, the 'three similies which have never been thought of before', and a intentional directing the mind towards nibbana in his training as a bodhisattva. The only sathipattana type practice he seems to mention is the cemetary (bhayaberava) meditation as I recall. I suspect that any practices which aim at ridding the mind of lobha,dosa and moha are effective in the path (on a background of jhana which make the mind 'maleable'). Would that be 'abhihammacially' correct? A word on the self view. It is lost at the sothapanna stage. This is ridding of sakkayaditti. This can happen through vipassana practice - seeing nama-rupa/hethu-phala etc. However its complete eradication occurs when one becomes an arahath according to the suttas. This i believe involves removing entirely from thoughts any 'feeling' of self .. to the point where ripping out ones eyes and throwing them away is possible! This has been temporarily felt by some people who had a very strong insight into no-self. A comlpete emptiness. The 'feeling' of self later returned, however the insight knowledge remained (along with insght into the other two charachteristics). metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Matheesha, > op 23-03-2005 19:49 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...> > > M: If magg-phala citta experiences nibbana, should it not experience > > what has been used to describe nibbana (if only in the negative)? > > One will have panna about it as well. > N: I do not understand your Q. True, nibbaana is described as the end of > dukkha, the end of defilements. It is the effect of the lokuttara cittas > experiencing nibbaana. There are many descriptions, but one only knows what > the unconditioned element is in experiencing it. Now we only speculate about > it. > > >> M: The suttas seem to suggest that there maybe other ways of > > getting rid > >>> of defilements as well. .. > > > > M: Well, ones like the vitakkasanthana sutta/MN for example which > > seem to be using simple ways of changing the way one thinks. > N: See the posts in U.P. I translated the Co from Thai. Satipatthaana is > implied in the whole sutta, no matter he changes his thoughts. I just quote > one part: > keen-eyed man shutting his eyes and looking away from some direction in > order to avoid seeing visible objects come within sight, should the bhikkhu > in whom evil, unskillful thoughts continue to arise in spite of his > pondering on their disadvantageousness, endeavor to be without attention and > reflection as regards them.> > Without understanding of the Abhidhamma we may misunderstand the Sutta and > the Commentary. One may believe that the bhikkhu merely has to think of the > contents of his bag in order to avoid unwholesome thoughts. However, we > should remember that when the citta is not engaged with daana, siila or > bhaavanaa, all thinking is done with akusala citta. When the bhikkhu¹s > objective is siila he thinks with kusala citta. But when he merely thinks, > this is a match, this is a needle, and defines different objects without > mindfulness of naama and ruupa his thoughts are akusala, he is merely > replacing unwholesome thoughts by other unwholesome thoughts. This can > remind us that whenever we define what we see or hear there are mostly > akusala cittas arising in mind-door processes. These cittas are often > accompanied by indifferent feeling, and therefore we may believe that they > are not akusala cittas. While we define different things after seeing or > hearing we do not harm others, but we forget that thinking is either kusala > or akusala, and that it is mostly akusala. This can remind us of the urgency > to be aware of visible object, of seeing, and also of thinking.> > >> M: The suttas also seem to suggest that nibbana is possible by > > just > >>> using void/emptiness/letting go as an object of meditation. > .... In this sutta a monk approaches the buddha and > > tell him that he is incapable of doing either samatha or vipassana. > > Then the buddha suggests that he try void as his object of > > meditation. ... Then there are the 10 recollections (dasa anussathi) which > also seems to > > prescribe just conteplation of impermanence etc rather than actual > > direct observation. It makes me wonder whether panna from direct > > observation is essential or whether other types of panna (sutamaya, > > cintamaya) are equally valid in giving rise to enlightenment. > N: Hearing and considering are very essential. Paññaa can develop, stage by > stage until enlightenment is attained. Not without mindfulness of nama and > rupa. When you read about contemplating impermanence etc., this is not > merely thinking about it. Anybody could just think, but this is not enough. > Defilements are deeply rooted. They cannot be eradicated by thinking. > Nina. 43554 From: Andrew Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: Let > me summarize my position: > > -- Science is a human activity, like religion, and has been used for > both good and ill. > -- The Nazis used it for ill. > -- The Nazis were not engaged in "liberation from suffering." > -- I never said that *all* science is engaged in the liberation of > suffering. In response to listers who described all scientific > activity as "random" and "without direction" I pointed toward whole > branches of science whose (human-given) purpose is the liberation of > suffering (e.g. medicine). > -- "Science" does not have an inherent ethical direction-finder. > -- social primates (including humans) do (though they don't always > follow it) Hi Matthew Sorry I haven't been able to keep up with my posting. Thank you for your patient reply. Dot points are THE way to get through to me. This thread seems to be entering a thicket of factual knowledge that is not helpful in sorting out the bigger picture. I think that science is very valuable and Dhamma is a treasure. I don't see any problem with being a scientist and also a student of Dhamma when one is honest and sticks to the facts. In science, one adheres strictly to scientific methodology and ascertains scientific facts (which cannot be equated with absolutisms). In Dhamma, one is studying the teachings of a being who claimed to be able to see things as they really are and who taught to the capability of his audience. One can "test" those teachings personally to a certain extent but, to overcome the brakes of skepticism, one must take a great deal on faith. Where's the problem with that if one acknowledges it? Did not the Buddha tell us to be clear in our language about this, about what we "know" and what we understand to be the teachings on any given topic? You might respond with a flurry of quotations from Dhamma teachers who speak as if they are dealing in absolutisms, but IMHO the issue is only one of semantics. Science and the Dhamma are separate pursuits and the way to see their separateness is through fastidious honesty. I hope you don't mind me saying, but I have a feeling that there is something religious about your position, something that doesn't fit neatly within the scientific method. Might be something to do with the inherent ethical direction-finder you perceive in social primates. Would you care to elaborate on that aspect? Is it just plain self-interest? Best wishes Andrew T 43555 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:31pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Thank you connie. Some people do get my cryptic meanings. You are quite correct. That is exactly what I was referring to. Hi, Evan, Matthew, > If there is no purpose to anything then stop. Exactly so. "The stopping of grasping is from the stopping of craving; the stopping of becoming is from the stopping of grasping; the stopping of birth is from the stopping of becoming; With the stopping of birth then grief, suffering, sorrow, despair and lamentation are stopped. Thus comes to be the stopping of this entire mass of ill." (M.i,337;S.ii,1-3) peace, connie 43556 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:40pm Subject: Re: The Brain on Dhamma In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > RobertK wrote: > > I predict that the current scientific picture of the > > world is completely skewed and will be viewed in the > > near futures with derision... > > > > I do not believe that dhamma practice occurs in the brain. > > Then where does it occur? ========= Dear Matthew, Geoff has given an elegant reply that I can't really improve on. I just add some extra. > > There is a huge and ever-increasing amount of knowledge about the > brain and its workings, all of which appears to point conclusively to > the view that the mind simply cannot exist apart from the brain. ========== I gave this hypothetical case: Say some aliens came to earth and saw the internet working on a computer. They take the computer back to Mars , absolutely sure that the internet is in the computer. So they do tests, find hotspots etc. Maybe they zero in on the battery pack and find that if they prod it or cool it or something funny things happen. So they think the battery is key. They spend vast resorces and make a pefect battery, the monitor becomes brighter.. Progress!... Or they pull out a wire and the monitor looks funny. AH! that must be it.... They think they are really getting to the heart of the internet and will soon plumb its depths. So they carry on - for decades. Every year there is a facinating new discovery. Prodding a point there gives this result,?@‚?rodding here another. They even invent new machines which can map the temperature of the computers components and 'prove' that at certain times and under certain conditions this or that happens. BUt they will never come to understand what the internet really is by any of this. And this is only an analogy - the internet is something that can be understood without the help of a Buddha . Consciousness is much more profound. =============== > > But if we do look at the evidence of neuroscience, the case becomes > even more convincing and a much more detailed picture emerges. As > Colin McGinn writes: > > What we call the mind is in fact made up of a great number > of subcapacities, and each depends upon the functioning of > the brain > > ======= Colin Mcginn is a materialist philosopher (as so many are at this time). But even with his materialist views he admits about the various scientific ideas on consciousness?gThe head spins in theoretical disarray; no explanatory model suggests itself; bizarre ontologies loom. There is a feeling of intense confusion, but no clear idea of where the confusion lies?h(1993) Problems in philosophy: the limits of inquiry. RobertK 43557 From: Matthew Miller Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:58pm Subject: Re: The Brain on Dhamma Greetings Geoff! Thank you for taking the time to reply. You wrote: > > because there is no irrefutable evidence that > consciousness is a material substance, there is no valid reason to > conclude that consciousness can't exist apart from the brain. These are really two different issues. The first is: is the mind the same as the brain? The second is, can the mind exist without the brain? A mind-body dualist may argue that "mind stuff" and "body stuff" are two different things (which I find improbable), but nevertheless the dualist would have to agree that all the evidence we have suggests that the mind cannot exist apart from the brain. >the pure subjectivity that you are, hasn't been scientifically >proven to be dependent upon the brain All the evidence points in that direction. Furthermore, there is *no* evidence whatsoever of a person's mind being able to exist independently from their brain. > They [subjective states and the brain] are related, > but they are not the same. Subjective phenomena and brain states are not merely "related" in some vague, general way. There is a specific, predictable, one-to-one, *causal* relationship between activation or deactivation of areas of the brain and corresponding subjective states. Damage to specific areas of the brain *causes* very specific, proportional and predictable changes in cognitive function. Alzheimer disease is a powerful example. Paul Edwards: "In the early stages of Alzheimer, the person misses appointments, he constantly loses and mislays objects, and he frequently can't recall events in the recent past. As the illness progresses, he can no longer read or write and his speech tends to be incoherent. In nursing homes Alzheimer patients commonly watch television, but there is no evidence that they understand what is happening on the screen. The decline in intellectual function is generally accompanied by severe emotional symptoms, such as extreme irritability and violent reactions to persons in the environment, as well as hallucinations and paranoid fears. In the final stages the patient is totally confused, frequently incontinent, and quite unable to recognize anybody, including the closest relatives and friends. "Although Alzheimer is incurable, a great deal is known about what goes on in the brain of Alzheimer patients. The cerebral cortex and the hippocampus develop twisted tangles and filaments as well as abnormal neurites known as neuritic plaques. It has been determined that the density of these abnormal components is directly proportional to the severity of the disorder." Here's a thought experiment for you: When faced with someone with Alzheimer or some lesser form of senility, it is perfectly natural for us to say in such situations -- and all of us speak like this, even phenomenologists and believers in reincarnation -- that the person's mind has deteriorated with age. Goeff (or anyone else), would you say that the mind has not deteriorated? Do you believe that this person actually has a fully intact mind (just as it would be if the brain had not been damaged)? Matthew 43558 From: Matthew Miller Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue > Might be something to do with > the inherent ethical direction-finder you perceive in social > primates. Would you care to elaborate on that aspect? Is it just > plain self-interest? > Oh, no. Not "plain self interest." Within primate societies, we see the patterns of communal moral behavior taht we do in human societies -- sharing, protection, sympathy,guilt, reciprocity, altruism, obligation, expectations, rules, and community concern. For more info, see the book "Good Natured: The Origins of Right and Wrong in Humans and Other Animals" by primatologist Frans De Waal: http://tinyurl.com/3jktx De Waal's work, as well as that of other primatologists and anthropologists, gives strong evidence against the old canard that humanity needs religion to be good. The foundations of ethical behavior not only predate the world's major religions; they also predate the rise of Homo sapiens. Matthew 43559 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:32pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 154- Determination /adhimokkha & Energy/viriya (d) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.9 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya) contd] Adhimokkha which accompanies akusala citta is determination which is akusala. When one, for example, speaks harshly or hits someone else, there is akusala adhimokkha which is convinced about the object of aversion. Adhimokkha which accompanies kusala citta is determination which is kusala. When one, for example, decides with kusala citta to study the Dhamma, kusala adhimokkha accompanies the kusala citta. However, at such a moment there are also many other wholesome cetasikas accompanying the kusala citta and adhimokkha is only one of them. It is difficult to know exactly what adhimokkha is. There is, for example, kusala cetanå which “wills” kusala, there is nonattachment, alobha, and there are many other cetasikas which each have their own task in assisting the citta to perform its function. They all take part in “ deciding” to study the Dhamma. ***** [Ch.8 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya))to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43560 From: Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 2:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Brain on Dhamma Hi Geoff, Matthew, All In a message dated 3/23/2005 4:53:53 PM Pacific Standard Time, sunnaloka@y... writes: This phenomenological method (i.e. abhidhamma method) exposes the error of the materialist position that all mental phenomena can be reduced to mere material phenomena. A subjective experience of laughing is simply not the same phenomena as the material neurological activities occurring in the brain, and these material activities are not the same phenomena as the visual reproduction of said material neurological activities observed by the neuroscientist. They are related and interdependent, but they are not identical. One cannot be reduced to the other. Furthermore, because there is no irrefutable evidence that consciousness is a material substance, there is no valid reason to conclude that consciousness can't exist apart from the brain. True, visual consciousness is dependent upon the material visual sensory organ (eye, nerves, brain, etc.), as are all six sensory consciousnesses, but consciousness as such, the pure subjectivity that you are, hasn't been scientifically proven to be dependent upon the brain (the effects of alchohol on the average mind is no proof). And until such a time that pure subjective consciousness can be scientifically proven to be dependent on the brain, the materialist theory is only a mere theory, and as such is just another mental phenomenon that one could observe, if one so wishes, with clear seeing (vipassana) and thereby discern (panna) that it is not-self nor does it pertain to a self. In this way one could, if one so wishes, free oneself form the tangle of all limited views, positions, and opinions. The Buddha stated that such freedom is radically Deathless. Geoff To me: 'phenomenological,' 'material' are just abstract distinctions. We have grown up with these distinctions. I don't think there is any difference other than in the manner of catagorizing things. Its all energy. TG 43561 From: sunnaloka Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:20pm Subject: Re: The Brain on Dhamma Hi Matthew, > Goeff (or anyone else), would you say that the mind has not > deteriorated? Do you believe that this person actually has a fully > intact mind (just as it would be if the brain had not been damaged)? Certainly not. But with all due respect I think you're missing my point. All such argumentation as to whether consciousness is or isn't the same as the brain never goes beyond inferential conclusion. Personally I neither support nor oppose the notion that consciousness continues after the death of the brain. From the perspective of skillful discernment it ultimately makes no difference one way or the other. When the Buddha was asked whether he considered the life force (soul, consciousness, whatever you want to call it) to be the same as the body (i.e. brain) or different from the body he maintained noble silence. All such metaphysical assumptions he considered meaningless argumentation (papanca). He considered the fading away and cessation of all such speculative views to be liberating (i.e. Deathless). The ultimate existential question is: how can I make the most of this life? Or stated another way: what actions of body, speech, and mind result in happiness? This is exactly what the Buddha is getting at in the Kalama Sutta (the charter of free inquiry) where he says that if you find that the Dhamma (ethical conduct, meditation, and discernment) he recomends is skillful (kusala) and promotes long term happiness and benefit, then use it. Conversely, if you find that such thoughts and actions based on them are unskillful and lead to regret and suffering, abandon them. So (in my opinion) the path of ethical conduct (sila), meditation (samadhi), and discernment (panna) taught by the Buddha is functional and not fundamentalist. It is based on the skillful employment of thoughts, speech, and actions to produce what the existentialists call 'the optimal mode of being.' This mode of being is unconditionally free from all existential angst because it discerns the emptiness and futility of speculating upon what lies outside our present frame of reference, while at the same time skillfully employing all of our present faculties to their optimal levels of functionality. This results in the greatest and most stable happiness for oneself and also contributes to the greater good of society as a whole. To summarize, this skillful path in no way depends upon belief in the continuity of consciousness after death, and all such speculation is actually the antithesis of the third noble truth: the cessation of suffering (i.e. Deathlessness). May we all realize this profound mode of being a.s.a.p.. Hi TG, >To me: 'phenomenological,' 'material' are just abstract >distinctions. We have grown up with these distinctions. I don't >think there is any difference other than in the manner of >catagorizing things. Its all energy. Well said. I would add that even the mental notion 'energy' is an abstract distinction. In the final analysis all mental labels and conceptual fabrications are empty. Geoff 43562 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi Howard, (James in passing at the end) After this afternoon, I’ll likely be signing off for a couple of weeks, so perhaps I shouldn’t be getting into new threads:-) However, I particularly wished to show my appreciation for your comment here in a post to Kel: --- upasaka@a... wrote: >H: “Ultimately, however, it is the uprooting of ignorance with the sword of wisdom that I consider to be critical, and not some "link-cutting operation". Most essentially, we are enslaved by avijja and freed > by vijja”. S: You followed it up with another post (#43429) and I thought it was very well written indeed. For example, you wrote: “There is no question that in the unraveling reading of D.O., with the cessation of vedana there is the cessation of tanha. Some folks think this means that “all we have to do” is pay careful, concentrated attention to the arising of vedana, with the mind in a calm state, so as not to react with craving/aversion. I think this is a fallacious piece of reasoning.” S: You then go on to clearly show why. Well said. Nothing to add to it at all, but possibly to stress that calm arises and develops with insight too. In other words, there cannot be moments of ‘liberating vijja’ or even beginning vijja without calm accompanying the citta. In fact ‘higher calm’ or concentration (adhi citta) can only be developed with satipatthana, not without. While I’m here, you wrote to Frank (#43414) that according to the Abhidhamma ‘vedana and sa~n~na are universals that *co-occur* in every mindstate’. You went on to question why we read about the dependence of sanna on vedana in the texts. Let me add a couple of points which I hope will help this good question: 1. See Guide to Conditional Relations which you have, p24 under sahajata (conascence)paccaya: “Now, if feeling aggregate, one of the four mental aggregates, is taken as the conditioning state, the remaining three aggregates are the conditioned states; if perception aggregate is taken as the conditioning state, the remaining three [mental]aggregates are the conditioned states and so on.”. It goes on to say that if two or three of the [mental] aggregates are taken as the conditioning states, the remaining two or one [mental] aggregate are conditioned at that moment by conascence condition. “The above shows how the four mental aggregates are both conditioning and conditioned states.” 2. I recently quoted an extract from Sammohavinodanii (Dispeller) for Azita which emphasized that the ‘order’ of the khandhas as given was not an ‘order of arising’, “because the aggregates do not arise in the order of their successive determining as in the case of ‘the foetus in the first stage’, etc; nor ‘order of abandoning’.......; nor ‘order of practice’......But ‘order of teaching’ is appropriate.” Having stressed this, the passage went on to say how for ‘easy grasping’ , the Buddha taught “the gross materiality aggregate [first] which is the object of the eye and so on; and after that the feeling which feels the materiality experienced as desirable and undesirable; [then] the perception which grasps the aspects of the object of feeling thus: ‘What he feels, that he perceives’ (M i 293); [then] formations by means of perception; [and lastly] consciousness which is their support and which dominates them.” So to stress, sanna, vedana and the other cetasikas arising are all dependent on each other. ***** Finally, a brief speculation on the sensitive, but important topic you raised about the fear/panic/terror you and others have experienced when seemingly on the brink of some insight. It may also be relevant to ‘burned out’ experiences when reading posts, I don’t know and apologise if this is off-track. Is it possible, do you think, that a) we hear/read/ reflect on something important and potentially likely to shatter some deeply-held beliefs, b)there is enough awareness/understanding to recognize the truth of it, but c) the deeply attachment to our views and ‘safe world’ results in an immediate kind of very strong reaction – whether of terror or some other aspect of aversion (dosa)? There is no terror or fear in any insight or understanding at all, but I think these rapidly following emotional states merely go to point out the anattaness of processes of cittas which are quite beyond anyone’s wish or control. After all, who would ever *choose* to experience such reactions? I think they're very natural and yes, even these states can be known for what they are, merely fleeting conditioned dhammas too. If these comments are off-track, just ignore them. I appreciated your sharing of your experiences (also James's and btw James, I liked your kind post to Azita very much). I’ll greatly look forward to anything you or others add on these or other topics while we’re away, or before we go (not til Monday actually, but I need to give my computer arm a good rest at the weekend and get prepared). Metta, Sarah ====== 43563 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Phil's letter from Japan Hi Phil, I’m glad you and Naomi have settled well into your new ‘high-class’ neighbourhood and superior apartment. I’m afraid there weren’t any responses to your letter on the list. As usual, it continues busily with some active new members too. I’m sure Nina and others are keenly awaiting your returning from hibernation. The ‘Cetasikas’ are especially waiting for your return:-). Anyway, as I’m about to take a break myself, let me just add a couple of comments on points you raise, so that I can send something back to you. Phil wrote: > One question I’d like to ask. This is Nina, writing to Howard: “It only > makes sense that I need to listen and read dhamma and on and on. With > so > much avijja and craving what would I find when I seek to practice? The > feeling of urgency points to the present moment, and if there is no sati > and panna what can be done? Nothing can accelerate the process of > development except when sati and panna does arise.” > > I think this is very important. When I see how gross my lobha is at > times, > should there not be samvega, should there not be an arousing of a sense > of > urgency? If there is, there is, but even when there is, when there is > so > much ignorance, what will be gained from urgency? .... S: I think it’s important to stress that the sense of urgency has to be with right understanding. For example, I was talking on the phone to a friend whose parents died recently. She appreciates that we should make the most of our lives while we can, but for many people this means we should see the urgency to enjoy our lives. As good students of the Dhamma, we know better, but so easily we may think ‘we’ or ‘self’ should urgently act to get rid of our defilements. I’m not at all sure that this kind of urgent mission by ‘self’ is any better as it’s likely to just lead to more attachment to Self, as I see it. So, understanding is the key again. We read that a sense or urgency is the proximate cause for viriya (energy/effort) to arise, but the words used are “bestirred, he strives wisely”. (We’ll soon be coming to this under viriya cetasika in the ‘Cetasikas’ series in more detail). The ‘wisely’ is very important. As it stresses elsewhere, better not to rouse viriya than to rouse it wrongly. So, I agree with you, that when there is ignorance, any urgency at such moments is quite useless.Now, I'm not sure if that was your question:-/ ... >If the man with his > turban on fire strikes out at the fire, hurries to put it out, the > flames > might just spread deeper, fanned by his flailing! Better to ever so > patiently remove the turban, which has to be unwound, not just torn off, > maybe. Something to think about, but these days I find even samvega can > lead to a further deepening of patience, paradoxically. ... S: I’ll look forward to hearing more when you return. We’ve talked about patience as an aspect of viriya, so I think there is a close connection. Energy, courage, patience, perseverance to follow the right path against the flow. .... > I am now rereading the CMA, but am wondering where pariyatti, patipatti > and pativedha fall in as dhammas? I won’t be able to read the answer for > now, but I hope the question will lead to a little fruitful discussion. > It sounds like a very important point! :-) ... S: Panna (understanding) of different degrees, accompanied by other mental factors of course. Pariyatti is right intellectual understanding with concepts of dhammas as objects. For example, now we are talking about the characteristic of viriya. If there is some right understanding it’s pariyatti, but not patipatti unless the characteristic appears. So patipatti refers to moments of the direct understanding of namas and rupas. Pativedha refers to higher insights into realities. (look up under ‘pariyatti......’ and also ‘samvegga...’ and maybe ‘viriya’ when you return to U.P:-). I’m sorry, this is not much, but I’m a little rushed these days. .... > P.S. many thanks to Ken H for sending me copies of the Burma talks on > tape. Great stuff! .... S: Hope you make notes of any points or comments for further discussion too. Many thanks again for your letter. Best wishes to Naomi Metta, Sarah p.s Jon sends his regards too. He’s flat-out at work and looking forward to his break:-) ====== 43564 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 0:07am Subject: Dhsg translations on Samvegga Dear Nina & Howard, I remember searching for ages for the Pali Icaro once gave to some phrases at the end of the Dhammasangani in vain before I realized that the PTS translation stops short at around 1400 of the Pali. To my delight, the Burmese translation is complete, up to 1616 and also it follows the Pali numbering so it’s easy to check. Ok, an example from the very end of the PTS translation, p 332 as this is where I’m looking. On Samvegga as it’s relevant: 1376. Sa.mvegoti– jaatibhaya.m jaraabhaya.m byaadhibhaya.m mara.nabhaya.m. Sa.mvejaniya.m [sa.mvejaniiya.m (sii.)] .thaananti– jaati jaraa byaadhi mara.na.m. ***** PTS: iii) The phrase “agitation” implies dread of birth, dread of old age, dread of sickness, dread of death. iv) The phrase “occasion of agitation” means birth, old age, sickness, death. ****** Myanmar: (39) Samvega Duka i) 1376. Emotional religious awakening means feeling of apprehension at seeing the danger of rebirth, the danger of ageing, the danger of illness, the danger of death. The cause of the apprehension are rebirth, ageing, illness and death. ***** S: I’m not keen on either of these translations and haven’t had a chance to look at much of the Myanmar text yet. The great advantage for me is being able to cross-check with the Pali much more easily, the fact that it is complete and has a very good Matika section at the front . Metta, Sarah p.s I know that both of you and others will be glad to hear that we received a nice note from Victor the other day. He doesn’t want to post it on list, but I think I can summarise by saying he greatly appreciates his active time on DSG (even though it was ‘heated’ at times), he’s been living at Metta Forest Monastery (under Ven Thanissararo, I believe) for the last 8 months, I believe as a samanera and expects to be fully ordaining there in July. He has very limited internet access, just once a week at a library when he tries to check in on us. He also gave this link for if anyone has any questions anytime for Ven Thanissaro or “Tan Ajaan Geoff” as he referred to him: http://www.mettaforest.org/VisitInfo.htm 43565 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 0:55am Subject: Victor .... (Re: Dhsg translations on Samvegga) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott > p.s I know that both of you and others will be glad to hear that we > received a nice note from Victor the other day. He doesn't want to >post it on list, but I think I can summarise by saying he greatly >appreciates his active time on DSG (even though it was `heated' >at times), he's been living at Metta Forest Monastery (under Ven >Thanissararo, I believe) for the last 8 months, I believe as a >samanera and expects to be fully ordaining there in July. He has >very limited internet access, just once a > week at a library when he tries to check in on us. He also gave > this link for if anyone has any questions anytime for Ven >Thanissaro or "Tan Ajaan Geoff" as he referred to him: > http://www.mettaforest.org/VisitInfo.htm Hello Victor, Only last weekend at the Cooran gathering, some were asking if anyone had heard from/about you ... so it is lovely to hear the news from Sarah that you are living at Metta Forest Monastery and are soon to be ordained. I always felt that this was a path you would take eventually ... I miss your active presence on dsg - and your (sometimes exasperating :-)) reminders about 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself.' Victor - may you be safe and protected, may you be healthy and strong, may you be happy of heart and mind, and may you live with ease and wellbeing. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 43566 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 0:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cooran. Dear Andrew and Ken H, thank you for your reports. op 24-03-2005 00:41 schreef kenhowardau op kenhowardau@y...:> > It is good of you to be concerned for people who have that > particular wrong understanding (that anatta means no kusala can be > developed). Do they honestly think that? Or is their attachment so > great that they are simply not interested in kusala without self? N: I have a feeling that they are afraid of anatta in all its consequences and feel powerless, lost. Also, they think about anatta in a logical way, purely intellectual and then start to draw conclusions. If everything is anatta, how can anyone develop metta, etc. etc. But all these things are real problems for them. K: This reminds me of a topic that came up repeatedly at the Cooran > meeting. We were facing the fact that enlightenment has consequences > that we, as unenlightened folk, find disagreeable: namely, it > proclaims that final extinction of consciousness is nigh. A > Sotapanna has, at most, seven more lives. N: We know it is not near. And when we come to that stage, paññaa is up to that to face it. It is still different form what we think it is at this moment. K: The Dhamma does not teach us to want to be other > than we are. It teaches us to know the present five khandhas. N: That is the solution. We have to be sincere and come to know our true accumulations. This goes also for the problems people have about anatta and dhammas as being beyond control. When we begin to have more understanding of what appears now, there is less opportunity for speculating. What seemed a problem at first just disappears. One begins to turn away from thinking how is this, how is that, because one understands that this is only thinking, a conditioned nama. It may take a while to understand the implications of the word 'only'. Nina. 43567 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 0:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhana & Abhidhamma Pitaka Hi Geoff, op 23-03-2005 23:00 schreef sunnaloka op sunnaloka@y...: > Concerning jhana, I'd also like to find out if it specifically states > in the Abhidhamma Pitaka that jhanacittas cannot have sensory objects > (i.e. does jhana necessarily mean the cessation of visual, auditory, > tactile awareness). I understand that the commentarial position is > that this is indeed the case, but is there any specific canonical > precedent for this position? N: The suttas repeat all the time: aloof from sense pleasures, or detached from sense objects. See M 119 for example, and Book of Analysis, Ch 12. This is the aim of jhana: detachment from sense objects. The meditation subject of ruupajhaana is still connected with materiality, but it is a concept. When someone begins he looks at the kasina but then he acquires a nimitta of it. The meditation subjects of arupajhaana have nothing to do with materiality. Nina. 43568 From: nina Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 0:56am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 147 and Tiika. Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 147 and Tiika. Text Vis.: (xxii)-(xxiii) The wieldy state of the [mental] body is 'wieldiness of body'. The wieldy state of consciousness is 'wieldiness of consciousness'. N: Wieldiness, kammaññataa, is workableness, readiness for wholesome action. Text Vis: They have the characteristic of quieting unwieldiness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. Their function is to crush unwieldiness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. N: The Tiika explains unwieldiness as non-application to daana, siila and other meritorious deeds. It refers to the defilements, beginning with sense desire (kaamacchandaa). Or unwieldiness pertains to the four akusala naamakkhandhas that are striving in that way. When one is overcome by sense desire or aversion, there is mental unwieldiness. Wieldiness is indispensable for any kind of kusala. Text Vis.: They are manifested as success in making (something) an object of the [mental] body and consciousness. N: They assist the citta in experiencing an object with wholesomeness, they cause it to succeed in what is beneficial. Text Vis.: As bringing trust in things that should be trusted in and as bringing susceptibility of application to beneficial acts, like the refining of gold, they should be regarded as opposed to the remaining hindrances, etc., that cause unwieldiness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. N: As to the remaining hindrances, the Tiika refers to sense desire etc., and this implies also the hindrance of ill-will (vyaapaada). The Tiika explains that wieldiness brings confidence in the objects that one should have confidence in since it subdues attachment and since it causes one to proceed with ease. It is opposed in particular to the hindrances of sense desire and aversion. The Tiika elaborates on the simile about the purity of gold. Just as gold that has impurities removed is smooth and can be molded into an ornament, evenso when defilements are removed there can be patient application to beneficial conduct. N: Wieldiness goes together with saddhaa, confidence in the Dhamma, confidence in wholesomeness. Kusala citta is resilient and smooth, also when the circumstances of life are difficult. Kusala citta is wieldy like purified gold and it can be shaped to any kind of kusala for which there is an opportunity. It can apply itself to daana, siila and bhaavanaa. One can have confidence in the benefit of satipa.t.thaana and develop right understanding of any dhamma that appears, even if it is unpleasant or unwholesome. In this way one takes one¹s refuge in the Dhamma with confidence. *** Nina. 43569 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 0:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge 2 Hi Matheesha, op 24-03-2005 01:55 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: I'm reffering to the statements about nibbana > saying it is devoid of this or that (sun moon etc!)-ie- it is stated > in the negative in some places. > Perhaps another point is that the buddha sought a state beyond the > eigth jhana, which is nirodha. Is this not an 'experience' (or more > acurately non experience) of nibbana? N: Attainment of Extinction, nirodha samaapatti: suspension of all mental activity. Anagamis and arahats who also have developed jhaana can reach this. They should have masteries of all the stages of jhaana and devlop insight in between the stages of jhaana. This extinction, nirodha, is not the experience of nibbaana. When that person emerges from it he experiences nibbaana with the phalacitta of the anagami or arahat, depending on the stage of enlightenment he has reached. M: A sothapanna also experiences nibbana for a moment through the > lokuttara citta, even though there isnt a full eradication of > defilements. So nibbana can be experienced before this final act. N: There are four stages of enlightenment and at each stage magga-citta and phalacittas arise. > M: While there is a definite element of mindfulness involved in carrying out the vitakkasanthana sutta instructions, there seems to be an active element of changing > akusala thoughts as well through contemplation etc which is not > visible in the sathpattana (even though it happens via a different > mechanism there). N: As to , yes, also that is citta, a conditioned nama, and it should be object of mindfulness, otherwise one takes that changing of thoughts for self. See Application of Mindfulness of citta. Satipatthana is the Buddha's teaching and even when we read about samatha, also satipatthana is implied. The jhanacitta should be object of mindfulness. There isn't anything that cannot be object of mindfulness. When we remember this, we read all texts in a way different from before. I cannot see satipatthana as a mechanism, I am not sure what you mean. It is to be developed. M: In the gradual teaching there are techniques given for getting rid > of hinderances which seem to have little do with sathipatthana if i > remember correctly. Rather they seem to be done in anticipation of > sathipattana practice. N: It is very meaningful that the hindrances are in the application of mindfulness of dhammas. They are conditioned namas. If they are not objects of mindfulness they can never be eradicated. In samatha they are only temporarily subdued. M: ...The Buddha himself mentions the > dvedhavitakka type of practice, the 'three similies which have never > been thought of before', and a intentional directing the mind > towards nibbana in his training as a bodhisattva. The only > sathipattana type practice he seems to mention is the cemetary > (bhayaberava) meditation as I recall. N: In many of his lives he listened to other Buddhas and developed satipatthana, insight, but not to the stage of gotrabhuu, since he intended to accumulate the perfections to the degree of being able to become a sammaasambuddha. He developed the perfections, and that means, excellent qualities together with satipatthana, with the aim to eliminate defilements. M:I suspect that any practices > which aim at ridding the mind of lobha,dosa and moha are effective > in the path (on a background of jhana which make the > mind 'maleable'). Would that be 'abhihammacially' correct? N: Not any practice. Only vipassana. Those who had accumulations developed jhana as well, but they had to be mindful of jhanacitta, otherwise the wrong view of self could not be eradicated. M: A word on the self view. It is lost at the sothapanna stage. This is > ridding of sakkayaditti. This can happen through vipassana practice - > seeing nama-rupa/hethu-phala etc. However its complete eradication > occurs when one becomes an arahath according to the suttas. This i > believe involves removing entirely from thoughts any 'feeling' of > self N: wrong view is eradicated at the sotapanna stage. But after that there is still conceit, thinking 'oneself' important or clinging to 'oneself' without wrong view. The arahat has eradicated conceit. We have to differentiate between wrong view and conceit. Even when one clearly understands that what we take for self are the five khandhas arising and falling away, one may, because of accumulations, still find these khandhas important. Nina. 43570 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhana & Abhidhamma Pitaka Hi Geoff, --- sunnaloka wrote: > > Anyway, my interest right now is in tracing the source of certain > terms and ideas that arise in the commentarial literature but may not > be specifically stated in the Tipitaka. Of course, not having access > to the complete Tipitaka makes this endeavor somewhat difficult. ... S: Just briefly to say I'm delighted to read your posts and areas of interest and I know Nina and others will appreciate the questions you're raising. I'll look forward to more contact later but look f/w to your threads in the meantime. Btw, welcome to DSG! Pls share a little about your background and keen interest in Dhamma (if you wish). Where do you live? Metta, Sarah ====== 43571 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Frank, Like Howard, I'd like to say, pls don't go back to lurkerland:-) I thought you made many good points in your posts on D.O. (and some I might have questioned if I'd had more time:-). --- Frank wrote: > > I don't know what the abidhamma says, but in either M or S nikaya, > the Buddha says something to the effect of: > > 1) with contact (phassa) as a requisite condition, there is feeling. > 2) with contact as a requisite condition, there is perception (sanna) > 3) with contact as a requisite condition, there is volition (sankhara) > > To me, this implies that once there is contact/phassa/sensory > impingement, feeling+perception+volition occur simultaneously. ... S: Yes, well said. Would you agree that 'once there is' means co-arising with the contact? ... > The critical part of the dependent origination formula referenced so > frequently (with feeling as requisite condition, there is craving), > > So my take on this is that when phassa/contact occurs, you get a > cocktail of the 3 aggregates feeling+volition+perception that arise as > a result. If one has deluded perception+volition, then the result would > be craving or its siamese twin aversion. ... S: Well put. .... >If one has correct perception + > correct volition in that instant, then the dukkha chain breaks down. > Feeling aggregate in an arahant and a worldling in that instant is no > different according to my understanding. .... S: I know what you mean. I was also interested in your post 43402. >F: Formula for the unawakened: 1) raw sensory input 2) contact 3) A deadly cocktail..... 4) .....suffering....< S: Why no sense bases (internal sense media)...and vipaka cittas such as seeing, hearing etc as in the 'more traditional phrasing'? Also, cessation of dukkha when there is right view....I'm not sure we can say this. Certainly there is no dukkha dukkha, but the dukkha as in the 4NT refers to all conditioned dhammas, incl. right view, but excluding lokuttara dhammas, as I understand. Sorry, this is rushed and you weren't asking for my views, but I was interested in your comments on D.O. If you pick this up or continue with the discussions, I hope others will join in and respond. Metta, Sarah p.s TG Good quotes in #43331:-) ================================= 43572 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi TG, --- TGrand458@a... wrote: > Check out Connected Discourses of the Buddha pages 1531 - 1532. The two > > Suttas on Dwelling. Reading these suttas one has to wonder if > perception is a > "universal." ... S: Only just checked out. SN45:11(1) Dwelling, under Maggasamyutta,2 Dwelling Did you read the comy notes on p1894? Interesting ref. to how this sutta is referred to as 'proof' the Buddha taught the Abhidhamma. But that's another thread:-). Later, the feeling conditioned by perception is referring to 2nd jhana - base of nothingness. Then the feeling when perception has subsided is referring to the base of neither perception-nor-nonperception and I'm getting out of my depth without further checking/considering:-). ... > However, in the same suttas mentioned above, the Buddha does say "there > is > feeling with perception as condition." In my way of thinking about > that...an > initial feeling instigated the perception and the perception, in turn, > is a > condition instigating feelings based on that. ... S: See my earlier post to Howard about how they condition each other. I think this sutta is referring to very specific jhana states, but you'd have to ask Nina or someone for more detail. good suttas to raise. Metta, Sarah ====== 43573 From: Charles Perera Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 2:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhana & Abhidhamma Pitaka Nina, I remember a Sutta, but the references elude me. It is about a Brhaman who Visits the Buddha and sees all the Bikkhus in meditation seated erect without moving. He asks the Buddha whether they have all attained "arahathood". Then the Buddha says, there was a time I too believed the same, but these Bikkhus still have vedana(feelings) and sanna(perceptions) in them, it is only when they attain "arahathood" that vedana and percetion will cease. with metta, Charles(Hasituppada) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nina van Gorkom wrote: Hi Geoff, op 23-03-2005 23:00 schreef sunnaloka op sunnaloka@y...: > Concerning jhana, I'd also like to find out if it specifically states > in the Abhidhamma Pitaka that jhanacittas cannot have sensory objects > (i.e. does jhana necessarily mean the cessation of visual, auditory, > tactile awareness). I understand that the commentarial position is > that this is indeed the case, but is there any specific canonical > precedent for this position? N: The suttas repeat all the time: aloof from sense pleasures, or detached from sense objects. See M 119 for example, and Book of Analysis, Ch 12. This is the aim of jhana: detachment from sense objects. The meditation subject of ruupajhaana is still connected with materiality, but it is a concept. When someone begins he looks at the kasina but then he acquires a nimitta of it. The meditation subjects of arupajhaana have nothing to do with materiality. Nina. 43574 From: gazita2002 Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 3:27am Subject: Re: quote Phra Dhammadharo, to Azita Hello Nina, -- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina wrote: > Dear Azita, > When reading Vipassana Letters to Lodewijk at dinner, I came across a quote > from the late Phra Dhammadharo and I thought of you. It is a good > encouragement. > I read first: and mindful in order to accumulate a great deal of kusala, "our kusala". > Instead of right understanding of realities which arise because of their own > conditions our goal becomes the accumulation of kusala. Then we are moving > away from our real goal: detachment from the self through right > understanding.> > Now the quote: > (taken from "Be here now", Adelaide): > > now. We want to get rid of distraction, to be calmer, to be steadier, to be > more organized, to be somehow, other than we are. What is that if it is not > attachment? Azita: this is it in a nutshell! this is what I was feeling, get rid of this distraction, don't like these bad feelings, want it to be different - something other than this....... > > Why can't we just be aware of distraction? But, oh no, we don't like > distraction and there we are, thoroughly distracted from awareness, because > of our attachment to a self who does not want to be distracted. In fact, > this is more an attachment to peace than to understanding. Ask yourself, do > you really want to be aware or do you just want calm? Azita: I suddenly thought of Sacca. to be really truthful to ourselves - do I want peace or do I want to understand any reality which appears, pleasant, painful or otherwise. We just go on > perpetuating the illusion of a self who has got a job to do and who wants to > do it and does not like distraction which gets in the way of doing the job. Azita: I relate very strongly to the above :-( > That is not right understanding at all. It is a cause for more frustration > when distraction arises. When there is satipatthana you are not thrown off > balance by distraction. You are just aware and then there can be awareness > of what appears next. There can be awareness and right understanding of what > has already appeared by conditions, which is not self. Only for one moment > though. And then there may be a whole lot of distraction. We can't do > anything about it, it is anatta. If there is awareness at that moment > something has been done already. It is anatta. > > Developing awareness. I don't think it is what we really want to do at all. > We don't have the inclination, deep down we are not really interested very > often. Only at a moment of right understanding is there any interest, right > interest in the object that appears, in order to see it as it really is. azita: I tend to agree here. I kid myself sometimes that I am interested in dhamma study, occasionally there is a battle within me thinking I 'should' do more study etc. its like forcing something that does not come naturally. We > are always looking for some other object, trying to change it or make it > last. That is attachment, not detachment. > > end quote. > More patience, courage and good cheer, > Nina. Thank you for these reminders, Nina. I was listening to a Dhamma tape this morning before I went to work, it was one I've heard lots of times, but realised that no matter how many times I listen there is always something that I learn from. It really does take lots of patience to just accept the present moment, pleasant or painful. with metta Azita 43575 From: Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Sarah - (Have a pleasant 2-week hiatus, Sarah :-) In a message dated 3/24/05 1:11:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahproctera bbott@y... writes: > While I’m here, you wrote to Frank (#43414) that according to the > Abhidhamma ‘vedana and sa~n~na are universals that *co-occur* in every > mindstate’. You went on to question why we read about the dependence of > sanna on vedana in the texts. Let me add a couple of points which I hope > will help this good question: > > 1. See Guide to Conditional Relations which you have, p24 under sahajata > (conascence)paccaya: > > “Now, if feeling aggregate, one of the four mental aggregates, is taken as > the conditioning state, the remaining three aggregates are the conditioned > states; if perception aggregate is taken as the conditioning state, the > remaining three [mental]aggregates are the conditioned states and so on.â€?. > It goes on to say that if two or three of the [mental] aggregates are > taken as the conditioning states, the remaining two or one [mental] > aggregate are conditioned at that moment by conascence condition. “The > above shows how the four mental aggregates are both conditioning and > conditioned states.â€? > > 2. I recently quoted an extract from Sammohavinodanii (Dispeller) for > Azita which emphasized that the ‘order’ of the khandhas as given was not > an ‘order of arising’, “because the aggregates do not arise in the order > of their successive determining as in the case of ‘the foetus in the first > stage’, etc; nor ‘order of abandoning’.......; nor ‘order of > practice’......But ‘order of teaching’ is appropriate.â€? > > Having stressed this, the passage went on to say how for ‘easy grasping’ , > the Buddha taught “the gross materiality aggregate [first] which is the > object of the eye and so on; and after that the feeling which feels the > materiality experienced as desirable and undesirable; [then] the > perception which grasps the aspects of the object of feeling thus: ‘What > he feels, that he perceives’ (M i 293); [then] formations by means of > perception; [and lastly] consciousness which is their support and which > dominates them.â€? > > So to stress, sanna, vedana and the other cetasikas arising are all > dependent on each other. > ***** > -------------------------------------- Howard: The foregoing doesn't settle the issue for me. The suttic causal asymmetry between vedana and sa~n~na still seems to remain. I find your examples more a matter of Abhidhammic & commentarial *claiming* than explanation, let alone proof. Now it may well be that there really is a symmetry involved, but I don't see that as at all established. -------------------------------------- > Finally, a brief speculation on the sensitive, but important topic you > raised about the fear/panic/terror you and others have experienced when > seemingly on the brink of some insight. It may also be relevant to ‘burned > out’ experiences when reading posts, I don’t know and apologise if this is > off-track. > > Is it possible, do you think, that a) we hear/read/ reflect on something > important and potentially likely to shatter some deeply-held beliefs, > b)there is enough awareness/understanding to recognize the truth of it, > but c) the deeply attachment to our views and ‘safe world’ results in an > immediate kind of very strong reaction – whether of terror or some other > aspect of aversion (dosa)? > ------------------------------------- Howard: Quite possibly it is a matter of threatened beliefs for some folks, but certainly not for all - nor do I think that it being a matter of threatened beliefs is primary. I can tell you that losing any sense of an anchor, is a novel, shocking, and, unless in a state of equanimity, dreadfully terrifying experience. Imagine being hurled into a bottomless abyss with nothing at all to hold onto. (Recall the Buddha's metaphor of being hurled down a turbulent, rushing river, desperately but fruitlessly attempting to grasp the kusa grass growing out from the river banks?) --------------------------------------- > > There is no terror or fear in any insight or understanding at all, but I > think these rapidly following emotional states merely go to point out the > anattaness of processes of cittas which are quite beyond anyone’s wish or > control. After all, who would ever *choose* to experience such reactions? > ---------------------------------------- Howard: Perhaps when the insight is complete, there is "no terror or fear in any insight or understanding at all," but one must be able to *get* to the point of the insight being complete. Possibly multiple experiencing of certain insights will build a familiarity that will enable closer viewing without the blocking terror. ---------------------------------------- > > I think they're very natural and yes, even these states can be known for > what they are, merely fleeting conditioned dhammas too. If these comments > are off-track, just ignore them. I appreciated your sharing of your > experiences (also James's and btw James, I liked your kind post to Azita > very much). > > I’ll greatly look forward to anything you or others add on these or other > topics while we’re away, or before we go (not til Monday actually, but I > need to give my computer arm a good rest at the weekend and get prepared). > > Metta, > > Sarah > ===================== 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) 43576 From: Joop Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 4:25am Subject: Re:Buddha Nature Dear all Back to the initial question: Is it possible to interprete the (Mahayana-)concept 'Buddha-Nature' in Theravada-language, so that this can be used in a fruitful dicsussion between Mahayanists and Theravadins? (It's a normal human habit that when a discussion takes place on an unknown terrain, to get as quick as possible to the known terrain, for example by taking a detail of the original discussion and redefine it in the frame of reference of the known terrain. In this thread many DSG-participants prefer to discuss about an abhidhammic concept like 'lokuttaracitta', and not about the concept 'Buddha- Nature; I do understand that) Included two quotes about this question Metta Joop In the essay "The self and the person as treated in some Buddhist texts. (part 1)" Mitchiko Ishigami-Iagolnitzer analyses Eraly Buddhist, Theravada and Mahayana- (Zen-) texts. (source: http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-EPT/mitch.htm) His conclusion: "We have seen how the self and the person have been treated in some Buddhist texts of different periods and how the notions concerning them have evolved. But we notice two constant tendencies: men's attachment to the individual and egotistic self is always discouraged, while their effort to find out their true self (the Buddha Nature) and to realise it (Nirvana) is encouraged, this self being considered, nevertheless, void of substance. This distinction between two selves is merely a skilful way of leading people to Nirvana." DSG is not the only Forum in which this topic is discussed. From E- Sangha I quote some message about it: Adamabsurd: I have been studying the Pali texts and Theravada commentaries for quite some time now, but have yet to come across any mention of Buddha Nature, or anything like Dharma-kaya. It seems these are foreign to Theravada and are not part of Buddha's original teaching. Is this correct, or does Theravada actually teach about Buddha Nature? BodhiTraveler These teachings are compeltely foreign to the theravada tradition. The teachings of Buddha Nature and the Dharmakaya, like most early Mahayana teachings, are actually derived from differing interpretations of some Pali texts. For example, the attitude that it is possible for all beings to achieve nibbana is present in theravada. However, the term 'Buddha Nature' comes loaded with other connotations. From my understanding [and I am not a Mahayana practitioner], Buddha nature is about the potential to become a buddha, and thus to 'merge' with the Dharmakaya. According to Theravada, it's really a question of the proper use of terms. As long as we are having this conversation about Buddhism, no one can be a Buddha, as the main characteristic of a Buddha is that he discovers the dhamma on his own. In addition, the teaching on Dharmakaya is taken from a very specific Pali Sutta. On one occasion, a devout lay follower was dying, and was much too sick to travel to see the Buddha, whom he had never seen and paid his respects to. Eventually, his plight made it's way up to the Buddha himself, and he stated that seeing him personally was not an issue since 'whoever sees the dhamma, sees me'. Now, the traditional interpretation is that the buddha was placing a higher value on following the dhamma than on seeing him personally. This was probably another way to discourage devotionalism to The Buddha's personage. The Mahayanists took this and, in my opinion, took it out of context and very literally, drawing the conclusion that 'Whoever sees the dhamma, sees me' means that the buddha and the dhamma are actually one and the same, that the buddha is some sort of physical manifestation of the dhamma. Adamabsurd Thanks for the confirmation, BodhiTraveler. I hear the term "Buddha Nature", and to be honest, it sounds like a very subtle self-theory, particularly as it uses the term "Nature", and because it is said to be "inherent" in all beings. It would seem more likely that all beings ultimately have "Arahant Potential", while only a few exceptional beings who start their spiritual quest under the right (rare) circumstances (eg start their spiritual journey already having great compassion and generousity etc) actually have "Buddha Potential". That's just my take. Anders Honore Bodhitraveler, that is an almost absurd misrepresentation of not only the methodology of Mahayana but also its understanding of the Dhamma. For starters, Buddhanature, tathagatagarbha in sanskrit (literally 'seed of Tathagata' a somewhat different connotation to 'Buddha-nature' which was a Chinese transliteration), denotes a connotation not explicit in the Pali Canon for sure: Mainly that the Tathagata (ie the fully enlightened being) is something that lies intrinsic in the mind (its fundamental nature, ie it is not something we become, but something we come to realise). The Pali Canon makes clear that the Tathagata is NOT the kandhas (which means that there is way which the tathagatagarbha could be interpreted as any kind of physical manifestation of the Dhamma) and its doctrine is consistent with this as well as the tathagata not being found apart from the kandhas (The Yogacara certainly backs this up). What follows from this is that the Tathagata is the same as the Dharmakaya, or that the Tathagata is in fact the very same as Nibbana. Something which is not at all implausible when looking at the various discussions of the nature of the Tathagata and why common classifications do not apply to it (ie, it is of a transcendent nature much like Nibbana), specifically in relation to the fate of the Tathagata after death. There are other suttas in the Pali Canon which point to the intrinsic purity of the mind (tathagatagarbha), such as the Pabhassara Sutta: "Luminous, monks, is the mind.[1] And it is defiled by incoming defilements." {I,v,9} "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements." {I,v,10} "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person -- there is no development of the mind." {I,vi,1} "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones -- there is development of the mind." {I,vi,2} …. boom_cat Any attempt in reconciling the Buddha Nature with the Theravadan standpoint will be very difficult. There are many materials in Mahayana schools that explain the Buddha Nature, the Dharmakaya and Tathagatagarbha, many of which deal with very very fine philosophical issues, thing is, no matter how fine the words are, as soon as one starts to talk about those things with words, it becomes coarse immediately. It is always taken for meaning there is either a self or no self, which, in the view of those who follow the Nikayas, is simply unspeakable--it goes beyond the level of concept and therefore it is not possible to talk about it without getting one-sided (the favour quote tells us that the Buddha did not encourage his disciples to dive into such questions). Anyway, the Buddha Nature is but one way of expressing the unspeakable. Some call it a positive expression of the not-selfness. So we could say that it is just one side of the coin. It is said that the Buddha Nature is the luminosity that is present in everyone at every present moment, and when enlightenment is attained it is this luminosity that completely reveals itself. Looking from this way we can say the Buddha Nature is merely a function which is common to all sentient beings but it only fully reveals itself only when the perfect enlightenment is attained, but it does not imply a self (nor a 'no self'). It is our deluded mind that fabricates a self from which the dualism between 'self' and 'no self' also derives. The later scholars had to come up with answers like this when non- Buddhists started to question Buddhist thoughts. Their questions are not totally absurd, for instance, they asked, if nibbana is not-self, then what's the difference between a person who realises it and a stone? To them, when not-selfness is realised, there has to be some kind of realising, some kind of knowing, otherwise it does not make any sense. The Buddha Nature may sound as if there is an independent entity called the knower, although it is explained very clearly that it is not the case at all, some of us will still be not pleased with the answer. Some will still continue to ask, if the luminosity is not a knower, then who knows all the things including the voidness of the things? Therefore it still does not make us totally happy, although these are perhaps the best conceptual answers we can get. Just need to bear into mind the Buddha taught a lot of things, some of them even sound contradictory. When we know the full picture is beyond the words, we shall know the words are fine as reference points but still not to be taken literally. It would be more interesting to look at the functional implication of the Buddha Nature, such as, how does it relates to one's practice-- and how does this relates to the Theravadan teachings. I am certain this will be much more beneficial than merely focusing on 'is it really a saying can be found from the Pali Canon' or any angle similar to that. Anders Honore : Hello Bodhitraveler, You do have a good point. Most Theravadans do not feel it is reconcilable. The notable exceptions nowadays is the Thai Forest tradition started by Ajahn Mun. His principle heir, Ajahn Boowa for instance talks about the Unborn Citta, a notion many Theravadans would find heretical. I am not familiar with how the scene is in Sri Lanka but I get the impression from Burma that they are primarily abidhammists (as are most not of the forest vtradition in Thailand). Another reformator like Ajahn Buddhadasa also found the Pali Canon and the Mahayana Sutras compatible. Ajahn Buddhadasa I feel is a significant character to bring the debate, as he did something few would dare at the time: Critisise the Abidhamma. Basically, he debunked it almost entirely, which is quite something since it in most Theravada circles consired one of the baskets of the Buddha's teachings. Though there is far from agreement on the issue, at leats he has opened up the discussion to a point where one can begin to talk about Theravada Buddhism without abidhammist theory. Ajahn Mun did not critisise the Abidhamma as such as far as I am aware, but certainly did critisise a lot of the doctrines extrapolated from it as well. Others have also voiced their critique on both the Abidhamma and the Commentaires, both of which are exponents of a Dhamma that is not compatible with the Mahayana. What I find interesting about this is that though the Mahayana and its compatability with the Pali Canon has been entirely irrelevant to the debate, most of those who have argued against it have been primarily meditation monks whose teachings in general are consistent with what is taught in the Mahayana as well. The curious implication of the Mahayana is of course that the Dhamma doesn't change at all. The these teachings are implicit already in the Pali Canon and it is merely its expression that changes. 43577 From: Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhsg translations on Samvegga Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 3/24/05 3:08:55 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > p.s I know that both of you and others will be glad to hear that we > received a nice note from Victor the other day. He doesn’t want to post it > on list, but I think I can summarise by saying he greatly appreciates his > active time on DSG (even though it was ‘heated’ at times), he’s been > living at Metta Forest Monastery (under Ven Thanissararo, I believe) for > the last 8 months, I believe as a samanera and expects to be fully > ordaining there in July. He has very limited internet access, just once a > week at a library when he tries to check in on us. He also gave this link > for if anyone has any questions anytime for Ven Thanissaro or “Tan Ajaan > Geoffâ€? as he referred to him: > http://www.mettaforest.org/VisitInfo.htm > ==================== Wow, how wonderful! Should you be in further contact with Victor, please send him my congratulations and very warmest wishes! 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) 43578 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions OK ----- Original Message ----- From: Joop To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Can you start out by explaining what you mean by rupa and nama? Hi Charles No. Because my remark was a mixture of joke and seriousness And because it deviates us more from the topic of the thread: having no opinions Joop 43579 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 2:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Ken ------------------ KH:> > There is only the present moment." ------------------ C: > So beings can't have existed in the past? --------------------------------- KH: When you consider a 'being' as the momentarily existing five khandhas, then beings have certainly existed in the past. But those beings no longer exist. There are only the present five khandhas. ...................... When you make this claim ("as the momentarily existing five khandhas"), you are say that beings don't change, they just cease to exist. Is this what you mean? ****************************************** C: > And, the future doesn't exit? ---------------------------------------------- k: No. Nor has it ever. ...................................... This is good, but it would have been better to say the future exist only as a concept, an idea. ****************************** k: >> ... after a billionth of a second ... ---------------------------------- C: > Have you experience this, or do you not experience? When you look in the mirror in the morning, do your image disappear after a billionth of a second, or a moment? ---------------------------------- K: An image in the mirror is a concept and, as such, it has no actual existence at all. The only ultimately real thing that meets the eye is visible object, and it lasts for one moment of rupa. Seeing consciousness, which experiences visible object, lasts for one moment of nama. ..................................... I would have to disagree with you, when you say, "An image in the mirror is a concept and, as such, it has no actual existence at all." and I don't understand what you mean by: "The only ultimately real thing that meets the eye is visible object, and it lasts for one moment of rupa. Seeing consciousness, which experiences visible object, lasts for one moment of nama." Do you believe that there are things that you can sense that are not real, even in the mind? and do you believe that thoughts and ideas (things in the mind) are not real? Maybe you should list/define what you think is real. *************************** C: > In ultimate reality there is space, emptiness, but you may not find it, unless you search for the essence. ---------------------------- K: You and I are approaching the Dhamma from different perspectives and so I don't see the meaning you obviously see in the above. According to the Theravada teaching, a dhamma is empty of self but it is not nothingness. ........................................... You don't see the meaning because: We are not sharing the same definition of "emptiness," "essence," and "self." However we both are relying on the Theravada teaching to explain/substantiate our definitions. Your problem is that you don't seem to understand the word "essence" from a Buddhist or Hindu perspective. I think you would define the word as "The Self" (a sutra teaching/summary) where I would define the word as: "The unchanging: attman, soul, the uncompounded part that gives you the whole, etc..." (an abidharmic teaching/more detailed). These things don't exist, so yes they are nothingness or nibbia (I can't spell). In this case, my goal was to try and help expand your definition of "Self," but I realize now that may be you don't need a new definition yet. That would depend on your practice. Do you see the Abidharma as a detailed scholastic endeavor only, a method for removing ... from the mind, or both? *************************** KH: > > and moments of thought creation (conceptualizing). In many of those moments, the mental factor known as lobar has arisen, performed its function (of attachment to its object) and fallen away. > > .................................... Now this is good/I agree with, I think. I am not sure what you mean by " lobar." And instead of "fallen away," I would say, "will, if not has already, change/transformed." §§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§ K: I have noticed lately that your spell-checker changes my spellings - and not always for the better. :-) .................................... Thanks a lot for the warning, please help me to catch the changes. §§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§ KH: > > Conditioned reality is the five khandhas as they arise in this present, fleeting moment. They can arise in one of six ways, or, as the Buddha said, "as one of the six worlds." There is one world for each of the six kinds of consciousness - seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and mentally cognizing. In a moment of seeing (the eye world) the ----------------------------- C: > Have you experienced this, and how would you describe that experience? --------------------------------- K: According to the Buddha, this is all I ever really experience. The best way of describing it would be to cut and paste from the Theravada texts. Or, I could just continue with what I have been doing - putting my understanding of those texts into my own words. ...................................... This doesn't answer the question, but that is OK, I did not think you could answer it. So you have accept these specific teaching by faith? ******************************** KH: > > they exist for only the briefest possible moment. Even the Eight-fold Path is just a fleeting moment in which the five khandhas exist in their superabundance form. ------------------------------ C: > how have you experienced these briefest possible moments? ------------- k: As I have explained, I experience them all the time - as moments of seeing or hearing etc. But I think you must be asking which parts (if any) of the teaching have I personally verified. Is that of any relevance? Where did the Buddha say we should divide the Dhamma into two sections - the parts we have personally verified and the parts we have not? If anything, the opposite is true: concepts of self should be excluded from our understanding. ...................................... You said: "as moments of seeing or hearing etc." This answers the question, but then, are those moments for a billionth of a second or do they vary (in terms of how long they last); and is that based on experience or teaching? And the relevance will be explained in the next post if you remind me of the question ("Where did the Buddha say we should divide the Dhamma into two sections - the parts we have personally verified and the parts we have not?"). We have a good flow going and I don't want you to get caught by a small off the track detail. ******************************** C: > How have you experience the ending of your existence? ---------------- K: According to the Abhidhamma, the falling away of a conditioned nama or rupa can be directly known, but only by well-developed panna. So too can its arising and persistence. ...................................... This doesn't answer the question, but that is OK, I did not think you could answer it. So you accept these specific teaching by faith? CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- <.....> 43580 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 2:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Andrew T, They believed (or were deceived into thinking) that by eliminating/... the Jews, it would free the world (their world) from all the suffering that Jews cause {in their world --- the sick-people believe the Jews were the root cause of suffering}. However, this is no different than when Buddhist killers (like in southeast Asia) have, in the past, killed and justified it by the "no-self doctrine -- there is no you no me, there is no killing only death caused by karma." Some, not all, of the medical experiments has worked its way into the medical community (there was a lot of "hoopla" about dismissing all the experiments, but in-reality the data is used (I herd that it has even referenced sometimes) - but to most scientists it is in bad taste to use, especially where the "SICK-people" did not use the scientific method. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Andrew <.....> Hello Matthew and others interested in this thread. Re Matthew's first point above, can somebody tell me whether or not the Nazi medical experiments on Jewish concentration camp interns were science and, if so, how they were "involved in liberation from suffering"? Andrew T 43581 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 2:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Me too, It teaches the science of mind, the first form/school of psychology. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: TGrand458@a... <...> Hi Evan No disrespect intended for anyone and my comments were not directed toward you...in fact I don't think I read a post by you on this subject. But I have seen a lot of anti-science sentiment in Buddhist chat rooms and the like. I know several highly educated Sri Lankan Theravdin monks who consider Buddhism to be a science. TG <....> 43582 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 4:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi, Joop Joop wrote: >I think that's too easy said, Jon >When an opinion is not 'kept' by rupa; is it then kept by nama? I >don't think so. >An opinion is a concept, kept in somebody's brains. That in rupa, in >livinf rupa, feed by oxygen in the blood, but still rupa. > > The dhamma explanation, as I understand it, would not see an opinion as being kept in a person's brain. "An opinion" merely refers to a way of thinking about something. The 'reality' of that moment is the consciousness that thinks, but that consciousness is not 'kept' anywhere at other times. Jon 43583 From: Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 0:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi, Jon (and Joop) - In a message dated 3/24/05 8:08:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > The dhamma explanation, as I understand it, would not see an opinion as > being kept in a person's brain. "An opinion" merely refers to a way of > thinking about something. The 'reality' of that moment is the > consciousness that thinks, but that consciousness is not 'kept' anywhere > at other times. > > Jon > ================== I agree with you Jon. The distinction is one of process/operation versus substance. There occurs "opinion-ing", but nowhere are there to be found "opinions". 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) 43584 From: Matthew Miller Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19am Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue TG wrote: > > But God help science when it comes to Western Buddhists. ;-) > It usually is in for a trashing. > One of the things that first attracted me to Buddhism was the Dalai Lama's stated position on science: "If the words of the Buddha and the findings of modern science contradict each other, then the former have to go." That really impressed me. Can you imagine the Pope or some Ayatollah saying the same thing about the Bible or the Koran? Later I discovered that Buddhism, like every religion, has its share of Sutta-thumping Fundamentalists. Matthew 43585 From: Matthew Miller Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 7:42am Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Rob wrote: > the Buddha clearly defined the > scope of the Dhamma and clearly identified what was not within the > scope of the Dhamma: > "Why have I left [answers to speculative questions] undeclared? > Because it is unbeneficial, it does not belong to the fundamentals > of the holy life, it does not lead to disenchantment, to > dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to > enlightenment, to Nibbana. Yes, but in practice, it is not always easy to identify at the outset which questions will be "beneficial" and which will not. Here's an analogy: in science, we have both basic science and applied science. Applied science seeks practical knowledge with everyday uses. You might say, it only asks questions that are clearly "beneficial." But there is also what we call "basic science" research. This research furthers our knowledge of how the world works, but does not have any immediately obvious practical application. Nevertheless, most breakthroughs in applied science are built on the foundation of this basic science. So I think that the "scope of dhamma" and what is or is not a beneficial question is not so clearly defined. Matthew 43586 From: Andrew Levin Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 9:06am Subject: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Andrew L, > > > --- Andrew Levin wrote: > > OK so then let me ask: What is sati? And are you saying reflecting on > > a particular nama or rupa can condition sati for that bit? That holds > > pretty good implications for the course of practise. > ... > S: As you know, sati arises with all wholesome kinds of consciousness. It > is the `door-keeper?which guards the senses and does not `allow the > floating away of moral states?(Atthasalini). When there is wise > reflection, sati must be there at those moments, conditioning more wise > reflection in future and also satipatthana, if it is right reflection on > presently arising dhammas. This is how pariyatti can condition patipatti > and eventually pativedha. I do not know that sati arises with all kinds of wholesome consciousness, at all. I know that it can maintain wholesome states and prevent negative, unwholesome states but it is new to me that it arises with all wholesome states. If this is true. It seems to me that if wise reflection can condition sati, or reflecting on the nature of a nama or rupa after discussion about it or reading the dhamma, it is not such a long jump to say that sati can be conditioned intentionally, through sitting meditation. At the least, wholesome deeds conditioning sati can get a good portion of it going. What other methods are there for the arising of sati, that you acknowledge, and do I get you right, that it is your position that sati can be mindful of nama and rupa by discussing the nature of that particular nama or rupa? This would seem to contradict your position that we have to wait for whichever nama and rupa comes to the fore on any given occasion to be mindful of it. There is some correlation here with your view and mine, for instance, if wrong views arise, or moha or dosa, it is said (in ADL, and by inference I assume that you agree with this stance) that being mindful of it is the way to eradicate these defilements. Please describe further how the sati that you describe can be cultivated and what other function(s) it has. Certainly one moment of sati conditions the next, but there must be an initial cause. I am willing to listen to more views on this because I have had what seems like sati of a diffeferent nature arise at some times but not others (ie, "30 minutes of sati in a day? You're a rich man" as you quoted at one point in time.). > .... > <...> ***** > >The Buddha really described wrong view as > > more of a general view of things, even conventionally using the term > > 'beings' numerous times in it. > .... > S: Let's be clear that when the Buddha referred to wrong views, he wasn't > talking about wrong views about the weather, about scientific theories, > about numbers of Abhidhamma classifications, about the details of brahma > realms, but about wrong views concerning the 6 worlds presently arising > and appearing, i.e about the khandhas or namas and rupas as being > conditioning, impermanent, unsatisfactory and void of any self. > ***** > "The Perfect One is free from any theory (ditthigata), for the Perfect One > has seen what corporeality is, and how it arises and passes away. He has > seen what feeling ... perception ... mental formations ... consciousness > are, and how they arise and pass away. Therefore I say that the Perfect > One has won complete deliverance through the extinction, fading away, > disappearance, rejection and casting out of all imaginings and > conjectures, of all inclination to the 'vain-glory of 'I' and 'mine." (M. > 72). Certainly right view does not encompass complex theories about the detailed workings of worlds, but it has been said that right view should include knowledge that beings are reborn spontaneously, and or in accordance with their deeds (kamma & vipaka) and it should include knowledge of suffering and its origin, cessation, and way to practise for its cessation (ie, reflection on the four noble truths, mundane right view.) I would like to discuss this more with you, as right view is the first path factor that should be cultivated in the Noble Eightfold Path, and in one of the books I am reading to foster right view, ("The Four Noble Truths" by Francis Story) the author talks about the psychological mechanism whereby suffering is suppressed from coming to the fore of our consciousness and we therefore take refuge in pleasure and pleasurable experiences. I have seen suffering of other people and recognized my own, but reflecting on this, and the principles of kamma, to create something that can qualify as right view, is not an easy task. > ***** > > That the type of wrong view you describe is a hindrance to practise at > > all times, I am not decided on yet. > ... > S: Wrong view is always a hindrance to practice when it arises. At such > moments of wrong view, the practice has to be wrong, i.e > silabbata-paramasa (attachment to rites and rituals). Of course this can > arise at any time, even whilst reflecting on `a particular nama or rupa? > For example, one might have the idea at such a time that focusing on > visible object is the way to develop awareness of visible object. It can > be very subtle. > ... I again would disagree that wrong view of self is the cause of all wrong views. I have detailed elsewhere how wrong view of self can be countered through perception of impermanence, but have said I don't see it as necessary to the type of mundane right view that which constitute right view as a path factor. I would think that the understanding that there are fruit and result of good and bad actions, a moral law of causality, is enough to have one perform meritorious deeds and spur the other path factors on. Additionally, while I do see the danger in wrong view of self leading to wrong practise, I think there is a chance that we may not be able to escape wrong view of self leading to attachment to rites and rituals until that fetter, the deeply ingrained view of self, is eradicated by practise still tainted with that view of self. > >.I have seen a lot leading one to > > use the terms 'you' and 'being' suggesting a view of self to do some > > rudimentary practise tasks, and I really think the Buddha taught that > > there are some things we can consciously decide to do. > ... > S: The Buddha taught about all dhammas (realities) as being anatta. > Whatever language he used according to what was appropriate, there is > never any self that can practice or decide to do anything. No, but if you allow for causes and conditions to create right view, that the desire to cultivate sati via sitting meditation, can be a cause for the arising of sati through actual sitting meditation, does not seem unfeasible to me. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ========= Yours in mischief, Andrew Levin 43587 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 10:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhsg translations on Samvegga Dear Sarah, Thank you, I followed the Pali. After this passage it explains about the four right efforts, viriya.m aarabhati... Very good text. Nina. op 24-03-2005 09:07 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...:> Ok, an example from the very end of the PTS translation, p 332 as this is > where I’m looking. On Samvegga as it’s relevant: > > 1376. Sa.mvegoti– jaatibhaya.m jaraabhaya.m byaadhibhaya.m mara.nabhaya.m. > Sa.mvejaniya.m [sa.mvejaniiya.m (sii.)] .thaananti– jaati jaraa byaadhi > mara.na.m. 43588 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 11:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhana & Abhidhamma Pitaka Dear Charles, op 24-03-2005 11:04 schreef Charles Perera op hasituppada@y...: > I remember a Sutta, but the references elude me. It is about a Brhaman who > Visits the Buddha and sees all the Bikkhus in meditation seated erect without > moving. He asks the Buddha whether they have all attained "arahathood". Then > the Buddha says, there was a time I too believed the same, but these Bikkhus > still have vedana(feelings) and sanna(perceptions) in them, it is only when > they attain "arahathood" that vedana and percetion will cease. N: It must be a special case of jhana and nirodha. Anagamis and arahats can attain if they also are proficient in jhana. But I cannot remember I have read the conversation you quote. Nina. 43589 From: Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 8:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew, All In a message dated 3/24/2005 6:29:24 AM Pacific Standard Time, bupleurum@y... writes: TG wrote: > > But God help science when it comes to Western Buddhists. ;-) > It usually is in for a trashing. > One of the things that first attracted me to Buddhism was the Dalai Lama's stated position on science: "If the words of the Buddha and the findings of modern science contradict each other, then the former have to go." That really impressed me. Can you imagine the Pope or some Ayatollah saying the same thing about the Bible or the Koran? Later I discovered that Buddhism, like every religion, has its share of Sutta-thumping Fundamentalists. Matthew TG That is a very impressive statement from the Dalai Lama. This shows his confidence that a correct investigation of actuality by science, or Buddha, or any other discipline, will draw the same conclusions. They have to. Surely scientific knowledge is incomplete and addresses many things Buddhism is not interested in addressing and vice versa. But the things that they commonly address and their expressions of principles of 'actualities of nature' are quite capable of overlapping seamlessly. This is by no means to equate science and Buddhism. Buddhism is infinitely more valuable IMO. But that's not to say science is wrong or garbage. I think science, like the Abhidhamma, can be usefully used (to a certain extent) in deeping the understanding of the Buddha's teachings in the Sutta Pitaka. TG 43590 From: Andrew Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 3:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > > Might be something to do with > > the inherent ethical direction-finder you perceive in social > > primates. Would you care to elaborate on that aspect? Is it just > > plain self-interest? > > > > Oh, no. Not "plain self interest." Within primate societies, we see > the patterns of communal moral behavior taht we do in human societies > -- sharing, protection, sympathy,guilt, reciprocity, altruism, > obligation, expectations, rules, and community concern. > > For more info, see the book "Good Natured: The Origins of Right and > Wrong in Humans and Other Animals" by primatologist Frans De Waal: > > http://tinyurl.com/3jktx > > De Waal's work, as well as that of other primatologists and > anthropologists, gives strong evidence against the old canard that > humanity needs religion to be good. The foundations of ethical > behavior not only predate the world's major religions; they also > predate the rise of Homo sapiens. Hi Matthew Thanks for the link. I will explore it when I get time. I wasn't actually raising that "old canard" as you put it. When I did undergrad anthropology, it was my impression that the de Waal type theories all still rested upon "self view" (mostly in the sense of passing on genes) i.e. that there had to be a pay-off in evolutionary terms for "ethical behaviour". That is why I suspected that your inner ethical direction-finder was essentially a form of self-view and/or a type of clinging in Dhamma terms. Was I right? Hot? Warm? Cold? Best wishes Andrew T 43591 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 3:34pm Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi, Howard Although we disagree on the issue of being/not being object of consciousness, we do agree on the distinction to be made, as you do here, between (a) moments when there is a dhamma as object of consciousness and (b) moments of thinking, remembering etc. when there is not. Your comments on this aspect are in agreement with my understanding of the teachings, that at a moment of thinking, remembering, etc. only the consciousness itself (and not the 'thoughts' or matters conceived of) may be the object of awareness/insight should it arise. This distinguishes a moment of thinking, remembering, etc. from a moment when there is a dhamma as object of consciousness (which of course include the moments of sense-door consciousness). In the latter case, either the consciousness itself or the object of that consciousness could be the object of arising awareness/insight. upasaka@a... wrote: >Hi, Jon - >... > > > As regards "objects", if one means by "object" either an actual >phenomenon (paramattha dhamma) that is objective content of consciousness OR what >merely *seems* to be such, like a tree or house or memory, but does not >actually exist, then I would agree to saying that there is always an object of >consciousness. As I see it, when we are "remembering something" or "seeing a tree", >there is no actual thing/event remembered or cognized, and my preference in >speaking literally/ultimately would be to say that there really is no object >present, but conventionally there is - that is, it is a covention to say that >there is an object of consciousness present. And, as you know, I have no problem >with figurative speech so long as one is aware that this is what one is using. > > In my view, the question of whether consciousness has an object is a different question from the question you pose here of whether 'there really is an object present'. In the former case we are talking about a relationship, specifically a subject/object relationship, whereas in the latter case we must be talking about an 'actual dhamma' or thing. By 'object of consciousness' I refer simply to what is 'experienced' by consciousness at that moment. In the context of the consciousness that thinks, the 'object of consciousness' is the thought that is conceived of. The thought is 'object of consciousness' but not 'an object present'. Jon 43592 From: Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 11:02am Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi, Jon - In a message dated 3/24/05 6:54:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > In my view, the question of whether consciousness has an object is a > different question from the question you pose here of whether 'there > really is an object present'. In the former case we are talking about a > relationship, specifically a subject/object relationship, whereas in the > latter case we must be talking about an 'actual dhamma' or thing. > > By 'object of consciousness' I refer simply to what is 'experienced' by > consciousness at that moment. In the context of the consciousness that > thinks, the 'object of consciousness' is the thought that is conceived > of. The thought is 'object of consciousness' but not 'an object present'. > ===================== I really do understand you. Actually, I think you are being more content with conventional speech in this case than I am! How's that for amusing?!! ;-)) As you say earlier in your post Jon [not quoted here by me] except for "object" terminology, we are very much in agreement on this subject matter. 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) 43593 From: matheesha Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 4:15pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge 2 Hi Nina, >N: This extinction, nirodha, is not > the experience of nibbaana. M: Any ideas how they differ? Is nirodha lokuttara? >N:When that person emerges from it he experiences > nibbaana with the phalacitta of the anagami or arahat M: This is new to me. Does this mean that if a sakadagami, in training to become an anagami, experiences nirodha for the first time, when coming out of this nirodha will experience phalacitta and become an anagami? > N: As to contemplation...>, yes, also that is citta, a conditioned nama, and it > should be object of mindfulness, otherwise one takes that changing of > thoughts for self. M: Yes, very tricky and applies to all practices really...My teacher uses a series of directed vipassana techniques aimed at identifying 1) nama-rupa, then 2) their causal connection to each other and then 3) the arising and passing away of these cause and effect nama-rupa. The Self view is usually abandoned between 1 and 3 in the trainees. The last technique 4) is anapanasathi -seeing arising and passing away of the breath (similar to the fourth tetrad of the anapanasathi sutta in that impermenence is viewed). I suspect he used the last one because the joining vipassana with samatha at this point has a better chance of giving rise to aanantharika samadhi. Unfortunately he has passed away and why he chose these in this order is not clear. Any ideas are welcome. I suspect that there is a link to the saptha-visuddi/vipassana nana. N:> I cannot see satipatthana as a mechanism, I am not sure what you mean. It is > to be developed. M: Sathi--> develop insight into the thilakkana/udaya-vya nana-- >nibbida (?), letting go based on that insight ie- erradication of craving delusion, craving and aversion (based on maggacitta)-- >vimukthi/release. This is the mechanism behind the sathipattana if Im not mistaken. However vitakkasanthana sutta seems to be talking about a more active/direct method of identifying lobha,dosa,moha and getting rid of them. That also mentions the possibility of becoming an arahath with mastery over thought. I'm wondering if there are other paths to maggacitta rather than through udaya-vya which doesnt seem to be the style of vitakkasanthana practice which seems to use more direct and pointed action as and when required rather than prolonged mindfulness. metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Matheesha, > op 24-03-2005 01:55 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: > I'm reffering to the statements about nibbana > > saying it is devoid of this or that (sun moon etc!)-ie- it is stated > > in the negative in some places. > > Perhaps another point is that the buddha sought a state beyond the > > eigth jhana, which is nirodha. Is this not an 'experience' (or more > > acurately non experience) of nibbana? > N: Attainment of Extinction, nirodha samaapatti: suspension of all mental > activity. Anagamis and arahats who also have developed jhaana can reach > this. They should have masteries of all the stages of jhaana and devlop > insight in between the stages of jhaana. This extinction, nirodha, is not > the experience of nibbaana. When that person emerges from it he experiences > nibbaana with the phalacitta of the anagami or arahat, depending on the > stage of enlightenment he has reached. > > M: A sothapanna also experiences nibbana for a moment through the > > lokuttara citta, even though there isnt a full eradication of > > defilements. So nibbana can be experienced before this final act. > N: There are four stages of enlightenment and at each stage magga- citta and > phalacittas arise. > > > M: While there is a definite element of mindfulness involved in carrying out > the vitakkasanthana sutta instructions, there seems to be an active element > of changing > > akusala thoughts as well through contemplation etc which is not > > visible in the sathpattana (even though it happens via a different > > mechanism there). > N: As to contemplation...>, yes, also that is citta, a conditioned nama, and it > should be object of mindfulness, otherwise one takes that changing of > thoughts for self. See Application of Mindfulness of citta. > Satipatthana is the Buddha's teaching and even when we read about samatha, > also satipatthana is implied. The jhanacitta should be object of > mindfulness. There isn't anything that cannot be object of mindfulness. When > we remember this, we read all texts in a way different from before. > I cannot see satipatthana as a mechanism, I am not sure what you mean. It is > to be developed. > M: In the gradual teaching there are techniques given for getting rid > > of hinderances which seem to have little do with sathipatthana if i > > remember correctly. Rather they seem to be done in anticipation of > > sathipattana practice. > N: It is very meaningful that the hindrances are in the application of > mindfulness of dhammas. They are conditioned namas. If they are not objects > of mindfulness they can never be eradicated. > In samatha they are only temporarily subdued. > M: ...The Buddha himself mentions the > > dvedhavitakka type of practice, the 'three similies which have never > > been thought of before', and a intentional directing the mind > > towards nibbana in his training as a bodhisattva. The only > > sathipattana type practice he seems to mention is the cemetary > > (bhayaberava) meditation as I recall. > N: In many of his lives he listened to other Buddhas and developed > satipatthana, insight, but not to the stage of gotrabhuu, since he intended > to accumulate the perfections to the degree of being able to become a > sammaasambuddha. > He developed the perfections, and that means, excellent qualities together > with satipatthana, with the aim to eliminate defilements. > > M:I suspect that any practices > > which aim at ridding the mind of lobha,dosa and moha are effective > > in the path (on a background of jhana which make the > > mind 'maleable'). Would that be 'abhihammacially' correct? > N: Not any practice. Only vipassana. Those who had accumulations developed > jhana as well, but they had to be mindful of jhanacitta, otherwise the wrong > view of self could not be eradicated. > M: A word on the self view. It is lost at the sothapanna stage. This is > > ridding of sakkayaditti. This can happen through vipassana practice - > > seeing nama-rupa/hethu-phala etc. However its complete eradication > > occurs when one becomes an arahath according to the suttas. This i > > believe involves removing entirely from thoughts any 'feeling' of > > self > N: wrong view is eradicated at the sotapanna stage. But after that there is > still conceit, thinking 'oneself' important or clinging to 'oneself' without > wrong view. The arahat has eradicated conceit. We have to differentiate > between wrong view and conceit. Even when one clearly understands that what > we take for self are the five khandhas arising and falling away, one may, > because of accumulations, still find these khandhas important. > Nina. 43594 From: Matthew Miller Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Andrew: > When I did > undergrad anthropology, it was my impression that the de Waal type > theories all still rested upon "self view" (mostly in the sense of > passing on genes) i.e. that there had to be a pay-off in > evolutionary terms for "ethical behaviour". That is why I > suspected that your inner ethical direction-finder was > essentially a form of self-view and/or a type of clinging > in Dhamma terms. > > Was I right? Hot? Warm? Cold? > I'm not talking about my own personal "inner ethical direction-finder. " I'm looking at the evidence from evolutionary biology to see what the roots of moral behavior in homo sapiens might be. As a species, our moral behavior is definitely instinctual. To say that this instinct derives from the "self view" of individuals does not account for all of the evidence, and reflects an earlier more primitive concept of Darwinism. For example, it does not account for phenomena such as kin selection and eusociality, where organisms act against their individual interests (in the sense of health, safety or personal reproduction). Have you read Dawkins's "The Selfish Gene"? Despite the title (which should prick any good Buddhist's ears), it does not actually argue that genes somehow have selfish motives (any more than viruses do), but rather that they act as if they do. A crude analogy would be the old joke "A chicken is just an egg's way of making more eggs." Dawkins describes biological organisms as "vehicles" used by their genes for making more copies of those genes. Actually, this dovetails nicely with the Buddhist notion that the "self" is constructed. Our neurological sensation of "self" is not actually the control center of our being, but just an illusion, an adapative strategy of the genes. Matthew 43595 From: connie Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 9:23pm Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi, Guys, Just joining AndrewL in a bit of mischief. Matthew: Later I discovered that Buddhism, like every religion, has its share of Sutta-thumping Fundamentalists. Connie: heavy sigh. co-miserating for fun. "This verse was stated by earlier worthy ones, fully self-awakened: 'Freedom from disease: the foremost good fortune. Unbinding: the foremost ease. The eightfold: the foremost of paths going to the Deathless, Secure.' "But now it has gradually become a verse of run-of-the-mill people." [MN 75: Magandiya S. (TB)] There comes a time when the Summoner lies silently forgotten behind the dark curtain no one knows is there. Groping blindly in the dark, one is led by craving, conceit and a mistaken belief in a self to identify 'This is mine (etam mama), this I am (esoham asmi), and this is myself (eso me atta)' [?], not remarking that "What the world at large considers Truth (idam saccamti upanijjhayitam) has been viewed as falsehood by the Noble (Ariya) through their consummate comprehension, whilst the Noble hail as Truth what the world deems falsehood" [SN.III,12]. Sound the Tipitaka of the Ultimate Science that one might follow the Ancient Way "for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the disappearance of pain and grief, for reaching the Noble Path, for the realization of Nibbana" [DN 22; MN 10] pointed out by "the Arahat in the world, a teacher peerless". "Empty of Ascetics are the other ways of thought. Resound thus, O Bhikkhus, your swelling diapason of just rejoicing." [Cula Sihanada Sutta] Matthew: I'm looking at the evidence from evolutionary biology to see what the roots of moral behavior in homo sapiens might be. As a species, our moral behavior is definitely instinctual. To say that this instinct derives from the "self view" of individuals does not account for all of the evidence, and reflects an earlier more primitive concept of Darwinism. For example, it does not account for phenomena such as kin selection and eusociality, where organisms act against their individual interests (in the sense of health, safety or personal reproduction) Connie: Ethics? Evolution? A fun read in 'primitive thought': www.webcastmy.com.my/bodhivision/aganna/agannaS.PDF Also, Maha-nidana Sutta [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/digha/dn15.html]: "...Now, craving is dependent on feeling, seeking is dependent on craving, acquisition is dependent on seeking, ascertainment is dependent on acquisition, desire and passion is dependent on ascertainment, attachment is dependent on desire and passion, possessiveness is dependent on attachment, stinginess is dependent on possessiveness, defensiveness is dependent on stinginess, and because of defensiveness, dependent on defensiveness, various evil, unskillful phenomena come into play: the taking up of sticks and knives; conflicts, quarrels, and disputes; accusations, divisive speech, and lies." I think Bhikkhu Dhammadharo's is a nice, scientific statement: "There is no nature which is a whole, which is desirable. Dukkha, unsatisfactory is not sukha, pleasant. Different elements can be known one at a time through the six doorways. This will lead to detachment. Things are not as we would like them to be and they never will. They are as they are. They arise and then fall away again. We should see the truth of disintegration." Just elements... see MN 140 / M iii 238 - Dhatu-vibhanga Sutta - An Analysis of the Properties: "A person has six properties, six media of sensory contact, eighteen considerations, & four determinations. He has been stilled where the currents of construing do not flow. And when the currents of construing do not flow, he is said to be a sage at peace. One should not be negligent of discernment, should guard the truth, be devoted to relinquishment, and train only for calm. This is the summary of the analysis of the six properties." Or if that seems a little dry to drink in, consider the pounding of this "Drum of the Deathless": "the element of happiness, the element of anguish, the element of gladness, the element of sorrowing, the element of equanimity, the element of ignorance." [Discourse on the Manyfold Elements' (Middle Length Sayings III, 115)]. peace, connie 43596 From: connie Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 9:23pm Subject: Re: New view on satipatthana 2 Hi, Andrew, Andrew: I am willing to listen to more views on this because I have had what seems like sati of a diffeferent nature arise at some times but not others (ie, "30 minutes of sati in a day? You're a rich man" as you quoted at one point in time.). Connie: [link?] BE HERE NOW - Bhikkhu Dhammadharo: peace, connie 43597 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 10:11pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 155- Determination /adhimokkha & Energy/viriya (e) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.9 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya) contd] When one develops calm there is adhimokkha which is determined, sure about the object, which is in this case an object of samatha. When jhåna is attained adhimokkha accompanies the jhåna-citta and it performs its function of being determined as to the object of absorption. When one develops right understanding of nåma and rúpa, there is adhimokkha accompanying the kusala citta. We may believe that we can decide to make sati arise, but there is no self who can decide this. When there are the appropriate conditions for sati and paññå they arise and then there is also adhimokkha which performs its function while it accompanies the kusala citta. When one begins to develop right understanding of nåma and rúpa, there will be doubt as to their different characteristics. When there is doubt adhimokkha does not arise. When there is right mindfulness of the nåma or rúpa which appears, adhimokkha performs its function of being “convinced”, sure about the object. ***** [Ch.8 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya))to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43598 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 11:27pm Subject: [dsg] Re Rob K: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Lokuttacittas are known as such only by the "Subsequent" > > reviewing > > > cittas which are conditioned. > > > There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. > > > > > > How can Theravadin exclude the possiblity that lokuttaracittas > are > > > unconditioned nama? > > > > > >========== > > Dear LK, > > On the point about direct experience. It has subtle meanings. > > For example the Paramatthamanjusa (see note 7 VII Visuddhimagga) > > talks about the Buddhas knowledge of past and future > > "and the Buddha's knowledge that has past and future as its > > objective field is entirely actual experience since it is devoid of > > assumption based on inference, tradition or conjecture" > > Robertk > > Dear RK > > As an orthodox theravadin, > > > > 1)Is it appropriate to say,"For the Buddhas, every nama and rupa > and > > pannatti(concepts)of every sacred one and worldly being in the > past > > and the present and the future can exist timelessly." > ===========] > Dear LC, > No that would be incorrect. All namas and rupas are incredibly > temporary, they barely last at all. > ============== Dear RK Thanks a lot for your help! Q-1 The note 7 VII Visuddhimagga says, "it is called omniscient knowledge becaue its objective field consists of formed, unformed,and conventional(sammuti) [i.e.conceptural]dhammas without remainder." Do not the objects of the Buddha's omniscient knowledge include formed ,unformed and conventional dhammas in the past and the future ? > > > > 2)Can you say " Wisdom in lokuttaracittas of Sotapana or > Sakadagami > > without any abhinna have entirely actual experience that has past > and > > future as its objective field since it is devoid of assumption > based > > on inference, tradition or conjecture" > > > ===========-- > Sotapanna and sakadagami without abhinna do not directly know the > future. But they do know directly the immediately past cittas when > reviewing knowledge of change of lineage occurs: > as Nina said 'No citta > can know itself, but shortly after it has fallen away paññaa can > have direct > understanding of its characteristic. There can be direct > understanding of a > dhamma even though it has just fallen away' > > RobertK Q-2 There is Bhavanga citta between falling away of a Sotapanna's Pharacitta and arising of the Subsequent Reviewing knowledge. Can the reviewing knowledge still be called "direct knowledge devoid of assumption based on inference when the Sotapanna has no abbhinna ? Metta from LK 43599 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 11:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Buddha Nature Hi, Joop Joop wrote: >Dear all > >Back to the initial question: Is it possible to interprete the >(Mahayana-)concept 'Buddha-Nature' in Theravada-language, so that >this can be used in a fruitful dicsussion between Mahayanists and >Theravadins? > > Although I doubt that this will lead to anything, I'm willing to follow along to see ;-)). I would say that if 'Buddha-Nature' is to fit into the Theravada scheme of things, it would have to be one of the following: - a dhamma, apprehendible through one of the doorways (presusmably the mind door) - an attribute of dhammas, or of a particular dhamma - a condition describing the relationship between dhammas - a natural law Otherwise it would be a term that is descriptive of some thing or state, which would make it a concept I suppose. Don't know if this is helpful. Jon 43600 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 0:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi TG (and Matthew) TGrand458@a... wrote: >Hi Matthew, All > >... > > >TG That is a very impressive statement from the Dalai Lama. This shows his >confidence that a correct investigation of actuality by science, or Buddha, >or any other discipline, will draw the same conclusions. They have to. > > Or it could be taken as showing his confidence that the two can always be distinguished sufficiently for any apparent inconsistencies to be explained away. ;-)) As to 'drawing the same conclusions', Matthew for one would I think disagree on this (for example, as to the 'unchanging' nature of (sense-door) experience). >Surely scientific knowledge is incomplete and addresses many things Buddhism >is not interested in addressing and vice versa. But the things that they >commonly address and their expressions of principles of 'actualities of nature' >are quite capable of overlapping seamlessly. > > At the risk of being labelled a science-basher (or a sutta thumper ;-)), may I ask if you see science as having any value in terms of gaining release from continued existence in samsara. >This is by no means to equate science and Buddhism. Buddhism is infinitely >more valuable IMO. But that's not to say science is wrong or garbage. > Just for the record, I also do not say that science is wrong or garbage. But I distinguish between conventional knowledge/truths and the knowledge/truths spoken of in the dhamma. As I see it, neither has validity in terms of the other's frame of reference. But I also see no contradiction whatsoever between being a scientist and a follower of the teachings. Jon 43601 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 0:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge 2 Hi Matheesha, You have many interesting and important items here. I try to react. op 25-03-2005 01:15 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...:> >> N: This extinction, nirodha, is not >> the experience of nibbaana. > > M: Any ideas how they differ? Is nirodha lokuttara? N: When there is nirodha samaapatti, there is no experience of nibbaana, thus, the cittas are not lokuttara. Ven. Nyanatiloka's dictionary is very helpful to look up such terms. He often gives texts quotations. >> N:When that person emerges from it he experiences >> nibbaana with the phalacitta of the anagami or arahat > > M: This is new to me. Does this mean that if a sakadagami, in > training to become an anagami, experiences nirodha for the first > time, when coming out of this nirodha will experience phalacitta and > become an anagami? N: He has to be already an anaagami before nirodha samaapatti. A sakadaagaami cannot enter nirodha. It would be impossible to experience phalacitta without the preceding magga-citta of the stage of the anaagaami. >> N: As to through >> contemplation...>, yes, also that is citta, a conditioned nama, > and it >> should be object of mindfulness, otherwise one takes that changing > of >> thoughts for self. > > M: Yes, very tricky and applies to all practices really...My teacher > uses a series of directed vipassana techniques aimed at identifying > 1) nama-rupa, then 2) their causal connection to each other and then > 3) the arising and passing away of these cause and effect nama-rupa. N: Your late teacher was actually explaining the stages of tender insight, taru.na vipassanaa which arise in order. This is a very important subject to discuss. M: The Self view is usually abandoned between 1 and 3 in the trainees. N: The sotaapanna has completely eradicated the self view. But it is wearing away slowly during the development of insight in stages. M: The last technique 4) is anapanasathi -seeing arising and passing > away of the breath (similar to the fourth tetrad of the anapanasathi > sutta in that impermenence is viewed). I suspect he used the last > one because the joining vipassana with samatha at this point has a > better chance of giving rise to aanantharika samadhi. N: The fourth tetrad pertains to insight alone. I requote from my study about it, with some words of Jon: "The fourth tetrad pertains to the contemplation of dhammas (mental objects) in dhammas. We read in the Commentary to the Anapanasati Sutta (translated by Ven. Nyanatiloka) about the explanations of the words of the sutta: : here covetousness is the hindrance of lust. By grief the hindrance of ill will is pointed out. For this tetrad is stated by way of insight. And contemplation of mental objects is sixfold... Of that contemplation, the section on the hindrances is the beginning... Accordingly, he said, in order to point out the beginning of the contemplation of mental objects. (pahaana.m) means it is the knowledge of abandoning, thus, that is intended... N: The Co refers to higher stages of insight knowledge leading to more detachment from conditioned realities: fading away (viraaga~naa.na), cessation (nirodha ~naa.na), and relinquishment (pa.tinissagga). We read further on: : because one who proceeds by the method, etc., is one who looks on with complete equanimity after successively seeing with understanding not only the mental objects beginning with the hindrances, but also the knowledge of the abandoning of the mental objects stated under the heading of covetousness and grief. Therefore, it should be understood that Nina: In the Way of Mindfulness, Co translated by Ven. Soma, it is stated that just as in the case of body, feeling and citta, the mental objects should be contemplated in seven ways: as impermanent; as being subject to dukkha; as anatta; by way of turning away from it and not by way of delighting in it; by freeing himself of passion for it; with thoughts making for cessation and not making for origination; and not by way of laying hold of it, by by way of giving it up. As we have seen, the hindrances are classified under the mental objects, and they include also the khandhas, the sense-bases (ayatanas), the seven factors of enlightenment and the four Truths. Jon: The mind objects/mental objects section refers to the dhammas (realities) that can be the object of a moment of consciousness, and this in turn means any and all realities (including those covered by the other 3 sections of the sutta). Only dhammas (realties) can be the object of satipatthana, because only something that has its own characteristic that is capable of being experienced is considered to be a dhamma’; anything that does not, is not.> " end quote. > > N:> I cannot see satipatthana as a mechanism, I am not sure what you > mean. It is >> to be developed. > > M: Sati--> develop insight into the tilakkana/udaya-vya nana-- >> nibbida (?), letting go based on that insight ie- erradication of > craving delusion, craving and aversion (based on maggacitta)-- >> vimukthi/release. N: Aversion can only be eradicated by anaagami and all delusion and craving by the arahat. M: This is the mechanism behind the sathipattana if Im not mistaken. However vitakkasanthana sutta seems to be talking about a more active/direct method of identifying lobha,dosa,moha and getting rid of them. N: I just repost a part with my thoughts about this sutta: end quote. M: I'm wondering if there are > other paths to maggacitta rather than through udaya-vya which doesnt > seem to be the style of vitakkasanthana practice which seems to use > more direct and pointed action as and when required rather than > prolonged mindfulness. N: What a person takes for prolonged mindfulness is likely to be full of self. Sati arises and falls away and it can only arise when there are the appropriate conditions. All the stages of insight have to be accomplished in order to attain enlightenment. We should discuss more the first stage of tender insight, but this post is already too long. If the first stage is not correct, the subsequent stages are not right. Nina. 43602 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:59am Subject: On Buddha nature from Lokuttaracitta --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Dear all > > Back to the initial question: Is it possible to interprete the > (Mahayana-)concept 'Buddha-Nature' in Theravada-language, so that > this can be used in a fruitful dicsussion between Mahayanists and > Theravadins? > > (It's a normal human habit that when a discussion takes place on an > unknown terrain, to get as quick as possible to the known terrain, > for example by taking a detail of the original discussion and > redefine it in the frame of reference of the known terrain. In this > thread many DSG-participants prefer to discuss about an abhidhammic > concept like 'lokuttaracitta', and not about the concept 'Buddha- > Nature; I do understand that) Hi,Joop Sorry for my belated response. As a Mahayana buddhist, I have interestes in What the orthodox theravadin teachs becuase it has been helping me understand better how profound some(not all) views and practices in mahayana and Vajrayana are. But I do not intend to compare Theravada with Mahayana on those open forums untill I become an adept in Mahayana . I believe that will end in long long tangled discussions if we dig into .That will not get us nowhere unless we are maha-panditas of Maha-yana or followers of a certain Maha-yana sect. There are various views in different Mahayana traditions even on Emptiness alone. There are many debates and arguments on it in Mahayana.It also is deeply connected with Buddha-nature and 3-kayas ,4-kayas or 5-kayas etc. And ,in my view, Mahayana can not be fully understood without sufficient knowldges and actual experiences of Vajrayana which itself consists of various traditions. However, This is just my two cents and I have no intention to discourage you. Metta from LK p,s, Sorry for having disturbed you in my previous reply to you 43603 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:00am Subject: Re: [dsg]Lokuttara cittas Dear Nina Thank you very much for your kindness. > > " Nibbana arises in us because of conditions such as the arising of > > the change-of-lineage or vodana(cleansing) citta " > N: Nibbana does not arise, it is unconditioned. It does not arise and fall > away, it could never arise in us. Does not Nibbana arise in our citta as Object when paññaa has been developed to the degree of the change-of-lineage citta ,and fall away from our citta when phala citta ceases ? > LK: "It(Nibbana) arises and falls away in us, but is Unconditioned > > Dhamma.In likewise ,Lokuttaracittas are unconditioned " *snip* > Is there a special reason that you ask about this subject? Very Sorry for bothering you! I ,as a Mahayana buddhist with deep faith in Theravada,like to know the orthodox theravadin view on these topics so that I can have better understandings of " Buddhism". But I do not like to mix their views. Now I just want to know What Theravada is within its framework. metta from LK 43604 From: Joop Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 3:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: ... Dear Jon, Howard You must be right, my remark was a little bit materialistic. But still I have two problems: - I'm not sure if "the consciousness that thinks" (quote Jon) is exact enough; I should say: "opinions (that are pannatti) as the result of flee floating consciousness". The art of not having opinions is than: mindfulness that prevents consciousness to float freely (that was the initial topic of the thread). - If "an opinion is not as being kept in a person's brain" (quote Jon), what is the function of the human brain in Abhidhamma at all? I mean the function of the human brain different from the brain of any animal, thus not the simple process of seeing etc. Even the seat of the mind is not the brain but the heart (hadaya vatthu): an idea not found in the Abhidhamma but later by commentaries ascribed to Abhidhamma. Metta Joop 43605 From: Joop Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 3:31am Subject: [dsg] Re:Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi, Joop > Although I doubt that this will lead to anything, I'm willing to follow along to see ;-)). > I would say that if 'Buddha-Nature' is to fit into the Theravada scheme > of things, it would have to be one of the following: > - a dhamma, apprehendible through one of the doorways (presusmably the mind door) > - an attribute of dhammas, or of a particular dhamma > - a condition describing the relationship between dhammas > - a natural law > > Otherwise it would be a term that is descriptive of some thing or state, > which would make it a concept I suppose. > > Don't know if this is helpful. > > Jon Dear Jon I think you are correct in describing the Theravada schema. To give 'Buddha Nature' a place in it, I think a possibly useful way for discussions with Mahayannist is to say that it's a part of kamma, a part that is permanent positive. (But I'm not sure where 'kamma' belongs in your list) Metta Joop 43606 From: kenhowardau Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 4:12am Subject: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Charles (D), ------------------------- C: > When you make this claim ("as the momentarily existing five khandhas"), you are say that beings don't change, they just cease to exist. Is this what you mean? -------------------------- Yes, there is nothing that carries over from the past to the present (or to the future). Each dhamma arises only once and then disappears forever. However, dhammas condition other dhammas to take their places, and so there is an appearance of continuity. --------------------- <. . .> C: > I would have to disagree with you, when you say, "An image in the mirror is a concept and, as such, it has no actual existence at all." and I don't understand what you mean by: "The only ultimately real thing that meets the eye is visible object, and it lasts for one moment of rupa. Seeing consciousness, which experiences visible object, lasts for one moment of nama." Do you believe that there are things that you can sense that are not real, even in the mind? and do you believe that thoughts and ideas (things in the mind) are not real? Maybe you should list/define what you think is real. > ----------------------- The Abhidhamma lists and defines all the different moments of consciousness and all the other realities that can exist with them. Sometimes, a reality known as visible object becomes the object of consciousness. It becomes the object of eye-door consciousness and of mind-door consciousness. In some other [mind-door] moments, concepts are created. Concepts are illusory and they cannot be listed in the Abhidhamma because there is an infinite number of them. Concepts of what has been seen can include 'a face in the mirror.' Because our understanding of the Dhamma is weak, we think the face in the mirror is real, and we have no recall of the actual visible objects that have been experienced. ----------------------------- C: > Do you see the Abidharma as a detailed scholastic endeavor only, a method for removing ... from the mind, or both? ----------------------------- It is a description of absolute reality which, when understood and verified, leads to dispassion, relinquishment and enlightenment. ---------------------- C: I am not sure what you mean by " lobar." ---------------------- Lobar is a word that your spell-checker puts in place of my word, lobha. Lobha is one of the absolute realities that can arise in some moments of consciousness. It is the mental factor (cetasika) that clings (desires, attaches) to the object it experiences. The object of lobha can be another absolute reality (e.g., visible object) or it can be a concept (e.g., a face in the mirror). -------------------------------------------- C: > And instead of "fallen away," I would say, "will, if not has already, change/transformed." -------------------------------------------- Lobha has the characteristic of changing (anicca) but, after its [less than a billionth of a second] duration, it falls away forever. --------------------------------------------- KH: > > I have noticed lately that your spell-checker changes my spellings - and not always for the better. :-) .................................... C: > Thanks a lot for the warning, please help me to catch the changes. -------------------------------------------- There are minor changes where your computer reprints my sentences in American English when they were originally printed in Australian English. So, for example, I write "cognising" and your computer reprints it as "cognizing." There is no problem with that, but then we see "lobha" changed into "lobar" and "supramundane" changed into "superabundance." That is a problem. :-) -------------------------- C: > So you have accept these specific teaching by faith? > -------------------------- Rather than think about 'accepting' and 'not accepting,' I simply study the teaching and understand it as best I can. --------------- C: > You said: "as moments of seeing or hearing etc." This answers the question, but then, are those moments for a billionth of a second or do they vary (in terms of how long they last); and is that based on experience or teaching? ---------------- Namas (consciousness and mental factors) last an incredibly short time. So do rupas, but some rupas (e.g., sense objects) can last for seventeen moments of nama. I know these figures only from my Dhamma study: there is no way I could single out one of those fleeting dhammas, let alone measure its duration. ---------------------------- C: > And the relevance will be explained in the next post if you remind me of the question ("Where did the Buddha say we should divide the Dhamma into two sections - the parts we have personally verified and the parts we have not?"). We have a good flow going and I don't want you to get caught by a small off the track detail. ----------------------------- I think it's a good question, and I am ready to discuss it when you are. Ken H 43607 From: Matthew Miller Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 5:19am Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hello Jon & All, DG: > > a correct investigation of actuality by science, or Buddha, > > or any other discipline, will draw the same conclusions. They > > have to. I agree, though this statement is something of a tautology: "Correct" investigation will always draw the same (correct) conclusions. Dalai Lama: >> "If the words of the Buddha and >> the findings of modern science >> contradict each other, then the former >> have to go." Jon: > it could be taken as showing his confidence > that the two can always > be distinguished sufficiently for any > apparent inconsistencies to be > explained away. ;-)) The Dalai Lama did not talk about "explaining away" inconsistencies. He directly says that any words of the Buddha that contradict scientific findings have to be rejected. If the Dalai Lama, as Jon suggests, actually feels confident that scientific findings will never contradict dhamma nor cause us to reject any of the Buddha's teachings, then his statement was disingenuous. > As to 'drawing the same conclusions', Matthew for > one would I think disagree on this (for example, as to the > 'unchanging' nature of (sense-door) experience). Yes. Also, the question occurs to me, if the nature of sense-door experience is unchanging (and not a product of evolution, as I would argue), doesn't that contradict impermanence? Matthew 43608 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 5:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Buddha Nature Hi Joop Joop wrote: >>I would say that if 'Buddha-Nature' is to fit into the Theravada scheme >>of things, it would have to be one of the following: >>- a dhamma, apprehendible through one of the doorways (presusmably the mind door) >>- an attribute of dhammas, or of a particular dhamma >>- a condition describing the relationship between dhammas >>- a natural law >> >>Otherwise it would be a term that is descriptive of some thing or state, which would make it a concept I suppose. >> >> >Dear Jon > >I think you are correct in describing the Theravada schema. To >give 'Buddha Nature' a place in it, I think a possibly useful way for >discussions with Mahayannist is to say that it's a part of kamma, a >part that is permanent positive. (But I'm not sure where 'kamma' >belongs in your list) > > Kamma is one of those terms that is used in different contexts to mean slightly different things. It falls under at least 3 of the 4 categories I gave ;-)): (a) As good and bad deeds/action done, kamma is the mental factor 'intention' ('cetana' cetasika), i.e., it is a dhamma (b) Kamma is one of the conditions that pertains between dhammas. The five sense-organs and every moment of sense-door consciousness in this life are conditioned by kamma from a previous life. (c) Kamma is one of the 5 'laws of nature' (niyaama). (There may be other meanings too.) If you have in mind kamma that has been performed but has yet to bring a result, then you are really talking about previous moments of cetana; all previous moments of consciousness are accumulated. I know this description does not match a lot of people's understanding of what kamma is, but that is in fact how it is described in the texts (including the suttas). Jon 43609 From: Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Buddha Nature Hi, Jon (and Joop) - In a message dated 3/25/05 2:49:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > > Although I doubt that this will lead to anything, I'm willing to follow > along to see ;-)). > > I would say that if 'Buddha-Nature' is to fit into the Theravada scheme > of things, it would have to be one of the following: > - a dhamma, apprehendible through one of the doorways (presusmably the > mind door) > - an attribute of dhammas, or of a particular dhamma > - a condition describing the relationship between dhammas > - a natural law > > Otherwise it would be a term that is descriptive of some thing or state, > which would make it a concept I suppose. > > Don't know if this is helpful. > > Jon > ======================= The only sense of "Buddha nature" that seems to me to have any reality to it is that of the possibility of realizing nibbana - that is, the potentiality for liberation. As to what that possibility/potentiality *is*, I would say it consists of the characteristic of the defilements (our deep-seated propensities to reify, crave, and grasp) to not be fixed, permanent, independent, or irremovable. In short, Buddha nature is the lack of inherent existence of the defilements, it is their adventitious nature. Complementarily, it is the the inherent luminosity of mind, as in the Pabhassara Sutta: "Luminous, monks, is the mind.[1] And it is defiled by incoming defilements." {I,v,9} "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements." {I,v,10} "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person -- there is no development of the mind." {I,vi,1} "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones -- there is development of the mind." {I,vi,2} With metta, Howard P.S. There is another notion that one might identify with "Buddha nature" causally related to the potential-for-liberation sense, I believe. And that is that (in my opinion) nibbana, in the sense of freedom, is an already existent, but unrealized, fact. In reality, there is nothing anywhere, of any sort, whether "internal" or "external" that is independent, with core of self, or graspable in any way - there is no ground beneath our feet and never has been. Were it otherwise, there would be no possibility/potential for liberating realization. /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) 43610 From: Matthew Miller Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 8:39am Subject: Re: The Brain on Dhamma Here's an article about recent studies on the neurological bases of religious experience ("Religion and the Brain"). I assume that many of the list members are familiar with this material (I know RobM is). If not, definitely check it out. *** Religion and the Brain In the new field of "Neurotheology," scientists seek the biological basis of sprituality. Is God all in our heads? by Sharon Begley ( With Anne Underwood) | May 07 2001 One Sunday morning in March, 19 years ago, as Dr. James Austin waited for a train in London, he glanced away from the tracks toward the river Thames. The neurologist -- who was spending a sabbatical year in England -- saw nothing out of the ordinary: the grimy Underground station, a few dingy buildings, some pale gray sky. He was thinking, a bit absent-mindedly, about the Zen Buddhist retreat he was headed toward. And then Austin suddenly felt a sense of enlightenment unlike anything he had ever experienced. His sense of individual existence, of separateness from the physical world around him, evaporated like morning mist in a bright dawn. He saw things "as they really are," he recalls. The sense of "I, me, mine" disappeared. "Time was not present," he says. "I had a sense of eternity. My old yearnings, loathings, fear of death and insinuations of selfhood vanished. I had been graced by a comprehension of the ultimate nature of things." Call it a mystical experience, a spiritual moment, even a religious epiphany, if you like -- but Austin will not. Rather than interpret his instant of grace as proof of a reality beyond the comprehension of our senses, much less as proof of a deity, Austin took it as "proof of the existence of the brain." He isn't being smart-alecky. As a neurologist, he accepts that all we see, hear, feel and think is mediated or created by the brain. Austin's moment in the Underground therefore inspired him to explore the neurological underpinnings of spiritual and mystical experience. In order to feel that time, fear and self-consciousness have dissolved, he reasoned, certain brain circuits must be interrupted. Which ones? Activity in the amygdala, which monitors the environment for threats and registers fear, must be damped. Parietal-lobe circuits, which orient you in space and mark the sharp distinction between self and world, must go quiet. Frontal- and temporal-lobe circuits, which mark time and generate self-awareness, must disengage. When that happens, Austin concludes in a recent paper, "what we think of as our 'higher' functions of selfhood appear briefly to 'drop out,' 'dissolve,' or be 'deleted from consciousness'." When he spun out his theories in 1998, in the 844-page "Zen and the Brain," it was published not by some flaky New Age outfit but by MIT Press. Since then, more and more scientists have flocked to "neurotheology," the study of the neurobiology of religion and spirituality. Last year the American Psychological Association published "Varieties of Anomalous Experience," covering enigmas from near-death experiences to mystical ones. At Columbia University's new Center for the Study of Science and Religion, one program investigates how spiritual experiences reflect "peculiarly recurrent events in human brains." In December, the scholarly Journal of Consciousness Studies devoted its issue to religious moments ranging from "Christic visions" to "shamanic states of consciousness." In May the book "Religion in Mind," tackling subjects such as how religious practices act back on the brain's frontal lobes to inspire optimism and even creativity, reaches stores. And in "Why God Won't Go Away," published in April, Dr. Andrew Newberg of the University of Pennsylvania and his late collaborator, Eugene d'Aquili, use brain-imaging data they collected from Tibetan Buddhists lost in meditation and from Franciscan nuns deep in prayer to... well, what they do involves a lot of neuro-jargon about lobes and fissures. In a nutshell, though, they use the data to identify what seems to be the brain's spirituality circuit, and to explain how it is that religious rituals have the power to move believers and nonbelievers alike. What all the new research shares is a passion for uncovering the neurological underpinnings of spiritual and mystical experiences —- for discovering, in short, what happens in our brains when we sense that we "have encountered a reality different from -- and, in some crucial sense, higher than -- the reality of everyday experience," as psychologist David Wulff of Wheaton College in Massachusetts puts it. In neurotheology, psychologists and neurologists try to pinpoint which regions turn on, and which turn off, during experiences that seem to exist outside time and space. In this way it differs from the rudimentary research of the 1950s and 1960s that found, yeah, brain waves change when you meditate. But that research was silent on why brain waves change, or which specific regions in the brain lie behind the change. Neuro-imaging of a living, working brain simply didn't exist back then. In contrast, today's studies try to identify the brain circuits that surge with activity when we think we have encountered the divine, and when we feel transported by intense prayer, an uplifting ritual or sacred music. Although the field is brand new and the answers only tentative, one thing is clear. Spiritual experiences are so consistent across cultures, across time and across faiths, says Wulff, that it "suggest[s] a common core that is likely a reflection of structures and processes in the human brain." "There was a feeling of energy centered within me... going out to infinite space and returning... There was a relaxing of the dualistic mind, and an intense feeling of love. I felt a profound letting go of the boundaries around me, and a connection with some kind of energy and state of being that had a quality of clarity, transparency and joy. I felt a deep and profound sense of connection to everything, recognizing that there never was a true separation at all." That is how Dr. Michael J. Baime, a colleague of Andrew Newberg's at Penn, describes what he feels at the moment of peak transcendence when he practices Tibetan Buddhist meditation, as he has since he was 14 in 1969. Baime offered his brain to Newberg, who, since childhood, had wondered about the mystery of God's existence. At Penn, Newberg's specialty is radiology, so he teamed with Eugene d'Aquili to use imaging techniques to detect which regions of the brain are active during spiritual experiences. The scientists recruited Baime and seven other Tibetan Buddhists, all skilled meditators. In a typical run, Baime settled onto the floor of a small darkened room, lit only by a few candles and filled with jasmine incense. A string of twine lay beside him. Concentrating on a mental image, he focused and focused, quieting his conscious mind (he told the scientists afterward) until something he identifies as his true inner self emerged. It felt "timeless and infinite," Baime said afterward, "a part of everyone and everything in existence." When he reached the "peak" of spiritual intensity, he tugged on the twine. Newberg, huddled outside the room and holding the other end, felt the pull and quickly injected a radioactive tracer into an IV line that ran into Baime's left arm. After a few moments, he whisked Baime off to a SPECT (single photon emission computed tomography) machine. By detecting the tracer, it tracks blood flow in the brain. Blood flow correlates with neuronal activity. The SPECT images are as close as scientists have come to snapping a photo of a transcendent experience. As expected, the prefrontal cortex, seat of attention, lit up: Baime, after all, was focusing deeply. But it was a quieting of activity that stood out. A bundle of neurons in the superior parietal lobe, toward the top and back of the brain, had gone dark. This region, nicknamed the "orientation association area," processes information about space and time, and the orientation of the body in space. It determines where the body ends and the rest of the world begins. Specifically, the left orientation area creates the sensation of a physically delimited body; the right orientation area creates the sense of the physical space in which the body exists. (An injury to this area can so cripple your ability to maneuver in physical space that you cannot figure the distance and angles needed to navigate the route to a chair across the room.) The orientation area requires sensory input to do its calculus. "If you block sensory inputs to this region, as you do during the intense concentration of meditation, you prevent the brain from forming the distinction between self and not-self," says Newberg. With no information from the senses arriving, the left orientation area cannot find any boundary between the self and the world. As a result, the brain seems to have no choice but "to perceive the self as endless and intimately interwoven with everyone and everything," Newberg and d'Aquili write in "Why God Won't Go Away." The right orientation area, equally bereft of sensory data, defaults to a feeling of infinite space. The meditators feel that they have touched infinity. "I felt communion, peace, openness to experience... [There was] an awareness and responsiveness to God's presence around me, and a feeling of centering, quieting, nothingness, [as well as] moments of fullness of the presence of God. [God was] permeating my being." This is how her 45-minute prayer made Sister Celeste, a Franciscan nun, feel, just before Newberg SPECT-scanned her. During her most intensely religious moments, when she felt a palpable sense of God's presence and an absorption of her self into his being, her brain displayed changes like those in the Tibetan Buddhist meditators: her orientation area went dark. What Sister Celeste and the other nuns in the study felt, and what the meditators experienced, Newberg emphasizes, "were neither mistakes nor wishful thinking. They reflect real, biologically based events in the brain." The fact that spiritual contemplation affects brain activity gives the experience a reality that psychologists and neuroscientists had long denied it, and explains why people experience ineffable, transcendent events as equally real as seeing a wondrous sunset or stubbing their toes. That a religious experience is reflected in brain activity is not too surprising, actually. Everything we experience -— from the sound of thunder to the sight of a poodle, the feeling of fear and the thought of a polka-dot castle -— leaves a trace on the brain. Neurotheology is stalking bigger game than simply affirming that spiritual feelings leave neural footprints, too. By pinpointing the brain areas involved in spiritual experiences and tracing how such experiences arise, the scientists hope to learn whether anyone can have such experiences, and why spiritual experiences have the qualities they do. "I could hear the singing of the planets, and wave after wave of light washed over me. But... I was the light as well... I no longer existed as a separate 'I'... I saw into the structure of the universe. I had the impression of knowing beyond knowledge and being given glimpses into ALL." That was how author Sophy Burnham described her experience at Machu Picchu, in her 1997 book "The Ecstatic Journey." Although there was no scientist around to whisk her into a SPECT machine and confirm that her orientation area was AWOL, it was almost certainly quiescent. That said, just because an experience has a neural correlate does not mean that the experience exists "only" in the brain, or that it is a figment of brain activity with no independent reality. Think of what happens when you dig into an apple pie. The brain's olfactory region registers the aroma of the cinnamon and fruit. The somatosensory cortex processes the feel of the flaky crust on the tongue and lips. The visual cortex registers the sight of the pie. Remembrances of pies past (Grandma's kitchen, the corner bake shop...) activate association cortices. A neuroscientist with too much time on his hands could undoubtedly produce a PET scan of "your brain on apple pie." But that does not negate the reality of the pie. "The fact that spiritual experiences can be associated with distinct neural activity does not necessarily mean that such experiences are mere neurological illusions," Newberg insists. "It's no safer to say that spiritual urges and sensations are caused by brain activity than it is to say that the neurological changes through which we experience the pleasure of eating an apple cause the apple to exist." The bottom line, he says, is that "there is no way to determine whether the neurological changes associated with spiritual experience mean that the brain is causing those experiences... or is instead perceiving a spiritual reality." In fact, some of the same brain regions involved in the pie experience create religious experiences, too. When the image of a cross, or a Torah crowned in silver, triggers a sense of religious awe, it is because the brain's visual-association area, which interprets what the eyes see and connects images to emotions and memories, has learned to link those images to that feeling. Visions that arise during prayer or ritual are also generated in the association area: electrical stimulation of the temporal lobes (which nestle along the sides of the head and house the circuits responsible for language, conceptual thinking and associations) produces visions. Temporal-lobe epilepsy -— abnormal bursts of electrical activity in these regions—takes this to extremes. Although some studies have cast doubt on the connection between temporal-lobe epilepsy and religiosity, others find that the condition seems to trigger vivid, Joan of Arc-type religious visions and voices. In his recent book "Lying Awake," novelist Mark Salzman conjures up the story of a cloistered nun who, after years of being unable to truly feel the presence of God, begins having visions. The cause is temporal-lobe epilepsy. Sister John of the Cross must wrestle with whether to have surgery, which would probably cure her -- but would also end her visions. Dostoevsky, Saint Paul, Saint Teresa of Avila, Proust and others are thought to have had temporal-lobe epilepsy, leaving them obsessed with matters of the spirit. Although temporal-lobe epilepsy is rare, researchers suspect that focused bursts of electrical activity called "temporal-lobe transients" may yield mystical experiences. To test this idea, Michael Persinger of Laurentian University in Canada fits a helmet jury-rigged with electromagnets onto a volunteer's head. The helmet creates a weak magnetic field, no stronger than that produced by a computer monitor. The field triggers bursts of electrical activity in the temporal lobes, Persinger finds, producing sensations that volunteers describe as supernatural or spiritual: an out-of-body experience, a sense of the divine. He suspects that religious experiences are evoked by mini electrical storms in the temporal lobes, and that such storms can be triggered by anxiety, personal crisis, lack of oxygen, low blood sugar and simple fatigue -- suggesting a reason that some people "find God" in such moments. Why the temporal lobes? Persinger speculates that our left temporal lobe maintains our sense of self. When that region is stimulated but the right stays quiescent, the left interprets this as a sensed presence, as the self departing the body, or of God. "I was alone upon the seashore... I felt that I... return[ed] from the solitude of individuation into the consciousness of unity with all that is... Earth, heaven, and sea resounded as in one vast world encircling harmony... I felt myself one with them." Is an experience like this one, described by the German philosopher Malwida von Meysenburg in 1900, within the reach of anyone? "Not everyone who meditates encounters these sorts of unitive experiences," says Robert K.C. Forman, a scholar of comparative religion at Hunter College in New York City. "This suggests that some people may be genetically or temperamentally predisposed to mystical ability." Those most open to mystical experience tend also to be open to new experiences generally. They are usually creative and innovative, with a breadth of interests and a tolerance for ambiguity (as determined by questionnaire). They also tend toward fantasy, notes David Wulff, "suggesting a capacity to suspend the judging process that distinguishes imaginings and real events." Since "we all have the brain circuits that mediate spiritual experiences, probably most people have the capacity for having such experiences," says Wulff. "But it's possible to foreclose that possibility. If you are rational, controlled, not prone to fantasy, you will probably resist the experience." In survey after survey since the 1960s, between 30 and 40 percent or so of those asked say they have, at least once or twice, felt "very close to a powerful, spiritual force that seemed to lift you out of yourself." Gallup polls in the 1990s found that 53 percent of American adults said they had had "a moment of sudden religious awakening or insight." Reports of mystical experience increase with education, income and age (people in their 40s and 50s are most likely to have them). Yet many people seem no more able to have such an experience than to fly to Venus. One explanation came in 1999, when Australian researchers found that people who report mystical and spiritual experiences tend to have unusually easy access to subliminal consciousness. "In people whose unconscious thoughts tend to break through into consciousness more readily, we find some correlation with spiritual experiences," says psychologist Michael Thalbourne of the University of Adelaide. Unfortunately, scientists are pretty clueless about what allows subconscious thoughts to pop into the consciousness of some people and not others. The single strongest predictor of such experiences, however, is something called "dissociation." In this state, different regions of the brain disengage from others. "This theory, which explains hypnotizability so well, might explain mystical states, too," says Michael Shermer, director of the Skeptics Society, which debunks paranormal phenomena. "Something really seems to be going on in the brain, with some module dissociating from the rest of the cortex." That dissociation may reflect unusual electrical crackling in one or more brain regions. In 1997, neurologist Vilayanur Ramachandran told the annual meeting of the Society for Neuroscience that there is "a neural basis for religious experience." His preliminary results suggested that depth of religious feeling, or religiosity, might depend on natural -- not helmet-induced -- enhancements in the electrical activity of the temporal lobes. Interestingly, this region of the brain also seems important for speech perception. One experience common to many spiritual states is hearing the voice of God. It seems to arise when you misattribute inner speech (the "little voice" in your head that you know you generate yourself) to something outside yourself. During such experiences, the brain's Broca's area (responsible for speech production) switches on. Most of us can tell this is our inner voice speaking. But when sensory information is restricted, as happens during meditation or prayer, people are "more likely to misattribute internally generated thoughts to an external source," suggests psychologist Richard Bentall of the University of Manchester in England in the book "Varieties of Anomalous Experience." Stress and emotional arousal can also interfere with the brain's ability to find the source of a voice, Bentall adds. In a 1998 study, researchers found that one particular brain region, called the right anterior cingulate, turned on when people heard something in the environment—a voice or a sound—and also when they hallucinated hearing something. But it stayed quiet when they imagined hearing something and thus were sure it came from their own brain. This region, says Bentall, "may contain the neural circuits responsible for tagging events as originating from the external world." When it is inappropriately switched on, we are fooled into thinking the voice we hear comes from outside us. Even people who describe themselves as nonspiritual can be moved by religious ceremonies and liturgy. Hence the power of ritual. Drumming, dancing, incantations -- all rivet attention on a single, intense source of sensory stimulation, including the body's own movements. They also evoke powerful emotional responses. That combination -- focused attention that excludes other sensory stimuli, plus heightened emotion -- is key. Together, they seem to send the brain's arousal system into hyperdrive, much as intense fear does. When this happens, explains Newberg, one of the brain structures responsible for maintaining equilibrium -- the hippocampus -- puts on the brakes. It inhibits the flow of signals between neurons, like a traffic cop preventing any more cars from entering the on-ramp to a tied-up highway. The result is that certain regions of the brain are deprived of neuronal input. One such deprived region seems to be the orientation area, the same spot that goes quiet during meditation and prayer. As in those states, without sensory input the orientation area cannot do its job of maintaining a sense of where the self leaves off and the world begins. That's why ritual and liturgy can bring on what Newberg calls a "softening of the boundaries of the self" -- and the sense of oneness and spiritual unity. Slow chanting, elegiac liturgical melodies and whispered ritualistic prayer all seem to work their magic in much the same way: they turn on the hippocampus directly and block neuronal traffic to some brain regions. The result again is "blurring the edges of the brain's sense of self, opening the door to the unitary states that are the primary goal of religious ritual," says Newberg. Researchers' newfound interest in neurotheology reflects more than the availability of cool new toys to peer inside the working brain. Psychology and neuroscience have long neglected religion. Despite its centrality to the mental lives of so many people, religion has been met by what David Wulff calls "indifference or even apathy" on the part of science. When one psychologist, a practicing Christian, tried to discuss in his introductory psych book the role of faith in people's lives, his publisher edited out most of it -- for fear of offending readers. The rise of neurotheology represents a radical shift in that attitude. And whatever light science is shedding on spirituality, spirituality is returning the favor: mystical experiences, says Forman, may tell us something about consciousness, arguably the greatest mystery in neuroscience. "In mystical experiences, the content of the mind fades, sensory awareness drops out, so you are left only with pure consciousness," says Forman. "This tells you that consciousness does not need an object, and is not a mere byproduct of sensory action." For all the tentative successes that scientists are scoring in their search for the biological bases of religious, spiritual and mystical experience, one mystery will surely lie forever beyond their grasp. They may trace a sense of transcendence to this bulge in our gray matter. And they may trace a feeling of the divine to that one. But it is likely that they will never resolve the greatest question of all -- namely, whether our brain wiring creates God, or whether God created our brain wiring. Which you believe is, in the end, a matter of faith. Newsweek U.S. Edition 43611 From: Andrew Levin Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 8:59am Subject: Re: New view on satipatthana 2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Hi, Andrew, > Connie: [link?] BE HERE NOW - Bhikkhu Dhammadharo: > all our ideas that we are going to do it right this time, we are going to > do it straight, we are going to have it now, we are going to be aware of > this or that. At those moments there is no awareness. **One moment of real > awareness in one lifetime- very rich man because it is right and it will > condition more of the same. Countless moments of wrong awareness and you > are not only not wealthy, you are getting poorer every moment, because you > are accumulating more and more wrong understanding.** This will make it > more likely to have more wrong understanding in the future. So, right > understanding, not intention, is the condition for awareness to arise. > Right understanding is not only one of the factors of the eightfold Path, > it is the first factor.> > > peace, > connie Isn't [mundane] right view view of suffering, reflecting on the four noble truths, believing in the law of moral causality, in rebirth, and in the priests and ascetics who practise dhamma well? Awareness is not what it's all about, as I understand it. Awareness sounds more like right mindfulness. 43612 From: Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 4:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Jon In a message dated 3/25/2005 12:10:40 AM Pacific Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: Hi TG (and Matthew) TGrand458@a... wrote: >Hi Matthew, All > >... > > >TG That is a very impressive statement from the Dalai Lama. This shows his >confidence that a correct investigation of actuality by science, or Buddha, >or any other discipline, will draw the same conclusions. They have to. > > Or it could be taken as showing his confidence that the two can always be distinguished sufficiently for any apparent inconsistencies to be explained away. ;-)) As to 'drawing the same conclusions', Matthew for one would I think disagree on this (for example, as to the 'unchanging' nature of (sense-door) experience). TG On the first point... no, I don't think that was his intention. As to your "'unchanging' nature of (sense-door) experience)" comment... I'm totally baffled by such a statement from a Buddhist. Maybe a little science is in order? ;-) >Surely scientific knowledge is incomplete and addresses many things Buddhism >is not interested in addressing and vice versa. But the things that they >commonly address and their expressions of principles of 'actualities of nature' >are quite capable of overlapping seamlessly. > > At the risk of being labelled a science-basher (or a sutta thumper ;-)), may I ask if you see science as having any value in terms of gaining release from continued existence in samsara. TG Sure. In terms of aiding the mind to see the principle of dependent arising working in all conditions, science can help boost insight in its current state; and if it makes more progress and becomes more accurate, it can do even better. Science is an attempt to understand the nature of things. "The nature of things" = Dhamma. Surely science has not approached the comprehensive competence that the Buddha had at his command. It probably never will come close until it starts looking to the Buddha's teaching as guide. Then it pretty much just turns into Buddhism. And the scienctists become Buddhists. Science is an evolving discipline with many facets. Buddhism is every bit as much science as it is a religion or psychology. I would not characterize Buddhism as any single one of these things, but it has aspects of all of them. >This is by no means to equate science and Buddhism. Buddhism is infinitely >more valuable IMO. But that's not to say science is wrong or garbage. > Just for the record, I also do not say that science is wrong or garbage. But I distinguish between conventional knowledge/truths and the knowledge/truths spoken of in the dhamma. As I see it, neither has validity in terms of the other's frame of reference. But I also see no contradiction whatsoever between being a scientist and a follower of the teachings. Jon TG When you contemplate dependent origination, do you honestly never use scientific knowledge you've gathered from past experience/learning to apply DO principles so as to see the nature of impermanence and conditionality in operational action? Because if the answer is "no," its a crying shame. And if the answer is yes, a little teeny-weeny respect for the scientific aspects of dhamma please. :-) TG 43613 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 10:58am Subject: Re: [dsg]Lokuttara cittas Dear LK, op 25-03-2005 11:00 schreef lokuttaracitta op lokuttaracitta@y...: > > Does not Nibbana arise in our citta as Object when paññaa has been > developed to the degree of the change-of-lineage citta ,and fall away > from our citta when phala citta ceases ? N: Let us first talk about ordinary objects we can experience now, apart from nibbaana. It helps to understand more about citta experiencing an object through one of the six doors at this moment. True, we read about citta and objects, but it is good to consider more what the meaning is of experiencing an object. Seeing is a citta and it experiences colour or visible object through the eyesense. Seeing falls away, eyesense and colour also fall away. They are conditioned dhammas that arise and fall away. We cannot say that colour falls away from the citta that is seeing, or that it falls away in us or within us. All that is visible impinges on the eyesense and then there are conditions for seeing. Nibbaana is the unconditioned element, it does not arise and fall away. But the citta that experiences nibbana is a conditioned reality, many conditions have to be fulfilled to reach the stage of paññaa so that lokuttara citta can arise and experience nibbaana. Nibbaana is not dependent on any other dhamma since it is unconditioned. It is not dependent on lokuttara cittas which experience it. Or on the change of lineage, the citta arising in the process during which nibbaana is experienced and which also experiences nibbaana. LK: quotes: Is there a special reason that you ask about this subject? > > Very Sorry for bothering you! N: Not at all, I just asked because of interest and I was wondering what you found difficult to understand. LK: I ,as a Mahayana buddhist with deep faith in Theravada,like to know > the orthodox theravadin view on these topics so that I can have > better understandings of " Buddhism". But I do not like to mix > their views. Now I just want to know What Theravada is within its > framework. N: We do not have to label anything Theravada or Mahayana. We can just talk about dhammas in daily life, dhammas we can verify at this moment. Nina. 43614 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 Hi AndrewL (and Kel) Sarah has signed off for the time being, so I hope you don;t mind me butting in here ;-)) A passage in your recent post caught my eye, as it relates to something I have discussed recently with others on the list (including Kel), namely, the view that the development of sati requires directed attention to a chosen object or objects, and the related idea that awareness/insight developed in relation to a single chosen object only is all that is called for in the teachings (I know the latter is not your view, Andrew). Andrew Levin wrote: >It seems to me that if wise reflection can condition sati, or reflecting on the nature of a nama or rupa >after discussion about it or reading the dhamma, it is not such a long jump to say that sati can be >conditioned intentionally, through sitting meditation. At the least, wholesome deeds conditioning sati >can get a good portion of it going. What other methods are there for the arising of sati, that you >acknowledge, and do I get you right, that it is your position that sati can be mindful of nama and rupa >by discussing the nature of that particular nama or rupa? This would seem to contradict your position >that we have to wait for whichever nama and rupa comes to the fore on any given occasion to be >mindful of it. > > There is an interesting passage in SN 54:10 (Sutta to Ven Kimbila, CDB translation at p.1777) where the Buddha says to Ven Ananda, in reference to the four foundations/establishments of mindfulness: "Suppose, Ananda, at a crossroads there is a great mound of soil. If a cart or chariot comes from the east, west, north, or south, it would flatten that mound of soil. So too, Ananda, when a bhikkhu dwells contemplating the body in the body, feelings in feelings, mind in mind, phenomena in phenomena, he flattens evil unwholesome states." A footnote to the text (note 311 at p. 1953) gives a translation of the commentary: "Spk: The six sense bases are like the crossroads; the defilements arising in the six sense bases are like the mound of soil there. The four establishments of mindfulness, occurring with respect to their four objects, are like the four carts or chariots. The "flattening" of the evil unwholesome states is like the flattening of the mound of soil by the cart or chariot." To me, the reference to traffic arriving at the crossroads from the four directions causing the eventual flattening of the mound of soil strongly suggests the situation where awareness is not 'directed' to a chosen object but occurs in relation to whatever object it may. So in answer to your question to Sarah, I would say that it is not a question of there being a method, but of having the confidence that awareness will develop if the appropriate conditions are in place, and these include of course a better understanding at the intellectual level of the details taught by the Buddha. Jon PS regarding Kel's point of a single object being sufficient. I would see the interpretation discussed above in relation to the simile of the crossroads as being consistent with the Satipatthana Sutta itself, which begins and ends with reference to the 'Four Foundations of Mindfulness', that is to say, the four collectively and not any lesser number than that. The vast majority of references elsewhere in the suttas to the satipatthana also refer to the four bases collectively. I know there are some instances where this is not so, but in my (for example, to mindfulness of the body alone), but in my view these need to be read in the context of the Satipatthana Sutta and those other references. (In the texts on mindfulness of breathing, I think it is clear that mindfulness of all 4 Foundations is involved). 43615 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions jonoabb Hi Joop Joop wrote: >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott > wrote: >... > > >Dear Jon, Howard > >You must be right, my remark was a little bit materialistic. >But still I have two problems: >- I'm not sure if "the consciousness that thinks" (quote Jon) is >exact enough; I should say: "opinions (that are pannatti) as the >result of flee floating consciousness". The art of not having >opinions is than: mindfulness that prevents consciousness to float >freely (that was the initial topic of the thread). > > But what is an opinion if it is not a moment of 'consciousness that thinks'? Do you have a more precise description than that? >- If "an opinion is not as being kept in a person's brain" (quote >Jon), what is the function of the human brain in Abhidhamma at all? I >mean the function of the human brain different from the brain of any >animal, thus not the simple process of seeing etc. Even the seat of >the mind is not the brain but the heart (hadaya vatthu): an idea not >found in the Abhidhamma but later by commentaries ascribed to >Abhidhamma. > > In the human realm, as in most other realms, mentality is to a degree dependent on materiality also. These relationships are complicated, which is why we are urged to study about all the different kinds of conditions; otherwise it is easy to mistake a merely supporting factor (like the brain) as being a more substantive causative factor. Jon 43615 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions jonoabb Hi Joop Joop wrote: >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott > wrote: >... > > >Dear Jon, Howard > >You must be right, my remark was a little bit materialistic. >But still I have two problems: >- I'm not sure if "the consciousness that thinks" (quote Jon) is >exact enough; I should say: "opinions (that are pannatti) as the >result of flee floating consciousness". The art of not having >opinions is than: mindfulness that prevents consciousness to float >freely (that was the initial topic of the thread). > > But what is an opinion if it is not a moment of 'consciousness that thinks'? Do you have a more precise description than that? >- If "an opinion is not as being kept in a person's brain" (quote >Jon), what is the function of the human brain in Abhidhamma at all? I >mean the function of the human brain different from the brain of any >animal, thus not the simple process of seeing etc. Even the seat of >the mind is not the brain but the heart (hadaya vatthu): an idea not >found in the Abhidhamma but later by commentaries ascribed to >Abhidhamma. > > In the human realm, as in most other realms, mentality is to a degree dependent on materiality also. These relationships are complicated, which is why we are urged to study about all the different kinds of conditions; otherwise it is easy to mistake a merely supporting factor (like the brain) as being a more substantive causative factor. Jon 43616 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 9:03am Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 dacostacharles If I understand most of what is being said (even in other post), most of you have accepted, by faith, the Abidharma as the infallible truth; and therefore, are trying to understand its teaching with out changing it, and maybe even apply it also. Does this sound true? CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, 25 March, 2005 00:34 Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi, Howard Although we disagree on the issue of being/not being object of consciousness, we do agree on the distinction to be made, as you do here, between (a) moments when there is a dhamma as object of consciousness and (b) moments of thinking, remembering etc. when there is not. ... 43617 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 0:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 dacostacharles Hi Ken, ------------------------- C: > When you make this claim ("as the momentarily existing five khandhas"), you are say that beings don't change, they just cease to exist. Is this what you mean? -------------------------- K: Yes, there is nothing that carries over from the past to the present (or to the future). Each dhamma arises only once and then disappears forever. However, dhammas condition other dhammas to take their places, and so there is an appearance of continuity. .............................................. And this is impossible to prove or experience? ******************************** C: > Do you believe that there are things that you can sense that are not real, even in the mind? and do you believe that thoughts and ideas (things in the mind) are not real? Maybe you should list/define what you think is real. --------------------------- K: The Abhidhamma lists and defines all the different moments of consciousness and all the other realities that can exist with them. Sometimes, a reality known as visible object becomes the object of consciousness. It becomes the object of eye-door consciousness and of mind-door consciousness. In some other [mind-door] moments, concepts are created. Concepts are illusory and they cannot be listed in the Abhidhamma because there is an infinite number of them. Concepts of what has been seen can include 'a face in the mirror.' Because our understanding of the Dhamma is weak, we think the face in the mirror is real, and we have no recall of the actual visible objects that have been experienced. ................................................... The question was about what "you think is real." And if Abhidhamma reflects your thoughts then your answer is ok. ************************** C: > Do you see the Abidharma as a detailed scholastic endeavor only, a method for removing ... from the mind, or both? ----------------------------- K: It is a description of absolute reality which, when understood and verified, leads to dispassion, relinquishment and enlightenment. ..................................................... Do you see the Abidharma as an unquestionable authority on these matters. What it puts forth is the complete truth/pure facts? ********************************** K: Lobha is one of the absolute realities that can arise in some moments of consciousness. It is the mental factor (cetasika) that clings (desires, attaches) to the object it experiences. The object of lobha can be another absolute reality (e.g., visible object) or it can be a concept (e.g., a face in the mirror). -------------------------------------------- C: > And instead of "fallen away," I would say, "will, if not has already, change/transformed." -------------------------------------------- K: Lobha has the characteristic of changing (anicca) but, after its [less than a billionth of a second] duration, it falls away forever. ................................................ This, of course, is something that can-not be proved, or is impossible to experience? ****************************** KH: > > I have noticed lately that your spell-checker changes my spellings - and not always for the better. :-) .................................... C: > Thanks a lot for the warning, please help me to catch the changes. -------------------------------------------- K: There are minor changes where your computer reprints my sentences in American English when they were originally printed in Australian English. So, for example, I write "cognising" and your computer reprints it as "cognizing." There is no problem with that, but then we see "lobha" changed into "lobar" and "supramundane" changed into "superabundance." That is a problem. :-) .............................................................. Is Australian English a better way to spell (words spell more like they sound)? ********************************* C: > So you have accept these specific teaching by faith? -------------------------- K: Rather than think about 'accepting' and 'not accepting,' I simply study the teaching and understand it as best I can. ....................................... But do you believe it to be true, even when you don't perfectly understand it or it conflicts with other teaching (science, other religions, sutra, etc...)? ************************************** C: > You said: "as moments of seeing or hearing etc." This answers the question, but then, are those moments for a billionth of a second or do they vary (in terms of how long they last); and is that based on experience or teaching? ---------------- K: Namas (consciousness and mental factors) last an incredibly short time. So do rupas, but some rupas (e.g., sense objects) can last for seventeen moments of nama. I know these figures only from my Dhamma study: there is no way I could single out one of those fleeting dhammas, let alone measure its duration. ...................................................... This is good, but do you even try to? ******************************* C: > And the relevance will be explained in the next post if you remind me of the question ("Where did the Buddha say we should divide the Dhamma into two sections - the parts we have personally verified and the parts we have not?"). We have a good flow going and I don't want you to get caught by a small off the track detail. ----------------------------- K: I think it's a good question, and I am ready to discuss it when you are. ............................................................... OK ken, I did not want to go down this road until I more fully understand the degree of your attachment to the Abidharma, and your level of self-awareness. You show a good scholastic grasp of it, like, at level a Bachelors degree. That is impressive. But the problem comes when you are closed to other views, especially when you do not clearly understand the one you "accept" as your own. This is one of the reasons why the Buddha dictated the Kalama sutra and a few other suttras that deal with attachments to views or knowledge. Now, I think you would agree that this is not really an issue now. CharlesD 43618 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 0:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] re: Seeing with the Tongue dacostacharles Matthew, very Good post. To answer the question: {Doesn't anyone find it curious that nowhere in Buddhism is the question asked -- "Why do we have a sense of 'self' (illusory or not) in the first place?" What purpose does it serve? The sense of self, like the human brain, the human eye or the human foot, is an adaptation to help the organism survive and to reproduce.} The early Indians, before the Buddha, believed that the sense of 'self' was the connection to the Gods, samsara, and karma. That was its purpose. This view was part of the Indian psyche, so the question did not have to be asked because every one knew the answer. The desire to serve and reproduce were a divine trick to keep mankind bound in samsara. This desire was fort against by the path of the ascetics (Buddha's first students). CharlesD PS: I hope this answered your question ----- Original Message ----- From: Matthew Miller To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, 20 March, 2005 14:27 Subject: [dsg] re: Seeing with the Tongue RobK wrote: > Dear matthew, Not sure what you are describing is seeing, could you > explain why it is? Well, if we define "seeing" as sensitivity to light signals, then this is seeing. Ultimately, all of the input from the sense organs are converted into nerve impulses with which the brain assembles a "world." ... 43619 From: Matthew Miller Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:46pm Subject: Unchanging, For All Times bupleurum Jon: > the 'unchanging' > nature of (sense-door) experience TG: > As to your "'unchanging' nature of (sense-door) > experience)" comment... I'm totally baffled by > such a statement from a Buddhist. For sure. As I was baffled by an earlier statement from Nina. In response to my description of the "great elements" as being an obsolete Hindu cosmological scheme, Nina wrote: >N: I find [the elements] as real as anything. This is for all times. (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/40877) What does that mean... "for all times"? Doesn't this contradict impermanence? Do the categories of the abhidhamma represent some kind of fixed, eternal structure of the universe? Or do they evolve like everything else? Matthew 43620 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue jonoabb Hi Matthew Matthew Miller wrote: >Hello Jon & All, >... > > >The Dalai Lama did not talk about "explaining away" inconsistencies. >He directly says that any words of the Buddha that contradict >scientific findings have to be rejected. If the Dalai Lama, as Jon >suggests, actually feels confident that scientific findings will never >contradict dhamma nor cause us to reject any of the Buddha's >teachings, then his statement was disingenuous. > > I do not think he was being disingenuous (that is not the nature of the person). But I do wonder about the accuracy of what he is reported to have said, or its context. >>As to 'drawing the same conclusions', Matthew for >>one would I think disagree on this (for example, as to the >>'unchanging' nature of (sense-door) experience). >> >> > >Yes. Also, the question occurs to me, if the nature of sense-door >experience is unchanging (and not a product of evolution, as I would >argue), doesn't that contradict impermanence? > > No contradiction. We need to understand impermanence as taught by the Buddha, because he also said that the truths he taught were eternal and unchanging. 'Impermanence' in the teachings is a characteristic of all dhammas. 'Dhammas' here has a specific meaning. The Buddha described and classified dhammas in a number of ways, including as the khandhas, ayatanas, elements, four foundations of mindfulness, etc. It is these dhammas that are to be the object of insight, to be seen as they truly are (as anicca, dukkha and anatta). Jon 43621 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 4:26pm Subject: Vism.XIV,148 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 148. (xxiv)-(xxv) The proficient state of the [mental] body is 'proficiency of body'. The proficient state of consciousness is 'proficiency of consciousness'. They have the characteristic of healthiness of the [mental] body and of consciousness. Their function is to crush unhealthiness of the [mental] body and of consciousness. They are manifested as absence of disability. Their proximate cause is the [mental] body and consciousness. They should be regarded as opposed to faithlessness, etc., which cause unhealthiness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. 43622 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 4:53pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Buddha Nature jonoabb Hi Howard --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: ... > The only sense of "Buddha nature" that seems to me to have any reality > to it is that of the possibility of realizing nibbana - that is, the > potentiality for liberation. The possibility of liberation is something the Buddha spoke about from time to time and specifically affirmed. However, to describe that in terms of a potentiality that is inherent in everyone seems to be taking that further than the Buddha himself did. As soon as we try to give 'reality' to this concept, there is the risk of wrong view being involved. Jon As to what that possibility/potentiality *is*, I would > say it consists of the characteristic of the defilements (our deep- seated > propensities to reify, crave, and grasp) to not be fixed, permanent, independent, or > irremovable. In short, Buddha nature is the lack of inherent existence of the > defilements, it is their adventitious nature. Complementarily, it is the the > inherent luminosity of mind, as in the Pabhassara Sutta ... 43623 From: "sunnaloka" Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 5:40pm Subject: Re: The Brain on Dhamma sunnaloka Hi Matthew, Thanks for the newsweek article. I'm wondering of what you think of Ken Wilber's 'all quadrant, all level' integral model for resolving the *apparent* one-sided approaches of both the subjective sciences (like Buddhism) and the objective hard sciences? For those not familliar with Wilber's AQAL model, it's basiclly an integral appreciation of all subjective, objective, intersubjective, and interobjective disciplines, which is represented graphically as four quadrants, and which together comprise all relative experience. The upper left quadrant represents/includes all individual subjective experience, or the "I" domain; the upper right quadrant represents all individual objective experience, or the "it" domain; the lower left quadrant represents all collective intersubjective experience, or the "we" domain; and the lower right represents all collective interobjective experience, or the "its" domain. (Of course this graphic representation is only a conceptual map.) Wilber lists some of the disciplines that specialize in each quadrant as follows: "[H]uman beings, over the decades and sometimes centuries, have developed time-honored methods of inquiry that enact, bring forth, and illumine these basic dimensions of being-in-the-world. For example, phenomenology and introspection enact, bring forth, and illumine the first-person singular dimensions of being-in-the-world ("I" or subjectivity, the UL quadrant); hermeneutics and collaborative inquiry enact, bring forth, and illumine the first- and second-person plural dimensions of being-in-the-world ("thou/we" or intersubjectivity, the LL quadrant); empiricism and behaviorism enact, bring forth, and illumine the third-person singular dimensions of being-in-the-world ("it" or objectivity, the UR quadrant); and ecology, functionalism, and systems theory enact, bring forth, and illumine the third-person plural dimensions of being-in-the-world ("its" or interobjectivity, the LR quadrant). Of course, there are many other important modes of inquiry, but those are a few of the historically most significant, and certainly ones that any integral methodological pluralism would want to address."[from 'The Way We Are in This Together,' Ken Wilber Online, http://wilber.shambhala.com] But this integral model doesn't just categorize and correlate all the various 'relative' conventional disciplines (relative truth). It is a nondual map which also incudes the experiential realization of the Unconditioned (ultimate truth), where the graphic representation of the four quadrants represent all relative experience, and the 'paper' on which the 'graph' appears represents the ultimately unitive nature of these various and seemingly separate (dualistic) phenomena. Of course this prior unity-in-diversity is usually only disclosed by employing sustained contemplative practices of the nondual wisdom traditions (which I personally believe includes the full understanding of what the Buddha is disclosing in the Nikaya Sutta Pitaka.) In 'Appendix B: The Hard Problem' of the same article Wilber explains how nonduality is essential for understanding the full correlation between the subjective and objective components of 'reality'(which he calls the 'Kosmos'): "The "all-quadrant, all-level" model [...], because it includes the transpersonal and nondual waves also has--or claims to have--an answer to the "hard problem" of consciousness (the problem of how we can get subjective experience out of an allegedly objective, material, nonexperiential world). The wisdom traditions generally make a distinction between relative truth and absolute truth (the former referring to relative truths in the conventional, dualistic world, and the latter referring to the realization of the absolute or nondual world, a realization known as satori, moksha, metanoia, liberation, etc.) An integral model would include both truths. It would suggest that, from the relative perspective, all existing entities have four quadrants, including an interior and an exterior, and thus "subjective experience" and "objective matter/energy" arise correlatively from the very start. From the absolute perspective, an integral model suggests that the final answer to this problem is actually discovered only with satori, or the personal awakening to the nondual itself. The reason that the hard problem remains hard is the same reason that absolute truth cannot be stated in relative words: the nondual can only be known by a change of consciousness, not a change of words or maps or theories. The hard problem ultimately revolves around the actual relation of subject and object, and that relation is said to yield its final truth only with satori (as maintained by philosophers of the nondual traditions, from Plotinus to Lady Tsogyal to Meister Eckhart). We could say that what is "seen" in satori is that subject and object are nondual, but those are only words, and when stated thus, the absolute or nondual generates only paradoxes, antinomies, contradictions. According to this view, the nondual "answer" to the hard problem can only be seen from the nondual state or level of consciousness itself, which generally takes years of contemplative discipline, and therefore is not an "answer" that can be found in a textbook or journal--and thus it will remain the hard problem for those who do not transform their own consciousness. In short, the ultimate, absolute, or nondual solution to the hard problem is found only with satori. On the relative plane--which involves the types of truths that can be stated in words and checked with conventional logic and facts--the relative solution to the relation of subject and object is best captured, I believe, by a specific type of panpsychism, which can be found in various forms in Leibniz, Whitehead, Russell, Charles Hartshorne, David Ray Griffin, David Chalmers, etc., although I believe it must be clearly modified from a monological and dialogical to a quadratic formulation, as suggested in detail in Integral Psychology (especially note 15 for chap. 14). With regard to such a (relatively true) panpsychism, David Chalmers, in a particularly illuminating discussion ("Moving Forward on the Problem of Consciousness," Journal of Consciousness Studies, 4, 1, 1997), reaches several important conclusions: (1) 'One is forced to the conclusion that no reductive explanation of consciousness can be given". That is, consciousness (or experience or proto-experience--or as I technically prefer it, interiority) is an intrinsic, given component of the Kosmos, and it cannot be completely derived from, or reduced to, something else. In my view, this is because every holon has an interior and exterior (in both singular and plural). Thus, only an integral model that includes consciousness as fundamental will likely succeed. (2) 'Perhaps the best path to such an integrated view is offered by the Russellian picture on which (proto)experiential properties constitute the intrinsic nature of physical reality. Such a picture is most naturally associated with some form of panpsychism. The resulting integration may be panpsychism's greatest theoretical benefit". As I would put it, the general idea is simply that physics (and natural science) discloses only the objective, exterior, or extrinsic features of holons, whose interior or intrinsic features are subjective and experiential (or proto-experiential). In other words, all holons have a Left- and Right-Hand dimension.'" Wilber then goes on to explain the AQAL sollution to the 'combination problem' (see full article at above mentioned website), and concludes by restating that nondual realization involves more that merely understanding the conceptual maps--it almost always requires sustained and thoroughly integrated (i.e. the integration of ethical conduct, meditation, and discernment) contemplative practice. Matthew, what Wilber's saying (as I understand it), is that when we see the correlation between brain and consciousness, we should also recognize that the interior subjectivity and exterior brain are *experientially* and *qualitatively* unique and distinct phenomena (not dualistically but interdependently), and as such represent the interior and exterior richness of 'reality.' This leads to the recognition that it's just as great a cognitive error for the materialist philosopher to collapse the richness of consciousness into the brain as it is for the idealist philosopher to collapse the richness of the material brain into consciousness. The integral approach recognizes and appreciates (values) the full richness of both interior and exterior domains, and therefore doesn't attempt to make one more valuable, more important, more inherently 'real,' i.e. the 'first cause' of, or prior to the other. Of course this is predicated upon the experiential realization of the prior nondual unity of all apparently relative duality, but this nondual discernment is in no way based upon any fuzzy-minded mystical/magical/wishful thinking, nor any abstruse dialectics. Rather it is assertained through what the Tibetan traditions term 'direct valid cognition,' which isn't inferential (dialectical) nor faith-based (??fuzzy-minded??), but immediate and uncompromising. More to the point, it is unconditioned, and therefore can occur (although rarely) to anyone with a healthy functioning brain at any time, and is in fact what we all (most of us unconsciously) slip into every night as deep dreamless sleep. (I believe this state of pure consciousness is also experienced in the meditative state of 'cessation of feeling and perception,' if anyone can shed light on how this meditative state is defined in the commentarial lit..) But while deep dreamless sleep and deep absorptive meditation are conditional (i.e. temporary) experiences of the unconditioned, this unconditioned essential nature is actually the ultimate truth of what we normally consider to be temporal phenomenal experience, and can be experientially maintained as such, through proper contemplative development, but of course can only ever be described by way of temporal/non-temporal paradox. Matthew (or anyone else), what do you think? Geoff 43624 From: "Matthew Miller" Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 5:52pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue bupleurum Hi Jon & All, Jon: > But I do wonder about the accuracy of what he is reported to > have said, or its context. Here is some context for his remarks. The Dalai Lama has been a great admirer of science most of his life. This is from his website: "His Holiness has said that if he were not a monk, he would have liked to have been an engineer. As a youth in Lhasa it was he who was called on to fix broken machinery in the Potala Palace, be it a clock or a car. A highlight of his first trip to the west in 1973 was a visit to the astronomy observatory at Cambridge University. "Over the years he has enjoyed connections with many scientists, including long friendships with Sir Karl Raimund Popper, the renowned philosopher of science, and physicists Von Weisacker and David Bohm. He has accepted invitations to participate in many conferences on science and spirituality. It was at one such conference, the Alpbach Symposia on Consciousness in 1983, that His Holiness met Dr. Francisco Varela. Their discussions on brain science and Buddhism continued informally for a few years, and eventually, with the facilitation of Adam Engle, led to more extensive, planned meetings with a formal agenda for a dialogue between Buddhism and science, and the formation of the Mind and Life Institute. Since the first Mind and Life Conference in 1987, His Holiness has regularly dedicated a full week of his busy schedule to the biennial meetings." And here's a a quote from HH himself: "Today, science means a valid method of explaining the observed reality. The well-founded disciplines of modern science are in a way related to Buddhism since Buddhist philosophy also searches and establishes truth through rational analysis, similar to that of science." -- Dalai Lama, January 5, 2002 So if we open our minds and use rational analysis to discuss the relationship of brain science and Buddhism, we are in good company! > 'Impermanence' in the teachings is a characteristic of all dhammas. > 'Dhammas' here has a specific meaning. The Buddha described and > classified dhammas in a number of ways, including as the khandhas, > ayatanas, elements, four foundations of mindfulness, etc. > It is these dhammas that are to be the object of insight, to > be seen as they truly > are (as anicca, dukkha and anatta). > So, the sense-doors *are* subject to evolutionary change? Matthew 43625 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Buddha Nature upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 3/25/05 7:54:09 PM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@... writes: > > The possibility of liberation is something the Buddha spoke about > from time to time and specifically affirmed. However, to describe > that in terms of a potentiality that is inherent in everyone seems to > be taking that further than the Buddha himself did. As soon as we > try to give 'reality' to this concept, there is the risk of wrong > view being involved. > > ======================== It is certainly true that enlightenment is possible for all beings. The Buddha said that the state of nonreturning, if not arahantship, is achievable even within a week, did he not? Obviously, enlightenment will not occur except as conditions allow. But the fact that such conditions can be satisfied and enlightenment achieved is all that is meant by the potential for enlightenment. BTW, I didn't speak of inherent potentiality for liberation. I spoke of inherent luminosity of mind, and I spoke of that as what makes liberation a possibility. And that luminosity *is* inherent, for as the Buddha said, whether mind is free of defilements or defiled yet, it is luminous. 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) 43626 From: connie Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 7:23pm Subject: Re:Buddha Nature nichiconn Hi, Howard, Thanks for the reify word. I had to look it up first time I saw you use it. Deifying, making i-cons. Just a quote from THE POWER OF MINDFULNESS An Inquiry into the Scope of Bare Attention and the Principal Sources of its Strength -Nyanaponika There - The Wheel Publication No. 121/122: In the profound and terse stanzas called "The Cave," included in the Sutta Nipata, the Buddha says that the "full penetration of sense impression (phassa) will make one free from greed" and that "by understanding perception (sanna), one will be able to cross the flood of samsara" (stanza 778 f.). By placing mindfulness as a guard at the very first gate through which thoughts enter the mind, we shall be able to control the incomers much more easily, and shut out unwanted intruders. Thus the purity of "luminous consciousness" can be maintained against "adventitious defilements" (Anguttara, 1:51). Thought of you when I read this: THE PROGRESS OF INSIGHT (Visuddhinana-katha) -A Modern Treatise on Buddhist Satipatthana Meditation - The Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw Translated from the Pali with Notes by Nyanaponika Thera >> Also in the Commentary to the Majjhima Nikaya[25] it is said: "Because in the case of the realm of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, the insight into the sequence of mental factors belongs to the Buddhas alone and not to the disciples, he (the Buddha) said thus thereby indicating the insight by groups." (This passage is the authority for the usage of the term "comprehension by groups.") and this: "Having discarded fear and delight, he is impartial and neutral towards all formations" (Visuddhimagga, xxi,62). peace, connie 43627 From: connie Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 7:30pm Subject: Re: New view on satipatthana 2 nichiconn Hi, Mischief, AL: Isn't [mundane] right view view of suffering, reflecting on the four noble truths, believing in the law of moral causality, in rebirth, and in the priests and ascetics who practise dhamma well? Awareness is not what it's all about, as I understand it. Awareness sounds more like right mindfulness. C: Not just awareness, agreed, but with right understanding & all those clear comprehensions (of purpose, suitability, domain & reality). Awareness / citta is going on all the time, I think, usually without proper attention or acknowledgement... there's ignorance most of the time, dreaming, however lucid we take it to be. Phra Dhammadharo: "Only at a moment of right understanding is there any interest, right interest in the object which appears, to see it as it really is. ... There is no self who has understanding. Understanding today is not the understanding of yesterday, which fell away as soon as it arose. Also understanding today falls away." Can one sit contemplating on the wind grounded in self? Why not call what you said mundane right view? Dukkha, ariya-sacca, kamma-vipaka only?, patisandhi-citta... what's the difference between a priest and an ascetic and how do we know who practices well? Buddha said to Magandiya, "Whatever priests or contemplatives who have dwelt or will dwell or are dwelling free from thirst, their minds inwardly at peace, all have done so having realized - as it actually is present - the origination & disappearance, the allure, the danger, & the escape from sensual pleasures, having abandoned sensual craving and removed sensual fever". How do we know another's 'inwardly at peace', or their 'method'? Also to Magandiya: "[A]ssociate with men of integrity. When you associate with men of integrity, you will hear the true Dhamma. When you hear the true Dhamma, you will practice the Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma. When you practice the Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma, you will know & see for yourself: 'These things are diseases, cancers, arrows. And here is where diseases, cancers, & arrows cease without trace." peace, connie ps: "Those who have gone to the Buddha for refuge will not go the lower worlds. Leaving human bodies, they will fill deva bodies." (D.ii,204; S.i,25) 43628 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 3:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue TGrand458@... In a message dated 3/25/2005 5:52:41 PM Pacific Standard Time, bupleurum@... writes: > 'Impermanence' in the teachings is a characteristic of all dhammas. > 'Dhammas' here has a specific meaning. The Buddha described and > classified dhammas in a number of ways, including as the khandhas, > ayatanas, elements, four foundations of mindfulness, etc. > It is these dhammas that are to be the object of insight, to > be seen as they truly > are (as anicca, dukkha and anatta). > So, the sense-doors *are* subject to evolutionary change? Matthew Matthew Matthew Matthew ... its not nature that's impermanent or evolving ... its 'dhammas.' You need to think, outside the box, as it were, and realize that using English expressions to describe things in English to English speaking people is nonsense when we have at our disposal Pali words that can be conveniently injected to conceal what the hell we're talking about, and sound nifty while we do it! C'mon Matthew, get with the program! TG 43629 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 3:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Buddha Nature upasaka_howard Hi, Connie - In a message dated 3/25/05 10:23:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, connieparker@... writes: > Hi, Howard, > > Thanks for the reify word. > ======================== And thank you for the good quotations and for thinking of 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) 43630 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 8:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue jonoabb Hi TG TGrand458@... wrote: >(J:) At the risk of being labelled a science-basher (or a sutta thumper ;-)), >may I ask if you see science as having any value in terms of gaining >release from continued existence in samsara. > >TG Sure. In terms of aiding the mind to see the principle of dependent >arising working in all conditions, science can help boost insight in its current >state; and if it makes more progress and becomes more accurate, it can do even >better. > > You may be right, but I'm afraid I just don't see it at the moment. Perhaps that's why I find DO so difficult to understand; not a scientific enough mind ;-)) >TG When you contemplate dependent origination, do you honestly never use >scientific knowledge you've gathered from past experience/learning to apply DO >principles so as to see the nature of impermanence and conditionality in >operational action? Because if the answer is "no," its a crying shame. And if the >answer is yes, a little teeny-weeny respect for the scientific aspects of >dhamma please. :-) > > Well, since you ask so nicely, I'll do my best to see it your way. So let me ponder longer before giving a definite answer (and it might be a lot longer ;-)). Jon 43631 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 9:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue jonoabb Hi TG (and Matthew) TGrand458@... wrote: >As to your "'unchanging' nature of (sense-door) experience)" comment... I'm >totally baffled by such a statement from a Buddhist. Maybe a little science is >in order? ;-) > > The context of this remark was Matthew's earlier post suggesting that the evolutionary nature of things makes it likely that different kinds of sense-door consciousness exist at different evolutionary periods ( see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/43424). I'm not sure what the scientific evidence of this is. My statement was simply meant to reflect the 'orthodox' position, namely, that the same 5 sense-door consciousnesses are all there ever have been or will be. As I understand it, the truths contained in the teachings are said to be 'eternal' truths. Hope this clarifies my remark, and unbaffles you ;-)). Jon 43632 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 9:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Unchanging, For All Times jonoabb Hi Matthew Matthew Miller wrote: >For sure. As I was baffled by an earlier statement from Nina. In >response to my description of the "great elements" as being an >obsolete Hindu cosmological scheme, Nina wrote: > > > >>N: I find [the elements] as real as anything. This is for all times. >> >> > >(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/40877) > >What does that mean... "for all times"? Doesn't this contradict >impermanence? Do the categories of the abhidhamma represent some >kind of fixed, eternal structure of the universe? Or do they evolve >like everything else? > > This is not just a matter of the Abhidhamma, but of the teachings as a whole, suttas included. The Buddha stated that the truths discovered and taught by him are valid for all time. This does not contradict impermanence. The characteristic of impermanence has a very specific meaning in the teachings, as I tried to explain in my earlier post. Jon 43633 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 9:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue jonoabb Hi Matthew Thanks for the info HHDL's website regarding his interest in science (nothing radical here!). Matthew Miller wrote: >Here is some context for his remarks. The Dalai Lama has been a great >admirer of science most of his life. This is from his website: > >"His Holiness has said that if he were not a monk, he would have liked >to have been an engineer. As a youth in Lhasa it was he who was called >on to fix broken machinery in the Potala Palace, be it a clock or a >car. A highlight of his first trip to the west in 1973 was a visit to >the astronomy observatory at Cambridge University. ... > >And here's a a quote from HH himself: >"Today, science means a valid method of explaining the observed >reality. The well-founded disciplines of modern science are in a way >related to Buddhism since Buddhist philosophy also searches and >establishes truth through rational analysis, similar to that of >science." -- Dalai Lama, January 5, 2002 > >So if we open our minds and use rational analysis to discuss the >relationship of brain science and Buddhism, we are in good company! > > Hmm, I'm not sure to what extent HH would agree with your concluding statement! Seems to me that in the quote from his website his words are rather carefully chosen (especially "...are in a way related to...") to avoid the *necessary* conclusion that an understanding of one was a means to the understanding of the other ;-)) >>'Impermanence' in the teachings is a characteristic of all dhammas. >>'Dhammas' here has a specific meaning. The Buddha described and >>classified dhammas in a number of ways, including as the khandhas, >>ayatanas, elements, four foundations of mindfulness, etc. >>It is these dhammas that are to be the object of insight, to >>be seen as they truly >>are (as anicca, dukkha and anatta). >> >> > >So, the sense-doors *are* subject to evolutionary change? > > The anicca-ness of dhammas is a momentary thing, and has no bearing on the question of evolutionary change. Yes, the conventional sense-doors as we know them are, like everything else at the conventional level, subject to evolutionary change. At the level of dhammas, however, the teachings are said to be valid for all times, in all realms, for all beings. This would include the teachings about the khandhas, ayatanas, elements, noble truths, 3 characteristics, etc., all of which are found throughout the Tipitaka (sutta, vinaya, abhidhamma). Jon 43634 From: "sunnaloka" Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 10:29pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue sunnaloka --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hmm, I'm not sure to what extent HH would agree with your concluding > statement! Seems to me that in the quote from his website his words are > rather carefully chosen (especially "...are in a way related to...") to > avoid the *necessary* conclusion that an understanding of one was a > means to the understanding of the other ;-)) Hi Jon, Somewhere (sorry but I don't remember where, although I think it was in one of the books containing the transcibed discourses of one or more of the scientific conferences HH initiated, which Matthew mentions) I remember reading HHDL saying that if anything was ever definitively proven by Western science that contradicted or refuted anything within the Buddhist Dharma, then the Dharma would necessarily have to be changed to remain valid with 'reality.' This is of course a paraphrase, but that's pretty much what he said. I think that from HH's perspective, he recognizes that the Dharma is true and therefore forever beyond refutation, and the further scientific knowledge progreses, the more it will confirm what the Buddha revealed 2500 years ago. Now he's not saying that a science is a substitute for contemplative practice, but he seems very much in favor of scientific/Buddhist integration as skillful means of presenting Dharma to Westerners who are coming to Dharma from a scientific paradigm. Geoff 43635 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 11:07pm Subject: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 kelvin_lwin Send IM Hello John, > J: namely, the view that the development of sati requires directed > attention to a chosen object or objects, and the related idea that > awareness/insight developed in relation to a single chosen object only > is all that is called for in the teachings (I know the latter is Kel: It was never about the particular object. Objects are inconsequential, only the level of insight is of import. Then the contention is any and all objects are sufficient. > Buddha: "Suppose, Ananda, at a crossroads there is a great mound > of soil. If a cart or chariot comes from the east, west, north, > or south, it would flatten that mound of soil. > Commentary: The six sense bases are like the crossroads; the defilements > arising in the six sense bases are like the mound of soil there. > J: To me, the reference to traffic arriving at the crossroads from the four > directions causing the eventual flattening of the mound of soil strongly > suggests the situation where awareness is not 'directed' to a chosen > object but occurs in relation to whatever object it may. Kel: Well I can easily read it differently. It says if a mount comes from one direction, it'll flatten. Did it say it'll only fully flatten after the mounts from ALL directions come with the same frequency or amount? Did it say Ananda don't rely on a cart in one direction only because it won't flatten enough? Taking your (&Sarah) position, why didn't commentary say there are six different mounds? I thought we had to know each of them separately and fully. So seems to me 4 carts have to pass over each of the six mounts and flatten them. Now if someone is aware of any object that arises anywhere then good for them. Due to people's natural tendencies they do better or incline toward 1 out of 4. I'm sure you're well aware of that categorization. Then nothing is wrong with using that accumulation and doing a particular bhavana. The suttas are full with examples of people who again discover or stumble on again their strong suit and had rapid advancement. Before then it might seem like they had no paramis at all. This suggest to me insisting on equal mastery over everything is not a necessary requirement. > The vast majority of references elsewhere in the suttas to the > satipatthana also refer to the four bases collectively. Kel: Maybe it's just a collective nickname used like a lot of other things with cross-references. I don't see how that proves anything. I already found Ledi Sayadaw's writings stating the same position. I'll quote some of Mogok sayadaw's teaching below. Both of them are teachers of tipitaka. In case they're too much of pariyatti teachers then Webu sayadaw's teaching is also inline and he's known for his patipatti. I'm sure you'll read Pa Auk sayadaw's instructions and think it's all ridden with sense of "self". Bottom line is I'm quite comfortable with my position and really don't want to waste time convincing you of it which I doubt I can anyway. As for going to the suttas themselves as final proof, these sayadaws' words are enough for me since their knowledge clearly dwarves mine. - kel Mogok Sayadaw: When you meditate you must know the followings. You need to know that there are two components of the mind. Mental factors (Cetisaka) and consciousness (Citta). The mental factor (thought) must be in line with the consciousness when you contemplate. Do not let the mental factor go astray from the consciousness. Do not think of anything while meditating. Don't let any thoughts come into the mind. If you can master your mind you can eliminate defilement (Kilesa). If you don't you will neither be successful in your life nor can you eradicate the 1500 Kilesas. Mogok Sayadaw: I will give you an example how to master your mind. Suppose a herd tender wanted to tame a raw cow he needs to put a post firmly into the ground, insert a rein into the cow's nose, and tie it to the post and tame her. Likewise, you must tame your mind by fixing it to the cord of mindfulness (Sati) and tie it up to the post of the object of contemplation in your practice. Do you understand? Mogok Sayadaw: I'll give you another example. If you want to catch a lizard that went into a burrow that had six holes, you need to close five holes and wait at the sixth. The analogy to this procedure would be to close all the five sense doors, namely your ears, eyes, nose, body, your tongue and then to wait at the last door, which is your mind. You will surely catch the thought as it occurs, just like you catch the lizard. Is that clear? http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/thtutmg.htm 43636 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 6:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Unchanging, For All Times TGrand458@... In a message dated 3/25/2005 9:31:43 PM Pacific Standard Time, jsabbott@... writes: This does not contradict impermanence. The characteristic of impermanence has a very specific meaning in the teachings, as I tried to explain in my earlier post. Jon Hi Jon What's so "very specific" about -- "All conditioned things are impermanent"? TG 43637 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 0:40am Subject: Yahoo Changes ... christine_forsy... Hello all, Yahoo have gone to a new format. I'm not sure what others think, but I find it irritating to read at the website now - the 'expand message' facility seems to work backwards - i.e. one reads replies before the original post. (- please send Yahoo "forthright" feedback. (I wonder why if it wasn't broken they decided to "fix" it?) And everything seems to take so much more room. This is a quote from another list: "They have also included in bouncing members in the membership numbers, so groups like this one who don't clear their bouncing membership list regularly have now acquired an extra few hundred members overnight... and just as many members who are not bouncing will be on 'no email' with inactive accounts. Forgive my cynicism, this is just so yahoogroups can kid their advertisers (sorry 'sonsors') as to how many people actually read the lists." and another quote: "I am going to set a group up on google groups, test it out and see how that goes. A lot of people have moved all of their groups over there. If anybody wishes to read what other group owners have to say, the archives of EmailList-Managers list are public: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EmailList-Managers/" Metta, Chris 43638 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 0:49am Subject: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 buddhatrue Hi Kel and Jon (Sarah and All), Kel: Now if someone is aware of any object that arises anywhere then good for them. Due to people's natural tendencies they do better or incline toward 1 out of 4. I'm sure you're well aware of that categorization. Then nothing is wrong with using that accumulation and doing a particular bhavana¡KThis suggest to me insisting on equal mastery over everything is not a necessary requirement. James: Kel, I couldn¡¦t agree with you more!! The point isn¡¦t to know the arising and perishing of each of the six sense bases in their entirety, or each of the five khandas in their entirety, or each of the four elements in their entirety, the point is simply to *know* the arising and perishing of any object which appears in the consciousness (as well as the arising and perishing of consciousness itself). I will quote a sutta example for support at the end of this post. Sometime back, I offered an analogy of Satipattha for a children¡¦s presentation of Buddhism for Rob M. I described Satipattha as being like a gum ball machine which will spontaneously spit out four different colored gum balls, one for each of the four foundations of mindfulness. And, thus, the purpose of Satipatthana is to be aware of each gum ball in and of itself when it pops out (Notice I write EACH gumball, not EVERY gumball). It¡¦s not a great analogy but Sarah really liked it, and now I¡¦m not sure if she liked it for the right reason. She might have been under the impression that I mean Satipattha is to be aware of each and every gum ball that comes out of that machine, and that is not what I meant. What I meant is that the gum balls have to be known in and of themselves, they have to been know as they arise, persist, and perish. Satipatthana is not about quantity, it is about quality. True insight into the arising and perishing of just one dhamma, for example feelings, if practiced consistently and continuously, will result in full enlightenment (in as little as seven days for some people). „« The vast majority of references elsewhere in the suttas to the > satipatthana also refer to the four bases collectively. Kel: Maybe it's just a collective nickname used like a lot of other things with cross-references. I don't see how that proves anything. James: Right, of course the four bases are referred to collectively to not leave any of them out. That doesn¡¦t mean that they ALL have to be developed. The Buddha explained this in other suttas (see below). Kel: Bottom line is I'm quite comfortable with my position and really don't want to waste time convincing you of it which I doubt I can anyway. James: Right, you are probably not going to be able to convince Jon or Sarah to change or adapt their views (And I have tried all kinds of approaches for over a year now: nice, humble, funny, logical, evidentiary, bitchy, and scathing. None of them worked! ;-). However, maybe it isn¡¦t a complete waste of time because there may be other members here who aren¡¦t so decided who will benefit from the discussion. Good luck. Metta, James * While the Buddha was residing at the Jetavana monastery, a certain monk being anxious to know how one can realize and attain Nibbana approached an Arahat and asked, Kitta vatanukho Avuso Yathabhutam Nanadassanam Suvisuddham ahosi. My dear, what is it that is required for a clear vision of Nibbana? The Arahat replied, Yatokho Avuso channam Ayatananam Samudayanca Atthangamanca Yathabutam nanadassanam Suvisuddhamhosi. My dear, in order to have a very clear vision of Nibbana, it is required to know and perceive the arising and perishing of the six sense bases as they really are. (Ayatana: sense bases) are Eye, Ear, Nose, Tongue, Body and Mind.) Rupa (matter or corporeality) and Nama (Mind) must be comprehended as they really are, which are nothing but the phenomena of arising and perishing. Should one be able to comprehend and perceive these six sense bases as they really are, he will be able to see and realize Nibbana. The enquiring monk being a Puthujjana (ordinary worldling) was not satisfied with the answer because he thought the number of things which he had to comprehend was considerably too many. He was more concerned with the number than with the importance of the knowledge of arising and perishing. Thinking that the number was too many for him to work upon, he moved to another Arahat and asked the same question. The second Arahat answered that in order that a monk might be able to see and realise Nibbana he should try to perceive and comprehend the arising and perishing of Pancakkhandha (five aggregates or components) as they really are. With this answer he was not satified yet because he thought that it was still too many for him. It is obvious that the Puthujjana monk laid so much stress upon the number and not the essential point which is arising and perishing. Being unsatisfied with the second answer, he again approached the third Arahat and asked the usual question. The third Arahat answered that one would be able to see and realise Nibbana if he perceived and comprehended the arising and perishing nature of the four Mahabhutas (four elements), Pathavi, Apo, Vayo, Tejo. (1. Element of hardness and softness 2. Element of cohesion 3 Element of motion and 4. Element of heat and cold) With this answer too, the Puthujjana monk was not able to satisfy himself although he thought that the third answer was better than the first and the second answers. He failed to see that the significance did not lie in numerical quantity but in the arising and perishing. Then he went to the fourth Arahat and put the same question. The fourth one answered, 'Yam Kinci Samudhaya dhammam Sabbantam nirodhadhammanti.' Whatever phenomenon that arises is bound to perish and he who comprehends this dhamma will be able to see and realise Nibbana. The monk was not at all satisfied with this last Arahat's answer because he thought that he had yet to comprehend the two dhammas. He never realised that what he had to comprehend was the arising and perishing and not six Ayatanas, Five Khandhas, Four Mahabhutas; and that it is the arising and perishing or Anicca which is the essence and the central core of the Vipassana, so he went to the Buddha and explained what he had heard from the four Arahats and the dissatisfaction he had regarding the answers. Then the Buddha said, 'Monk, there was a man who had never seen in his life a butea tree. He went out and asked the first man he came across as to how it looked like. The man answered that the butea tree was black because he had seen it only after it had been burnt down. Being not satisfied with the answer, he went again and asked another man about it. The second man answered that the butea tree was like a chop of meat because he had only seen it when the tree was in bloom. Then again he went out and put the same question to the third who told him that the tree was just like the swords in sheaths because he only saw the tree when it when the tree was in bloom. Then again he went out and put the same question to the third who told him that the tree was just like the swords in sheaths because he only saw the tree when it was bearing some fruits. Being not satisfied with it, he again asked the fourth one who told him that the tree resembled the banyan tree with spreading foliage because he had seen it in spring time when it was luxuriant with green and shady leaves. The Buddha continued, 'The descriptions of the butea tree by the four men were quite correct in their own way. Similarly all the four Arahats who attained the highest stage of enlightenment and gained the true penetrative wisdom, purity of insight are right in their own way be cause all of them emphasised the importance of the arising and perishing, 'Samudayanca and Attangamanca.' 43639 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 0:58am Subject: Re: Yahoo Changes ... rjkjp1 DEar Chris, It is bad alright. I am thinking I might have to get messges sent to my mailbox, very hard to foilow at the website. rob B In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > Hello all, > > Yahoo have gone to a new format. I'm not sure what others think, > but I find it irritating to read at the website now - the 'expand > message' facility seems to work backwards - i.e. one reads replies > before the original post. (- please send Yahoo "forthright" > feedback. (I 43640 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 1:50am Subject: Re: Yahoo Changes ... kelvin_lwin Send IM This is usually how I like my mail box sorted in date from latest to earliest. It's more convenient for me since I don't have to scroll all the way down to the bottom of the page to see the newest post. I think they should add ascending or descending options for people who prefer it the old way though. Being able to customize is key to appeasing most people. 43641 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 2:12am Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 jonoabb Hi Charles Charles DaCosta wrote: >If I understand most of what is being said (even in other post), most of you have accepted, by faith, the Abidharma as the infallible truth; and therefore, are trying to understand its teaching with out changing it, and maybe even apply it also. Does this sound true? > > Speaking only for myself, my interest in knowing and understanding what the Abhidhamma has to say on matters being discussed here is based on a confidence that the Buddha knew more about these matters than anyone else. There is nothing to be gained by mere acceptance by faith. However there is, I believe, a lot to be gained from getting a good grasp of the Sutta-Vinaya-Abhidhamma perspective on things. You are right about trying to understand its meaning without changing it. As far as I'm concerned, that would defeat the whole purpose of having it ;-)). What's your thinking on this? Jon 43642 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 2:24am Subject: Yahoo Groups New Look! dsgmods All, Yahoo have made some changes, as Chris has pointed out, and we're also very concerned about them, especially ones affecting the searching for specific posts, backing-up with numbers and others mentioned. We also recommend sending feedback to yahoo. Hopefully they'll take note. Meanwhile, we suggest: *Consider getting your messages in your in-box if you don't already. They are much easier to read this way and the reading order can be changed. Consider opening a yahoo or google account for this purpose, perhaps. Google accounts make it very easy to read threads. (contact Jon for a google invite). *Be patient! Let's give them a little while to sort out bugs and respond. *Continue discussing dhamma issues as usual on list. Jon & Sarah p.s Further comments off-list only. Thanks! 43643 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 2:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue jonoabb Hi Geoff Thanks for these comments, which I think I largely agree with. I'm sure HH would be keen to reassure those coming to the Dhamma from a scientific paradigm that there would be no question of having to reject the results of scientific research. Jon sunnaloka wrote: >I think that from HH's perspective, he recognizes that the Dharma is >true and therefore forever beyond refutation, and the further >scientific knowledge progreses, the more it will confirm what the >Buddha revealed 2500 years ago. > >Now he's not saying that a science is a substitute for contemplative >practice, but he seems very much in favor of scientific/Buddhist >integration as skillful means of presenting Dharma to Westerners who >are coming to Dharma from a scientific paradigm. > >Geoff > > 43644 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 3:50am Subject: [dsg] Re:Buddha Nature jwromeijn Dear all My conclusion (as always: temporary): - There are no real Theravada-concepts with which the Mahayana- concept 'Buddha-Nature' can be translated. - I like the Pabhassara Suttas - Luminous (AN I.49-52), but don't have an idea what they mean - My superficial idea that the kamma-concept can be used for it, is in vain, thanks Jon for the information you gave about the meaning of 'kamma'. - The only remaining meaning of 'Buddha-Nature' is that enlightenment is possible for all beings. And that's a truism. - The more transcendent meaning the Mahayanists give to 'Buddha- Nature' is can only say: I don't believe it and I don't need it. Metta Joop 43645 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 3:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions jwromeijn Dear Jon, Howard, and all > >- I'm not sure if "the consciousness that thinks" (quote Jon) is > >exact enough; I should say: "opinions (that are pannatti) as the > >result of flee floating consciousness". The art of not having > >opinions is than: mindfulness that prevents consciousness to float > >freely (that was the initial topic of the thread). > Jon: But what is an opinion if it is not a moment of 'consciousness that thinks'? > Do you have a more precise description than that? Joop: That's a misunderstanding (perhaps because english is not my native language). I agree that an opinion is a moment of consciousness. DOT I don't know what 'thinking' is, otherwise than 'reasoning', and an opinion is hardly the result of reasoning. My desciption was: opinions are the result of flee floating consciousness (I think 'free floating' can be described more in Abhidhamma-language). > >- If "an opinion is not as being kept in a person's brain" (quote > > Jon), what is the function of the human brain in Abhidhamma at all? I > >mean the function of the human brain different from the brain of any > >animal, thus not the simple process of seeing etc. Even the seat of > >the mind is not the brain but the heart (hadaya vatthu): an idea not > >found in the Abhidhamma but later by commentaries ascribed to > >Abhidhamma. > Jon: In the human realm, as in most other realms, mentality is to a degree > dependent on materiality also. These relationships are complicated, > which is why we are urged to study about all the different kinds of > conditions; otherwise it is easy to mistake a merely supporting factor > (like the brain) as being a more substantive causative factor. Joop: You did not react on my conclusion that there is a loose end. Why do you think the brain is merely a supporting factor (in the producing process of an opinion)? What is the difference of the brain being a supporting factor in human beings and the brain being a supporting factor in animals (the other realm) ? Metta Joop BTW I know it's another topic but suddendly another question arises in me: do animals have opinions ? 43646 From: "Matthew Miller" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 3:53am Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue bupleurum TG: > Matthew Matthew Matthew ... its not nature that's impermanent > or evolving ... its 'dhammas.' You need to think, outside the > box, as it were, and realize that using English expressions > to describe things in English to English speaking people is > nonsense when we have at our disposal Pali words that can > be conveniently injected to conceal what the hell we're talking > about, and sound nifty while we do it! C'mon Matthew, get > with the program! 43647 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 4:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 jonoabb Hi Kel Thanks for bringing up the views of the Sayadaw. They are certainly worth considering. You say: "As for going to the suttas themselves as final proof, these sayadaws' words are enough for me since their knowledge clearly dwarves mine." Yes, many of the respected teachers are very knowledgeable as regards the teachings, but may I suggest that it is always worth questioning whether an author has given references from the suttas or other texts to support his important propositions, and whether the views he expresses are in accordance with one's own general reading of the texts. I say this because there are many learned authors and respected teachers out there, but they mostly have different ideas as to what the teaching says, so they can't all be right ;-)). The only chance we have of sorting out the 'more correct' from the 'less correct' is to ourselves have a good knowledge of the texts. Jon kelvin_lwin wrote: > Kel: Well I can easily read it differently. It says if a mount >comes from one direction, it'll flatten. Did it say it'll only >fully flatten after the mounts from ALL directions come with the >same frequency or amount? Did it say Ananda don't rely on a cart in >one direction only because it won't flatten enough? > >... > I already found Ledi Sayadaw's writings stating the same >position. I'll quote some of Mogok sayadaw's teaching below. Both >of them are teachers of tipitaka. In case they're too much of >pariyatti teachers then Webu sayadaw's teaching is also inline and >he's known for his patipatti. I'm sure you'll read Pa Auk sayadaw's >instructions and think it's all ridden with sense of "self". Bottom >line is I'm quite comfortable with my position and really don't want >to waste time convincing you of it which I doubt I can anyway. As >for going to the suttas themselves as final proof, these sayadaws' >words are enough for me since their knowledge clearly dwarves mine. > >- kel > > 43648 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 4:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Unchanging, For All Times jonoabb Hi TG TGrand458@... wrote: >Hi Jon > >What's so "very specific" about -- "All conditioned things are impermanent"? > > The Pali word 'sankhara' ('conditioned things') has a specific meaning or, to be more exact, a number of specific meanings depending on the context (Nyanatiloka's dictionary gives 4 main meanings). In the context of your quoted passage, I understand sankhara to mean 'conditioned dhammas', that is to say, the dhammas other than Nibbana. These dhammas are those classified in the suttas in various ways including as the 5 khandhas, six ayatanas, 18 elements, 4 establishments of mindfulness, etc. In other words, the passage does not refer to 'things' in the conventional sense of the word, to my understanding. Jon 43649 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 4:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 jonoabb Hi James Thanks for coming in on this thread. Just to clarify, I don't think I said to Kel that all 6 sense-doors have to be fully known in their entirety. I believe I said that the development of awareness and insight was not a matter of choosing a particular object, and especially it was not a matter of developing insight into a single (chosen) object only. So from this I think you will see that there is much in what you say that I would not take issue with. (I do, however, understand the texts to be saying that awareness/insight must be developed in relation to experiences through all the sense doors, as and when objects appear through those doors to sati and panna.) I liked your sutta story, and would be interested to know the reference for it, please. Jon buddhatrue wrote: >Hi Kel and Jon (Sarah and All), > >... >James: Kel, I couldn¡¦t agree with you more!! The point isn¡¦t to know >the arising and perishing of each of the six sense bases in their >entirety, or each of the five khandas in their entirety, or each of >the four elements in their entirety, the point is simply to *know* >the arising and perishing of any object which appears in the >consciousness (as well as the arising and perishing of consciousness >itself). I will quote a sutta example for support at the end of this >post. > >... > > >James: Right, of course the four bases are referred to collectively >to not leave any of them out. That doesn¡¦t mean that they ALL have >to be developed. The Buddha explained this in other suttas (see >below). > > 43650 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 5:06am Subject: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kelvin_lwin" wrote: > > > I already found Ledi Sayadaw's writings stating the same > position. I'll quote some of Mogok sayadaw's teaching below. Both > of them are teachers of tipitaka. In case they're too much of > pariyatti teachers then Webu sayadaw's teaching is also inline and > he's known for his patipatti. I'm sure you'll read Pa Auk sayadaw's > instructions and think it's all ridden with sense of "self". Bottom > line is I'm quite comfortable with my position and really don't want > to waste time convincing you of it which I doubt I can anyway. As > for going to the suttas themselves as final proof, these sayadaws' > words are enough for me since their knowledge clearly dwarves mine. > > - kel ========= Dear Kel, A potential problem with deciding to take a modern teacher as our authority is if they disagree on some aspect of Dhamma. Previously you've cited Mahasi sayadaw, also Pa Auk sayadaw. But they and their disciples have quite a difference in thinking,: http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/pandita5.htm """Some very thick books of Pa Auk Sayadaw in English which were sent to Myanmar from Taiwan have been banned and prohibited from distribution by the Maha Nayaka Sayadaws of the Myanmar Religious Affairs Department in Kaba Aye, Yangon. In response to an attack on the Mahasi method by one Pa Auk disciple, Sayadaw U Panditabhivamsa remarked, "One should not immerse poison into pure, clean water which is very useful. After being contaminated it will become useless. So don't put poison into pure, clean water" A well known meditation teacher of Myanmar urged one of the most learned of monks to read his book. When Sayadaw U Sumangala finished reading, he commented that the Mahasi method is the right method. He compared the quotations of the Tipitaka featured in Pa Auk Sayadaw's book against the original Tipitaka and discovered discrepancies in interpretation. Having scrutitnised Mahasi Sayadaw's writings and teachings intensely, he came to understand fully Mahasi Sayadaw's doctrine and affirmed them to be correct and pure. Then the Tipitakadhara Sayadaw continued with the following points which puzzled and troubled me further. A recently published book contends that many of Mahasi Sayadaw's instructions for vipassana meditation are not in accord with the Buddha's teaching as expressed in the Tipitaka, the Buddhist Canon. The book, by a well known sayadaw, was no less than an attempt to set a new direction and a new agenda for vipassana meditation in Myanmar..."" RobertK 43651 From: "matheesha" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 5:19am Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge 2 matheesha333 Hi Nina, >M:My teacher > > uses a series of directed vipassana techniques aimed at identifying > > 1) nama-rupa, then 2) their causal connection to each other and then > > 3) the arising and passing away of these cause and effect nama- rupa. > N: Your late teacher was actually explaining the stages of tender insight, > taru.na vipassanaa which arise in order. > This is a very important subject to discuss. M: Ok, we can come back to the rest of the post later.What is taruna vipassana? metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Matheesha, > You have many interesting and important items here. I try to react. > op 25-03-2005 01:15 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...:> > >> N: This extinction, nirodha, is not > >> the experience of nibbaana. > > > > M: Any ideas how they differ? Is nirodha lokuttara? > N: When there is nirodha samaapatti, there is no experience of nibbaana, > thus, the cittas are not lokuttara. > Ven. Nyanatiloka's dictionary is very helpful to look up such terms. He > often gives texts quotations. > >> N:When that person emerges from it he experiences > >> nibbaana with the phalacitta of the anagami or arahat > > > > M: This is new to me. Does this mean that if a sakadagami, in > > training to become an anagami, experiences nirodha for the first > > time, when coming out of this nirodha will experience phalacitta and > > become an anagami? > N: He has to be already an anaagami before nirodha samaapatti. A > sakadaagaami cannot enter nirodha. It would be impossible to experience > phalacitta without the preceding magga-citta of the stage of the anaagaami. > >> N: As to > through > >> contemplation...>, yes, also that is citta, a conditioned nama, > > and it > >> should be object of mindfulness, otherwise one takes that changing > > of > >> thoughts for self. > > > > M: Yes, very tricky and applies to all practices really...My teacher > > uses a series of directed vipassana techniques aimed at identifying > > 1) nama-rupa, then 2) their causal connection to each other and then > > 3) the arising and passing away of these cause and effect nama- rupa. > N: Your late teacher was actually explaining the stages of tender insight, > taru.na vipassanaa which arise in order. > This is a very important subject to discuss. > > M: The Self view is usually abandoned between 1 and 3 in the trainees. > N: The sotaapanna has completely eradicated the self view. But it is wearing > away slowly during the development of insight in stages. > > M: The last technique 4) is anapanasathi -seeing arising and passing > > away of the breath (similar to the fourth tetrad of the anapanasathi > > sutta in that impermenence is viewed). I suspect he used the last > > one because the joining vipassana with samatha at this point has a > > better chance of giving rise to aanantharika samadhi. > N: The fourth tetrad pertains to insight alone. I requote from my study > about it, with some words of Jon: > "The fourth tetrad pertains to the contemplation of dhammas (mental objects) > in dhammas. We read in the Commentary to the Anapanasati Sutta (translated > by Ven. Nyanatiloka) about the explanations of the words of the sutta: > becomes one who looks on with complete equanimity>: here covetousness is the > hindrance of lust. By grief the hindrance of ill will is pointed out. For > this tetrad is stated by way of insight. And contemplation of mental objects > is sixfold... Of that contemplation, the section on the hindrances is the > beginning... Accordingly, he said, in order to > point out the beginning of the contemplation of mental objects. abandoning> (pahaana.m) means it is the knowledge of abandoning, thus, abandons the perception of permanence through the contemplation of > impermanence> that is intended... > N: The Co refers to higher stages of insight knowledge leading to more > detachment from conditioned realities: fading away (viraaga~naa.na), > cessation (nirodha ~naa.na), and relinquishment (pa.tinissagga). We read > further on: > : because one who proceeds by the method, > etc., is one who looks on > with complete equanimity after successively seeing with understanding not > only the mental objects beginning with the hindrances, but also the > knowledge of the abandoning of the mental objects stated under the heading > of covetousness and grief. Therefore, it should be understood that occasion... a bhikkhu abides contemplating mental objects in the mental > objects.> > Nina: In the Way of Mindfulness, Co translated by Ven. Soma, it is stated > that just as in the case of body, feeling and citta, the mental objects > should be contemplated in seven ways: as impermanent; as being subject to > dukkha; as anatta; by way of turning away from it and not by way of > delighting in it; by freeing himself of passion for it; with thoughts making > for cessation and not making for origination; and not by way of laying hold > of it, by by way of giving it up. > As we have seen, the hindrances are classified under the mental objects, and > they include also the khandhas, the sense-bases (ayatanas), the seven > factors of enlightenment and the four Truths. > Jon: The mind objects/mental > objects section refers to the dhammas (realities) that can be the object > of a moment of consciousness, and this in turn means any and all realities > (including those covered by the other 3 sections of the sutta). > Only dhammas (realties) can be the object of satipatthana, because only > something that has its own characteristic that is capable of being > experienced is considered to be a dhamma'; anything that does not, is > not.> " end quote. > > > > N:> I cannot see satipatthana as a mechanism, I am not sure what you > > mean. It is > >> to be developed. > > > > M: Sati--> develop insight into the tilakkana/udaya-vya nana-- > >> nibbida (?), letting go based on that insight ie- erradication of > > craving delusion, craving and aversion (based on maggacitta)-- > >> vimukthi/release. > N: Aversion can only be eradicated by anaagami and all delusion and craving > by the arahat. > M: This is the mechanism behind the sathipattana if Im not mistaken. However > vitakkasanthana sutta seems to be talking about a more active/direct method > of identifying lobha,dosa,moha and getting rid of them. > N: I just repost a part with my thoughts about this sutta: > cittas. He is not troubled by restlessness, worry or doubt. > However, he had to go a long way and needed patience and perseverance to > fully develop paññaa. The bhikkhu in this sutta had to use all available > means and finally he had to have heroic fortitude to attain arahatship. > In each Sutta satipatthana is implied, because through satipatthana, the > development of vipassana, the truth of anatta can be realized.The teaching > of anatta is exclusively the Buddha¹s teaching. That is why the Commentary > emphasizes the development of vipassana time and again. The goal is the > eradication of all defilements, but the wrong view of self has to be > eradicated first. > We are thinking with lobha, attachment, dosa, aversion and moha, ignorance, > because these unwholesome roots have not been eradicated. The Buddha > explained several ways of abandoning unwholesome thinking by wholesome > thinking. However, we should realize that there is no self who can be master > of his thoughts. We can learn this by the development of understanding of > naama and ruupa, by the development of insight. If we develop conditions for > kusala without satipatthana we still have the wrong view of my akusala and > my kusala. We may think of the akusala citta that has fallen away and worry > about it. But, how can that which falls away immediately be self or mine?> > end quote. > M: I'm wondering if there are > > other paths to maggacitta rather than through udaya-vya which doesnt > > seem to be the style of vitakkasanthana practice which seems to use > > more direct and pointed action as and when required rather than > > prolonged mindfulness. > N: What a person takes for prolonged mindfulness is likely to be full of > self. Sati arises and falls away and it can only arise when there are the > appropriate conditions. All the stages of insight have to be accomplished in > order to attain enlightenment. > We should discuss more the first stage of tender insight, but this post is > already too long. If the first stage is not correct, the subsequent stages > are not right. > Nina. 43652 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 6:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re Rob K: Buddha Nature rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > --- In> > Q-1 > > The note 7 VII Visuddhimagga says, > "it is called omniscient knowledge becaue its objective field > consists of formed, unformed,and conventional(sammuti) > [i.e.conceptural]dhammas without remainder." > > > Do not the objects of the Buddha's omniscient knowledge include > formed ,unformed and conventional dhammas in the past and the future ? ||||||| Dear LK, Yes that is correct. ------ > > > > > > > > 2)Can you say " Wisdom in lokuttaracittas of Sotapana or > > Sakadagami > > > without any abhinna have entirely actual experience that has past > > and > > > future as its objective field since it is devoid of assumption > > based > > > on inference, tradition or conjecture" > > > > > > ===========-- > > Sotapanna and sakadagami without abhinna do not directly know the > > future. But they do know directly the immediately past cittas when > > reviewing knowledge of change of lineage occurs: > > as Nina said 'No citta > > can know itself, but shortly after it has fallen away paññaa can > > have direct > > understanding of its characteristic. There can be direct > > understanding of a > > dhamma even though it has just fallen away' > > > > RobertK > > Q-2 > There is Bhavanga citta between falling away of a Sotapanna's > Pharacitta and arising of the Subsequent Reviewing knowledge. > > Can the reviewing knowledge still be called "direct knowledge devoid > of assumption based on inference when the Sotapanna has no abbhinna ? > ======= Yes, it is still direct knowledge because it is known by panna, without any inference. It happens so fast, billions of cittas arise and fall away in split second. Later there be be thinking about the experience but this is different from teh direct understanding that occurs during reviewing knowledge. It is highly developed panna that knows, so no doubt about the attainment. Robertk 43653 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 7:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions jonoabb Hi Joop Joop wrote: >I don't know what 'thinking' is, otherwise than 'reasoning', and an >opinion is hardly the result of reasoning. > > Thinking need not be limited to reasoning. There is 'ordinary' thinking most of the time, for example, while you are brushing your teeth, eating breakfast, taking a walk, etc. >My desciption was: opinions are the result of flee floating >consciousness (I think 'free floating' can be described more in >Abhidhamma-language). > > Sorry, but I haven't caught your meaning. Would you mind giving an example or two of 'floating consciousness'. Also, 'opinions' can mean different things. Do you mean likes and dislikes, or forming views about issues, or 'judging' people and things, or something else? Thanks. >Joop: You did not react on my conclusion that there is a loose end. >Why do you think the brain is merely a supporting factor (in the >producing process of an opinion)? > > Well, the holding/forming of an opinion is a mental process, and to my understanding of the teachings all mental processes are performed by consciousness, which is a nama. Rupa (such as the brain) cannot experience an object, cannot perform a mental process. >What is the difference of the brain being a supporting factor in >human beings and the brain being a supporting factor in animals (the >other realm) ? > > No fundamental difference, that I'm aware of. >BTW I know it's another topic but suddendly another question arises >in me: do animals have opinions ? > > Not altogether a different topic, perhaps. The answer will depend on what you have in mind by an opinion ;-)). Jon 43654 From: "Matthew Miller" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 7:55am Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue bupleurum Geoff: >>[Dalai Lama] seems very much in >>favor of scientific/Buddhist >>integration as skillful means of presenting Dharma to Westerners who >>are coming to Dharma from a scientific paradigm. So the Dalai Lama's interest in science is at heart just a proselytizing gimmick (er, upaya)? Matthew 43655 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:37am Subject: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 kelvin_lwin Send IM Hi RobK, Well, having debated with my uncle who's from Pa Auk tradition I think I'm in position to comment. It's hard to find exact reference to "abdomen" method but it falls under kaya and dhatu. If you read Pa Auk, you'll find he gave anapana and dhatu. Proper context of Pa Auk's method is samatha and I can appreciate his position more as people seem to be going overboard with "no-control". The article you quoted is also full with misinformation and confusion. For example, anapana being the method of choice for all Buddhas is something many sayadaws use. Anyone with rudimentary knowledge of Visuddhimagga should know what is consistent about the techniques. So which method is correct? All of them when they're applied correctly. Very few can actually do it so maybe that's where the confusion and arguments arise. This is like age old debate of vipassana versus samatha vehicles. You'll find one side bashing the other and trying to make it appear impossible to reach enlightenment if it's not their way. Mostly you find this is due to followers and not sayadaws when you really look into their teachings. Also we should keep in mind the lesson from the sutta James quoted, even an arahat's knowledge is not complete unlike a Buddha. So is there any surprise in the world of puthujjanas? It's just politics. - kel ps. it occured it me the problem is the obsession with objects of meditation and not meditation itself. 43656 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 10:33am Subject: Re: Yahoo Changes ... lbidd2 Hi Chris and Mods., I don't like this at all. I was working on an index for the Vism. thread based on message numbers that is now useless. There used to be a message number box that would take you directly to a particular message. Plus I don't like the format either. Larry 43657 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 11:21am Subject: Re: New view on satipatthana 2 buddhatrue Hi Jon, Jon: Thanks for coming in on this thread. James: Sure, no problem. But don't count on me continuing because with this new Yahoo format it is hard for me to find anything! (And in addition to being an English teacher I am a certified web site designer. Yahoo has lost their minds with this new format! ;-)). Jon: Just to clarify, I don't think I said to Kel that all 6 sense- doors have to be fully known in their entirety. I believe I said that the development of awareness and insight was not a matter of choosing a particular object, and especially it was not a matter of developing insight into a single (chosen) object only. James: Oh Jon, please spare me the political jargon mumbo-jumbo. If you say that one cannot choose a particular object or mind door then of course you are saying that all six doors must be developed. Do you think I feel off the turnip truck yesterday?? ;-)) Objects at all six doorways are arising and falling in a continuous fashion and there is hardly a moment when this isn't the case. When you suggest that one cannot *choose* which doorway is to be known with insight, then you are in essence saying that all six doorways must be known in their entirety. Please, to facilitate communication, do call a spade for a spade. Jon: from this I think you will see that there is much in what you say that I would not take issue with. James: Oh, wonderful! (if this was true). But, please, don't pretend to be on my side if you really aren't. Jon: (I do, however, understand the texts to be saying that awareness/insight must be developed in relation to experiences through all the sense doors, as and when objects appear through those doors to sati and panna.) James: No, again, it doesn't have to be through ALL the sense doors. Awareness must only be of arising and falling, that is it- regardless of if this awareness is through one, two, three, four, five, or all six of the sense doors. Jon: I liked your sutta story, and would be interested to know the reference for it, please. James: You liked it for what reason? Do you agree with it? Anyway, it is a paraphrase of a sutta found in the Tipitaka- now you must find it. Usually I give complete references for everything I quote, but this time I don't think I will. Jon, if you love the texts so much, the find the sutta and bring it to light! ;-) Metta, James 43658 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 0:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue nilovg Dear Matthew, And I hope also it unbaffles you with regard to the elements. Naama elements and ruupa elements, these are just dhammas that can be expeirneced without having to think about them. True for everybody. Nina. op 26-03-2005 06:13 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jsabbott@...: > I'm not sure what the scientific evidence of this is. My statement was > simply meant to reflect the 'orthodox' position, namely, that the same 5 > sense-door consciousnesses are all there ever have been or will be. As > I understand it, the truths contained in the teachings are said to be > 'eternal' truths. > > Hope this clarifies my remark, and unbaffles you ;-)). 43659 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 0:52pm Subject: Re: New view on satipatthana 2 christine_forsy... Hello Jon, (James), and all, Jon - it is a story in Chapter XX of 'The Doctrine of Paticcasammupada' U Than Daing MOGOK VIPASSANA YEIKTHA http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/tdaing3.htm James - it may be that humour doesn't translate very well from one culture to another - but your post seemed to be a little 'tetchy'?? metta, Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" > > Jon: I liked your sutta story, and would be interested to know the > reference for it, please. > > James: You liked it for what reason? Do you agree with it? Anyway, > it is a paraphrase of a sutta found in the Tipitaka- now you must > find it. Usually I give complete references for everything I quote, > but this time I don't think I will. Jon, if you love the texts so > much, the find the sutta and bring it to light! ;-) > > Metta, > James 43660 From: "sunnaloka" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 1:44pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue sunnaloka Hi Matthew, > So the Dalai Lama's interest in science is at heart just a > proselytizing gimmick (er, upaya)? That's neither what I said nor what I meant. HH's upaya is, in my opinion, profound and sincere--as is his interest in science. Furthermore, I don't appreciate your sarcastic tone. In all honesty Matthew, what is your motivation for making such a statement? What is your upaya motivated by? Geoff 43661 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:31am Subject: Faith and the Abidharma dacostacharles I can see, for some of you, the word "faith" razes red flags. So I had to post some definitions in-hopes that it will to help people see that the red flags are not needed. Many of the Buddha's teachings that I don't understand or can not prove (even though I believe) I accept by faith. Faith: (Christian Bible) 1.. The substance of things hoped for. 2.. The evidence of things unseen. (Random House Unabridged Dic.) 1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability. 2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact. 3. belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims. 4. belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty. 5. a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith. 6. the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.: Failure to appear would be breaking faith. I like the biblical definition the best, however, I would replace the word "unseen" with "that can not be verified." In the case of your post, the Buddhist scripture is the evidence. 43662 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:32am Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 dacostacharles Hi Jon, I can see, not only from you, that the word "faith" razes red flags I am going to make a separate post defining it. My hopes will be to help people see that the red flags are not needed. However, I will start with you. Faith: (Christian Bible) 1.. The substance of things hoped for. 2.. The evidence of things unseen. (Random House Unabridged Dic.) 1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability. 2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact. 3. belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims. 4. belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty. 5. a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith. 6. the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.: Failure to appear would be breaking faith. I like the biblical definition the best, however, I would replace the word "unseen" with "that can not be verified." In the case of your post, the Buddhist scripture is the evidence. ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, 26 March, 2005 11:12 Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Charles Charles DaCosta wrote: {>If I understand most of what is being said (even in other post), most of you have accepted, by faith, the Abidharma as the infallible truth; and therefore, are trying to understand its teaching with out changing it, and maybe even apply it also. Does this sound true?} Speaking only for myself, my interest in knowing and understanding what the Abhidhamma has to say on matters being discussed here is based on a confidence that the Buddha knew more about these matters than anyone else. There is nothing to be gained by mere acceptance by faith. However there is, I believe, a lot to be gained from getting a good grasp of the Sutta-Vinaya-Abhidhamma perspective on things. You are right about trying to understand its meaning without changing it. As far as I'm concerned, that would defeat the whole purpose of having it ;-)). What's your thinking on this? Jon 43663 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 0:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Unchanging, For All Times dacostacharles Hi Matthew, Thanks for uncovering an inconsistency. The Buddha said his teachings will not last for ever. The evolutionary approach has not yet been accepted, especially by western Buddhist. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Matthew Miller To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, 25 March, 2005 23:46 Subject: [dsg] Unchanging, For All Times >N: I find [the elements] as real as anything. This is for all times. (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/40877) What does that mean... "for all times"? Doesn't this contradict impermanence? Do the categories of the abhidhamma represent some kind of fixed, eternal structure of the universe? Or do they evolve like everything else? Matthew 43664 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 0:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Unchanging, For All Times dacostacharles But even the Buddha said the teachings will not last for ever. And most are for humans, so if humans don't exist then they are no longer valid. So yes they are relative and imperment. ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, 26 March, 2005 06:21 Subject: Re: [dsg] Unchanging, For All Times Hi Matthew Matthew Miller wrote: ... >What does that mean... "for all times"? Doesn't this contradict >impermanence? Do the categories of the abhidhamma represent some >kind of fixed, eternal structure of the universe? Or do they evolve >like everything else? > This is not just a matter of the Abhidhamma, but of the teachings as a whole, suttas included. The Buddha stated that the truths discovered and taught by him are valid for all time. This does not contradict impermanence. The characteristic of impermanence has a very specific meaning in the teachings, as I tried to explain in my earlier post. Jon 43665 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 0:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Unchanging, For All Times dacostacharles good question ----- Original Message ----- From: TGrand458@... To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, 26 March, 2005 08:28 Subject: Re: [dsg] Unchanging, For All Times In a message dated 3/25/2005 9:31:43 PM Pacific Standard Time, jsabbott@... writes: This does not contradict impermanence. The characteristic of impermanence has a very specific meaning in the teachings, as I tried to explain in my earlier post. Jon Hi Jon TG: What's so "very specific" about -- "All conditioned things are impermanent"? 43666 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 0:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Unchanging, For All Times dacostacharles So is the Abidharma and other teachings Nibbana, or do they not really exist? CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, 26 March, 2005 13:23 Subject: Re: [dsg] Unchanging, For All Times Hi TG TGrand458@... wrote: >Hi Jon > >What's so "very specific" about -- "All conditioned things are impermanent"? > The Pali word 'sankhara' ('conditioned things') has a specific meaning or, to be more exact, a number of specific meanings depending on the context (Nyanatiloka's dictionary gives 4 main meanings). In the context of your quoted passage, I understand sankhara to mean 'conditioned dhammas', that is to say, the dhammas other than Nibbana. These dhammas are those classified in the suttas in various ways including as the 5 khandhas, six ayatanas, 18 elements, 4 establishments of mindfulness, etc. In other words, the passage does not refer to 'things' in the conventional sense of the word, to my understanding. Jon 43667 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 1:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Brain on Dhamma dacostacharles Matthew, You should have referred your reader to DO. It has Mind/Form. The teaching alludes to them being two things that work as one; and they are dependent on each other; therefore they are one (at least in the case of humans). CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Matthew Miller To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, 23 March, 2005 18:23 Subject: [dsg] The Brain on Dhamma RobertK wrote: > I predict that the current scientific picture of the > world is completely skewed and will be viewed in the > near futures with derision... > > I do not believe that dhamma practice occurs in the brain. Then where does it occur? Some people seem to think that saying "We are the brain" somehow reduces the richness of human experience to a lump of clay. The fact is, the human brain is the most complex object in the known universe. Carl Sagan pointed out: ... 43668 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 1:20pm Subject: LK- Re: [dsg] Re:Buddha Nature dacostacharles Hi LK, I could not help to respond because, I am a both a Mahayanist and a Theravadin. I don't understand the question at the end (I don't know pali) so I can begin to try and answer it. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: lokuttaracitta To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, 22 March, 2005 03:25 Subject: [dsg] Re:Buddha Nature Dear Joop: ... Abhiddhama says there are 33 to 36 cetasikas in each of lokuttaracittas. The object of lokuttarcittas is Nibbana. How can the 36 to 38 cetasikas in each of lokuttaracittas be known as such ? (I gave this question to Sarah, but I have not receive her answer yet. ) From LK 43669 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 1:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Brain on Dhamma dacostacharles It is interesting though, with chemicals, we can manipulate the thing you call Consciousness. ----- Original Message ----- From: rjkjp1 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, 24 March, 2005 03:40 Subject: [dsg] Re: The Brain on Dhamma ... And this is only an analogy - the internet is something that can be understood without the help of a Buddha . Consciousness is much more profound. =============== > > But if we do look at the evidence of neuroscience, the case becomes > even more convincing and a much more detailed picture emerges. As > Colin McGinn writes: > > What we call the mind is in fact made up of a great number > of subcapacities, and each depends upon the functioning of > the brain > ======= Colin Mcginn is a materialist philosopher (as so many are at this time). But even with his materialist views he admits about the various scientific ideas on consciousness?gThe head spins in theoretical disarray; no explanatory model suggests itself; bizarre ontologies loom. There is a feeling of intense confusion, but no clear idea of where the confusion lies?h(1993) Problems in philosophy: the limits of inquiry. RobertK 43670 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 1:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions dacostacharles Hi Jon, ... or is the brain the real factor? CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, 25 March, 2005 23:25 Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi Joop ... In the human realm, as in most other realms, mentality is to a degree dependent on materiality also. These relationships are complicated, which is why we are urged to study about all the different kinds of conditions; otherwise it is easy to mistake a merely supporting factor (like the brain) as being a more substantive causative factor. Jon 43671 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 1:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions dacostacharles Jon, In Buddhist thought/teachings, "the consciousness that thinks" would be very unclear because it is the aggregates of feelings and intellect that thinks. The aggregate of consciousness senses only. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: upasaka@... To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, 24 March, 2005 14:43 Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi, Jon (and Joop) - In a message dated 3/24/05 8:08:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@... writes: > The dhamma explanation, as I understand it, would not see an opinion as > being kept in a person's brain. "An opinion" merely refers to a way of > thinking about something. The 'reality' of that moment is the > consciousness that thinks, but that consciousness is not 'kept' anywhere > at other times. > > Jon > ================== I agree with you Jon. The distinction is one of process/operation versus substance. There occurs "opinion-ing", but nowhere are there to be found "opinions". Howard 43672 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 2:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Seeing with the Tongue dacostacharles Thanks ----- Original Message ----- From: Matthew Miller To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, 21 March, 2005 23:44 Subject: [dsg] Re: Seeing with the Tongue Have you seen this site? It's a fun resource: http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/ Matthew 43673 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 2:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] On Buddha nature from Lokuttaracitta dacostacharles Hi LK, The orthodox Theravada schools teach that the Buddhasavatas (poor spelling) were real people, not deities. This is the main difference. The issue of re-incarnation is relative to the Theravadas (some believe in it, others don't) and for those that do, the re-incarnation is not the same being, so it is relative as to the level and .... If you are a Mahayanist or Vajrayanist, the important thing would not be complex teachings. The reason for turning to the schools of the elders is to re-gain the basics, and clarify them so that they become a mantra (a method of taming the mind and cultivating virtue). What do you mean by "profound?" CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: lokuttaracitta To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, 25 March, 2005 10:59 Subject: [dsg] On Buddha nature from Lokuttaracitta ... As a Mahayana buddhist, I have interestes in What the orthodox theravadin teachs becuase it has been helping me understand better how profound some(not all) views and practices in mahayana and Vajrayana are. But I do not intend to compare Theravada with Mahayana on those open forums untill I become an adept in Mahayana . I believe that will end in long long tangled discussions if we dig into .That will not get us nowhere unless we are maha-panditas of Maha-yana or followers of a certain Maha-yana sect. There are various views in different Mahayana traditions even on Emptiness alone. There are many debates and arguments on it in Mahayana.It also is deeply connected with Buddha-nature and 3-kayas ,4-kayas or 5-kayas etc. And ,in my view, Mahayana can not be fully understood without sufficient knowldges and actual experiences of Vajrayana which itself consists of various traditions. 43674 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 2:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cooran. dacostacharles Good post Ken H. Your point is exactly why "I" live in samsara and it is ok. It is very tough, but I will keep on living. In hopes that when time stops, "I" will still exist, unchanged, unconditioned. CharlesD PS: Dharma also teaches us to sense the future five khandhas and to understand the past five khandhas. ----- Original Message ----- From: kenhowardau To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, 24 March, 2005 00:41 Subject: [dsg] Re: Cooran. Hi Nina ... This reminds me of a topic that came up repeatedly at the Cooran meeting. We were facing the fact that enlightenment has consequences that we, as unenlightened folk, find disagreeable: namely, it proclaims that final extinction of consciousness is nigh. A Sotapanna has, at most, seven more lives. To us unenlightened folk, it is as if he has jumped out of an aeroplane with no parachute - there is no turning back! We might pretend to want enlightenment and final extinction of the khandhas, but that is just bluff. Fortunately for us, the laws of nature save us from ourselves by not calling our bluff. :-) All this seems obvious to me now, but only after having met you and other DSG people. The Dhamma does not teach us to want to be other than we are. It teaches us to know the present five khandhas. Ken H 43675 From: "sunnaloka" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 3:27pm Subject: Re: Introduction Time sunnaloka Hi everyone at DSG, In an earlier thread Sarah suggested that I introduce myself, and today I have time to do so. My name is Geoff and I reside in Western Canada. I'm a practicing Buddhist (for almost 20 yrs now) and consider myself to be nonsectarian, although I have a deep faith- connection to both the Kammatthana Thai forest tradition and the Madhyamika/Dzogchen Nyingma tradition. Although these two traditions may appear to represent quite different facets of Dhamma, to my discernment anyway, they seem to have very much in common. I believe that the Kammatthana tradition as expressed in the teachings of Ajahns: Mun, Chah, Sumedho, Amaro, and also Ajahn Thanissaro and Ajahn Buddhadasa represents something of a practice centred reform movement within the Theravada (although to my knowledge none of these Ven. teachers have ever stated so, nor might any of them specifically admit to such an apparently outlandish notion). Nevertheless, within the teachings of all these forest monks I see definite connections to the nondual Nyingma teachings that I've been practicing with for many years (Nyingma and Kagyu also being practice lineages). Furthermore, it seems to me that what the Buddha is saying in the Sutta Pitaka is more accurately interpreted by not only the experiential discernment of the Thai forest masters, but by much of the nondual Nyingma teachings as well. So, you might ask, why not remain with the Nyingmapas and leave us orthodox Abhidhamma Theravadins alone ;-) since the Tibetans also acknowledge many of the Sutta's as being part of their canon? Well, because I believe that the Tibetans have possibly overemphasized the nondual fruitional aspect of the path (at least as their teachings are being represented in the West), and that there is generally an under-appreciation of the Suttas in all so-called Mahayana schools, as well as a persistent notion that the Pali Suttas, Chinese Agamas, and their Tibetan counterparts reveal an 'inferior' or 'provisional' view, which must be relinquished to discern the 'definitive' view of the Mahayana Sutras. I personally believe that this notion is baseless. There are many Suttas that express the same profoundly definitive view. Also, as a contemporary practitioner I believe that the teachings found in the Pali canon (and Chinese/Tibetan counterparts) are the only ones that we can with any historical accuracy trace back to the Buddha himself, and the Thai forest tradition beautifully integrates a profound view with pragmatic renunciation and emphasis on practice, all of which are qualities that I aspire to emulate, and which I believe are about as close to the historical Buddha as a modern practitioner can get. What's more, I believe that we are now slowly but inevitably moving toward an integrated Dhamma, much more integrated than that traditionally represented by the Tibetan three yana system. Of course all of this is just my personal opinion. I'm not out to ruffle any feathers or claim any sectarian exclusivity to truth. I merely wish to engage in some skillful, open-minded discourse with people who know the Pali Tipitaka much better than I do. Thus my intentions are good-natured and gentle, and not in any way rigid or judgemental. With omnidirectional metta, Geoff 43676 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 11:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Unchanging, For All Times TGrand458@... In a message dated 3/26/2005 2:29:59 PM Pacific Standard Time, dacostas@... writes: The Pali word 'sankhara' ('conditioned things') has a specific meaning or, to be more exact, a number of specific meanings depending on the context (Nyanatiloka's dictionary gives 4 main meanings). In the context of your quoted passage, I understand sankhara to mean 'conditioned dhammas', that is to say, the dhammas other than Nibbana. These dhammas are those classified in the suttas in various ways including as the 5 khandhas, six ayatanas, 18 elements, 4 establishments of mindfulness, etc. In other words, the passage does not refer to 'things' in the conventional sense of the word, to my understanding. Jon Hi Jon, All "Things" is exactly the 5 khandhas, 18 elements, Four Great Elements, etc. There is no other "thing." (I infer Nibbana not to be a 'thing' though some would not agree with that.) When the term 'dhammas' is used...it just means 'things or states.' Its no big deal. The term 'dhammas' does not add one iota of importance to it. "All conditioned things are impermanent" whether or not they are being seen from a deluded or insightful perspective ... the fact of that principle remains the same. TG 43677 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 8:22pm Subject: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kelvin_lwin" wrote: > > Hi RobK, > > Well, having debated with my uncle who's from Pa Auk tradition I > think I'm in position to comment. The article > you quoted is also full with misinformation and confusion. For > example, anapana being the method of choice for all Buddhas is > something many sayadaws use. ======= Dear Kel, Thanks for the extra information. It is interesting the piece about Anapanasati The article is citing U Pandita, I'm a little surprised you disagree? "Panditarama Sayadaw has become perhaps the foremost and most successful among many Myanmar Sayadaws teaching vipassana who have won world-wide renown. "Did the Buddha not attain Buddhahood through anapana-sati?" "Ko Hla Myint," the Sayadaw replied, "You have not studied the scriptures with the necessary attention to detail. It is true that the Buddha-to-be attained pubbenivasanussau-abhinna (Knowledge of Former States of Being) and dibbacakkhu abhinna (the Divine Eye of Omniscient Vision) in the first and second watches of the night through anapana-sati. But in the third and last watch of the night, the Buddha-to-be was no longer absorbed in anapana-sati, but had turned his great intellect to the doctrine of paticcasamuppada, or Dependent Origination. 'Through ignorance are conditioned the sankharas, the rebirth producing volitions or kamma-formations, and so on'. Then, just before the break of day, while meditating on the five khandhas, the physical and mental phenomena of existence, the Buddha-to-be attained arahatta-magga, arahatta-phala, and the Omniscience of the Buddha, the Supremely Enlightened. Thus, Buddhahood was won not through anapana-sati, but through mindfulness on the physical and mental phenomena of the five khandhas." ========== Robertk 43678 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 8:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Buddha Nature jonoabb Hi Joop I have one minor quibble about your 4th conclusion: Joop wrote: >Dear all > >My conclusion (as always: temporary): > >- There are no real Theravada-concepts with which the Mahayana- >concept 'Buddha-Nature' can be translated. > >- I like the Pabhassara Suttas - Luminous (AN I.49-52), but don't >have an idea what they mean > >- My superficial idea that the kamma-concept can be used for it, is >in vain, thanks Jon for the information you gave about the meaning >of 'kamma'. > >- The only remaining meaning of 'Buddha-Nature' is that enlightenment >is possible for all beings. And that's a truism. > > I think the truism actually stated by the Buddha is that 'enlightenment is possible' (no mention of 'all beings'). Jon 43679 From: "Matthew Miller" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:11pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue bupleurum > > So the Dalai Lama's interest in science is at heart just a > > proselytizing gimmick (er, upaya)? > > That's neither what I said nor what I meant. HH's upaya is, in my > opinion, profound and sincere--as is his interest in science. > Furthermore, I don't appreciate your sarcastic tone. In all honesty > Matthew, what is your motivation for making such a statement? > What is your upaya motivated by? No sarcasm intended. 1. pros•e•lyt•ize (pros'u-li-tīz"), —v.t., v.i., to convert or attempt to convert; recruit. 2. upaya. the ability to present the teachings in such a way as they will be understood by audiences with different levels of comprehension. What's the difference? According to your post, the Dalai Lama believes that the dhamma is "forever beyond refutation" and that the purpose of his scientific/ Buddhist integration is to "present" dharma to science-trained Westerners. In a genuine dialogue between Buddhism and science, each side could potentially have their views changed by input from the other, and neither side would have prior commitment to a position that is "beyond refutation." Using science as skillful means to present to scientifically-minded Westerners a position that is "beyond refutation" is not genuine dialogue. It is proselytizing. Matthew Geoff: > he recognizes that the Dharma is > true and therefore forever beyond refutation, and the further > scientific knowledge progreses, the more it will confirm what the > Buddha revealed 2500 years ago... > he seems very much in favor of scientific/Buddhist > integration as skillful means of presenting Dharma > to Westerners who are coming to Dharma from a scientific paradigm. 43680 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:02pm Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 jonoabb Hi Charles Thanks for the research on the various meanings of 'faith'. I would not have guessed there was such a wide range of meanings. One thing puzzles me though, and that is your perception that for me the Abhidhamma is seen as 'evidence of things that cannot be verified' (if I have understood you correctly). This seems to suggest that the Abhidhamma consists of 'unattainables'. That is very much not the case; if it were then there would be limited value in its study. The things contained in the texts (suttas, vinaya and abhidhamma) comprise (a) things capable of verification by us, and that perhaps have been (tentatively) verified at a certain level, (b) things that have not been verified by direct experience as yet, but are capable of being verified as insight is developed, and (c) things that are capable of verification only by one with high attainments, or by a Buddha, but that will not be directly verified by those of lesser attainments. Of the 3 groups, the things under (a) are by far the minority in my own case ;-)), but it is on the basis of these that there is confidence in the value of further study of the teachings. BTW, how do you see the suttas, in terms of your definitions of 'faith'? Jon Charles DaCosta wrote: >Hi Jon, > >I can see, not only from you, that the word "faith" razes red flags I am going to make a separate post defining it. My hopes will be to help people see that the red flags are not needed. However, I will start with you. > >Faith: >(Christian Bible) > 1.. The substance of things hoped for. > 2.. The evidence of things unseen. >(Random House Unabridged Dic.) >1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability. > >2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact. > >3. belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims. > >4. belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty. > >5. a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith. > >6. the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.: Failure to appear would be breaking faith. > >I like the biblical definition the best, however, I would replace the word "unseen" with "that can not be verified." >In the case of your post, the Buddhist scripture is the evidence. > > 43681 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Yahoo Changes ... jonoabb Hi Larry Larry wrote: >Hi Chris and Mods., > >I don't like this at all. I was working on an index for the Vism. >thread based on message numbers that is now useless. There used to be a >message number box that would take you directly to a particular message. > > Links to post numbers (as in the UP) will still work, so as long as you keep a note or the relevant post numbers it will be possible to create a working index (which will be much appreciated). So don't despair, and keep up the good work! Jon 43682 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:21pm Subject: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 kelvin_lwin Send IM Hi RobK, > Buddhahood was won not through anapana-sati, but through mindfulness > on the physical and mental phenomena of the five khandhas." Splitting hair imho to direct it toward their particular tradition. The position was that anapana is the stepping stone used by Buddhas which is consistent. Maybe you're aware of how and why Mahasi sayadaw arrived at abdomen to begin with? I think whatever technical reasons are just post justification to counter the criticism of non-conformity to the texts. Then I personally find it hilarious when they become the most renown, the arguments are reversed. In terms of Myanmar traditions that have become most renown world-wide I think Goenka takes the cake. I can always add enough adjectives to make myself the best at something. - kel 43683 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Unchanging, For All Times jonoabb Hi Charles Charles DaCosta wrote: >But even the Buddha said the teachings will not last for ever. > Quite so. He said both things, namely, that the truths are eternal, and that the teachings will gradually decline. No inconsistency there. >And most are for humans, so if humans don't exist then they are no longer valid. So yes they are relative and imperment. > > Yes, the teachings decline, and life in the human plane disappears at an appropriate time. But neither of these things has any bearing on the validity of the truths taught, as I see it. Jon 43684 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 jonoabb Hi Chris Thanks for the link. Unfortunately, no reference is given (it is a retelling by the Sayadaw). I know I've seen the sutta before (I think in MN), so I'm sure I'll come across it again soon. Jon Christine Forsyth wrote: >Hello Jon, (James), and all, > >Jon - it is a story in Chapter XX of 'The Doctrine of >Paticcasammupada' U Than Daing MOGOK VIPASSANA YEIKTHA >http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/tdaing3.htm > > 43685 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Unchanging, For All Times jonoabb Hi Charles Charles DaCosta wrote: >So is the Abidharma and other teachings Nibbana, or do they not really exist? > > Sorry, but I haven't caught your point here. No, the teachings are not Nibbana, and nor are they 'dhammas' as in the 5 khandhas, etc. They are truths about dhammas. Jon 43686 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:39pm Subject: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kelvin_lwin" wrote: > > Hi RobK, > > > Buddhahood was won not through anapana-sati, but through mindfulness > > on the physical and mental phenomena of the five khandhas." > Splitting hair imho to direct it toward their particular tradition. > The position was that anapana is the stepping stone used by Buddhas > which is consistent. Maybe you're aware of how and why Mahasi sayadaw > arrived at abdomen to begin with? I think whatever technical reasons > are just post justification to counter the criticism of non- conformity > to the texts. Then I personally find it hilarious when they become > the most renown, the arguments are reversed. In terms of Myanmar > traditions that have become most renown world-wide I think Goenka > takes the cake. I can always add enough adjectives to make myself the > best at something. > > - kel Dear Kel. :) :) Fair enough! Robert p.s actually I don't know the story of how Mahasi came to the abdomen method? 43687 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions jonoabb Hi Charles Charles DaCosta wrote: >In Buddhist thought/teachings, "the consciousness that thinks" would be very unclear because it is the aggregates of feelings and intellect that thinks. The aggregate of consciousness senses only. > > Yes, I think I see what you are saying here. However, when I refer to "consciousness that thinks" I refer to the citta and its accompanying mental factors collectively. That is, I am not distinguishing between the different functions performed by the citta and the mental factors. In any event, as I think you know, all 4 nama khandhas are dhammas that experience an object, and co arising members of the different khandhas all experience the same object*. In the case of a moment of thinking, that object is a concept. Jon *Thus at a given moment of consciousness, the citta (vinnana-khandha) and its co-arising mental factors comprising the other 3 nama khandhas, namely vedana kh (feeling), sanna kh (perception) and sankhara kh (formations), all experience the same object. 43688 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Introduction Time jonoabb Hi Geoff Thanks for the intro and for giving us your background in dhamma study. We very much welcome your interest in the Pali canon -- no need to worry about coming from a non-Theravada or non-Tipitaka study approach. I'm sure you will have much to share with us. Please feel free to come in on threads at any time. Jon sunnaloka wrote: >Hi everyone at DSG, > >In an earlier thread Sarah suggested that I introduce myself, and >today I have time to do so. My name is Geoff and I reside in Western >Canada. I'm a practicing Buddhist (for almost 20 yrs now) and >consider myself to be nonsectarian, although I have a deep faith- >connection to both the Kammatthana Thai forest tradition and the >Madhyamika/Dzogchen Nyingma tradition. ... > > 43689 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 10:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Unchanging, For All Times jonoabb Hi TG TGrand458@... wrote: >"Things" is exactly the 5 khandhas, 18 elements, Four Great Elements, etc. >There is no other "thing." (I infer Nibbana not to be a 'thing' though some >would not agree with that.) When the term 'dhammas' is used...it just means >'things or states.' > No argument from me, at least I think not, but perhaps I should check with you on that. The 5 khandhas, 18 elements, etc., with which you (correctly) equate 'things', are specific dhammas that are enumerated in the texts (including the suttas). That is to say, they are not conventional 'things', but are the dhammas that we take to be the conventional world. They are what is to be known by insight. Is this how you see it? Jon 43690 From: "sunnaloka" Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 10:18pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue sunnaloka Matthew: > No sarcasm intended. > > 1. pros•e•lyt•ize (pros'u-li-tīz"), —v.t., v.i., > to convert or attempt to convert; recruit. > > 2. upaya. the ability to present the teachings in such a way as they > will be understood by audiences with different levels of > comprehension. > > What's the difference? I was refering to the *just* a [...] *gimick* -- and not to either proselytize or upaya. This sounds sarcastic to me. If that wasn't your intention, so be it. Personally I don't think Buddhism has any 'proselytizing' agenda, as the Buddha stated that it's inappropriate to present Dhamma unless specifically requested to do so. If you think that this injunction amounts to proselytizing, so be it. > In a genuine dialogue between Buddhism and science, each side could > potentially have their views changed by input from the other, and > neither side would have prior commitment to a position that is "beyond refutation." > > Using science as skillful means to present to scientifically-minded > Westerners a position that is "beyond refutation" is not genuine > dialogue. It is proselytizing. I began that post by stating: I remember reading HHDL saying that if anything was ever definitively proven by Western science that contradicted or refuted anything within the Buddhist Dharma, then the Dharma would necessarily have to be changed to remain valid with 'reality.' This is of course a paraphrase, but that's pretty much what he said.... By making such a statement I think (and of course I can't speak for HH) but it sounds to me like he's coming to such discourse with an open mind and is sincere about engaging in genuine dialogue. It seems he's saying that if reality is proven different than what the Dharma states, then he's completely ready and willing to accept that proof. I then went on to say that it's my opinion that HH recognizes i.e. *has direct valid cognition* concerning Dhamma: I think that from HH's perspective, he recognizes that the Dharma is true and therefore forever beyond refutation.... This statement is based solely on my opinion as predicated by *I think* and as such refers to my faith in HH as a highly developed bodhisattva capable of direct valid cognition. Such cognition is defined by the Tibetan schools as being *beyond refutation*. But being a bodhisattva with direct valid cognition would in no way make him close minded or incapable of genuine dialogue by having a 'prior commitment to a position.' Prasangika Madhyamika of the Gelugpa's (as I understand it) has no recourse to any 'prior commitment to a position' because it puts forth no 'position.' It's a reductio ad absurdum dialectic which results in inferential valid cognition (pramana). This inferential cognition results in nonconceptual wisdom-mind (nirvikalpa jnana), which when assertained during jhana/dhyana is what they term 'yogic direct perception,' and as such is direct valid cognition. Of course, this is all based on my very meager understanding of the Gelugpa system and may not be completely accurate as I'm not a practitioner of their system. But based on my understanding of their contemplative methodology, I have faith that HHDL is completely fluent in Prasangika Madhyamika, and therefore is capable of direct valid cognition, but this direct valid cognition wouldn't make HH incapable of genuine dialogue in any way, shape, or form. This is all just my opinion though. Geoff 43691 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Mar 26, 2005 11:36pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 156- Determination /adhimokkha & Energy/viriya (f) sarahprocterabb... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.9 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya) contd] Adhimokkha which accompanies lokuttara citta is “convinced”, sure about the object which is nibbåna. Adhimokkha is not self; it is saòkhåra dhamma, a conditioned dhamma which arises and falls away with the citta it accompanies. It performs its function only while it is accompanying the citta and then it falls away together with the citta. If the next citta is accompanied by adhimokkha it is another adhimokkha and this falls away again. Since adhimokkha arises with all cittas except the ten pañcaviññåùas and the type of moha-múla-citta which is accompanied by doubt, it arises with seventy-eight cittas in all (1). *** 1) When cittas are counted as 89. Cittas can be counted as 89 or 121. When they are counted as 121 the lokuttara jhånacittas accompanied by jhåna-factors of the five stages of jhåna are included. ***** [Ch.8 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya))to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43692 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Mar 27, 2005 0:11am Subject: Re: New view on satipatthana 2 buddhatrue Hi Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > Hello Jon, (James), and all, > > Jon - it is a story in Chapter XX of 'The Doctrine of > Paticcasammupada' U Than Daing MOGOK VIPASSANA YEIKTHA > http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/tdaing3.htm Oh darn it, you gave the secret away! ;-0 > > James - it may be that humour doesn't translate very well from one > culture to another - but your post seemed to be a little 'tetchy'?? Just speaking my mind dear...just speaking my mind ;-) (BTW, do you think Australian culture is greatly different than American culture? You seem more uptight than I picture most Australians as being?) > > metta, > Chris Metta, James 43693 From: "bernard.vital" Date: Sun Mar 27, 2005 0:06am Subject: Dear friends vital_moors Today I leave The Netherlands to become a monk in Wat Thaton (www.wat-thaton.org) in Thailand. I hope to become a little bit enlightend there to do well for all the people who I will met. I wish you happiness and I you you will find the path to end the suffering in your situation. Ant if you are once in the oppotunity to visit the meditationcenter in Wat Thaton, you are always welcomm. Om Mani Padme Hum Vital Moors Mr. Vital E.H. Moors sahmkan@... http://www.instantsites.nl/3/vitalmoors 43694 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Mar 27, 2005 1:00am Subject: Agreement between Buddhism, Modern Science & Cosmology ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Buddhism, Modern Science & Cosmology: Modern cosmology have recently found out that the universe is not in a steady state but undergoes periodic expansion (big bang) and contraction. The blessed Buddha told of this > 2500 !!! years ago: He said "He recalls to mind his various temporary states in days gone by - one birth, or two or three or four or 5 births, 10 or 20, 30 or 50, a 100 or a 1000 or a 100.000 births, through many cycles of cosmic contraction & cosmic expansion... Now there comes a time, friends, when, sooner or later, after the lapse of a long, long period of contraction, this world-system passes away. And when this happens beings have mostly been reborn in the World of Radiance, and there they dwell made of mind, feeding on joy, radiating light from themselves, traversing the air, dwelling in glory; and thus they remain for a long, long period of time. Now there comes also a time, friends, when, sooner or later, this universe begins to re-evolve by expansion. Digha Nikaya 1: Brahma-Jala Sutta Time & space are not universal! Albert Einstein presented the special & general relativity theory almost a hundred years ago. Still the philosophical implications is only known by a very few mathematicians. Mainly Einstein's relativity theory points out that time & locality in space cannot be regarded independent if the observer & object is moving fast relative to each other. Differently moving observers will experience different speeds of time even when using the same watches. They will disagree on the order of different events. A 'Universal' time do not exist: Buddha also told about this > 2500 years ago . : 'Bhikkhus, 50 human years is one night & day to the four guardian gods. 500 of those divine years are the life span of the four guardian gods. . Bhikkhus, 1600 human years is one night and day to the gods with power over other's creations. 16 thousand of those divine years are the life span of these gods.' (Paranimmita-vasavatti-devas) Anguttara Nikaya III.71: The Roots of the Uposatha http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an03-070.html Matter is quanta of discrete events! Another implication of both Einstein's theory & also of quantum mechanics is that matter cannot be regarded to be continuously existing in time nor in space. A movement of a body is therefore absolutely speaking events of disappearance in one place & its rearising in the next place. This process is though so incredible fast, that we experience it as continuous existence. Exactly so do the Higher Buddha-Dhamma ie: The Abhidhamma consider movement of matter to be serial vanishing & re-arising in adjacent locations... So modern Science even regarding physical phenomena (rupa) is not so 'Modern' after all!!! Most seem to rediscovering of what was known already 2 millenniums ago but ignored & forgotten as usual... Hihihi ;-) Friendship is the Greatest ! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <....> 43695 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 27, 2005 2:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dear friends jonoabb Dear Vital This is wonderful news. We wish you all the best in your life as a monk. Thank you for letting us know, and giving us the opportunity to share in your kusala. Jon and Sarah bernard.vital wrote: >Today I leave The Netherlands to become a monk in Wat Thaton >(www.wat-thaton.org) in Thailand. I hope to become a little bit enlightend >there to do well for all the people who I will met. I wish you happiness and >I you you will find the path to end the suffering in your situation. Ant if >you are once in the oppotunity to visit the meditationcenter in Wat Thaton, >you are always welcomm. > >Om Mani Padme Hum >Vital Moors >Mr. Vital E.H. Moors >sahmkan@... >http://www.instantsites.nl/3/vitalmoors > > 43696 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 27, 2005 2:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 jonoabb Hi James buddhatrue wrote: >James: Oh Jon, please spare me the political jargon mumbo-jumbo. If >you say that one cannot choose a particular object or mind door then >of course you are saying that all six doors must be developed. Do >you think I feel off the turnip truck yesterday?? ;-)) Objects at >all six doorways are arising and falling in a continuous fashion and >there is hardly a moment when this isn't the case. When you suggest >that one cannot *choose* which doorway is to be known with insight, >then you are in essence saying that all six doorways must be known >in their entirety. Please, to facilitate communication, do call a >spade for a spade. > > Hmm, who's being the drama queen now? ;-)) Just to clarify, my comment was meant to be to the effect that knowledge regarding all six doors must be developed, but that it was not necessary for each doorway to be fully known in its entirety. Jon 43697 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Mar 27, 2005 3:25am Subject: Re: Dear friends rjkjp1 --- Dear Bernard, I just had a look at your link- what a great site the temple is at! Best wishes Robert In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "bernard.vital" wrote: > > Today I leave The Netherlands to become a monk in Wat Thaton > (www.wat-thaton.org) in Thailand. 43698 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 27, 2005 3:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge 3 nilovg Hi Matheesha, op 26-03-2005 14:19 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@...: > >> M:My teacher >>> uses a series of directed vipassana techniques aimed at > identifying >>> 1) nama-rupa, then 2) their causal connection to each other and > then >>> 3) the arising and passing away of these cause and effect nama- > rupa. >> N: Your late teacher was actually explaining the stages of tender > insight, >> taru.na vipassanaa which arise in order. >> This is a very important subject to discuss. > > M: Ok, we can come back to the rest of the post later.What is taruna > vipassana? N: Tender insight, the three beginning stages of insight before Maha-vipassana, principal insight. 1. Distinguishing the difference between the characteristic of nama and of rupa. 2. Understanding nama and rupa as conditioned dhammas. 3. Understanding their arising and passing away. No 3 is different from the first stage of principal insight. One discerns nama and rupa as dhammas that arise and fall away very rapidly, but there is not yet precise knowledge of each dhamma that appears, as it arises and passes away. Now, for me this is a difficult subject and I prefer to discuss more about the first stage of tender insight. Indeed, in order to understand this, a basic knowledge of Abhidhamma about different doorways and processes is necessary. A sense object such as visible object that is rupa is experienced through the eye-door and then through the mind-door. After that there are other mind-door processes which may define it and think about it. Naama, such as seeing can only be known through the mind-door. The first stage of insight that knows the difference between the characteristics of nama and rupa occurs in the mind-door process. I wrote in My Letters about Vipassana (see Rob K's web: http://www.vipassana.info/letter_about_vipassana_i.htm ):